Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Melanoma: HELP
Articles by Gerald P. Linette
Based on 34 articles published since 2008
||||

Between 2008 and 2019, G. P. Linette wrote the following 34 articles about Melanoma.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
Pages: 1 · 2
1 Clinical Trial A single dose of neoadjuvant PD-1 blockade predicts clinical outcomes in resectable melanoma. 2019

Huang, Alexander C / Orlowski, Robert J / Xu, Xiaowei / Mick, Rosemarie / George, Sangeeth M / Yan, Patrick K / Manne, Sasikanth / Kraya, Adam A / Wubbenhorst, Bradley / Dorfman, Liza / D'Andrea, Kurt / Wenz, Brandon M / Liu, Shujing / Chilukuri, Lakshmi / Kozlov, Andrew / Carberry, Mary / Giles, Lydia / Kier, Melanie W / Quagliarello, Felix / McGettigan, Suzanne / Kreider, Kristin / Annamalai, Lakshmanan / Zhao, Qing / Mogg, Robin / Xu, Wei / Blumenschein, Wendy M / Yearley, Jennifer H / Linette, Gerald P / Amaravadi, Ravi K / Schuchter, Lynn M / Herati, Ramin S / Bengsch, Bertram / Nathanson, Katherine L / Farwell, Michael D / Karakousis, Giorgos C / Wherry, E John / Mitchell, Tara C. ·Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. alexander.huang@uphs.upenn.edu. · Institute for Immunology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. alexander.huang@uphs.upenn.edu. · Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy at University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. alexander.huang@uphs.upenn.edu. · Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. alexander.huang@uphs.upenn.edu. · Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA. · Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy at University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Department of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lawrenceville, NJ, USA. · Institute for Immunology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Department of Radiology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Stem Cell Technologies, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. · Merck Research Laboratories, Kenilworth, NJ, USA. · Bill & Melinda Gates Medical Research Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA. · Department of Medicine II, Gastroenterology, Hepatology, Endocrinology, and Infectious Diseases, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. · Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Institute for Immunology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. wherry@pennmedicine.upenn.edu. · Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy at University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. wherry@pennmedicine.upenn.edu. · Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. wherry@pennmedicine.upenn.edu. · Department of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. wherry@pennmedicine.upenn.edu. · Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. tara.mitchell@uphs.upenn.edu. · Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. tara.mitchell@uphs.upenn.edu. ·Nat Med · Pubmed #30804515.

ABSTRACT: Immunologic responses to anti-PD-1 therapy in melanoma patients occur rapidly with pharmacodynamic T cell responses detectable in blood by 3 weeks. It is unclear, however, whether these early blood-based observations translate to the tumor microenvironment. We conducted a study of neoadjuvant/adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy in stage III/IV melanoma. We hypothesized that immune reinvigoration in the tumor would be detectable at 3 weeks and that this response would correlate with disease-free survival. We identified a rapid and potent anti-tumor response, with 8 of 27 patients experiencing a complete or major pathological response after a single dose of anti-PD-1, all of whom remain disease free. These rapid pathologic and clinical responses were associated with accumulation of exhausted CD8 T cells in the tumor at 3 weeks, with reinvigoration in the blood observed as early as 1 week. Transcriptional analysis demonstrated a pretreatment immune signature (neoadjuvant response signature) that was associated with clinical benefit. In contrast, patients with disease recurrence displayed mechanisms of resistance including immune suppression, mutational escape, and/or tumor evolution. Neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 treatment is effective in high-risk resectable stage III/IV melanoma. Pathological response and immunological analyses after a single neoadjuvant dose can be used to predict clinical outcome and to dissect underlying mechanisms in checkpoint blockade.

2 Clinical Trial Phase IIIb safety results from an expanded-access protocol of talimogene laherparepvec for patients with unresected, stage IIIB-IVM1c melanoma. 2018

Chesney, Jason / Awasthi, Sanjay / Curti, Brendan / Hutchins, Laura / Linette, Gerald / Triozzi, Pierre / Tan, Marcus C B / Brown, Russell E / Nemunaitis, John / Whitman, Eric / Windham, Christopher / Lutzky, Jose / Downey, Gerald F / Batty, Nicolas / Amatruda, Thomas. ·Department of Medicine, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky. · Department of Medical Oncology, City of Hope, Duarte. · Earle A Chiles Research Institute, Providence Cancer Center, Portland, Oregon. · Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology Oncology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas. · Division of Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri. · Section of Hematology and Oncology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem. · Division of Surgical Oncology, University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama. · Department of Surgery, Ochsner Medical Center, New Orleans, Louisiana. · Department of Medical Hematology and Oncology, Mary Crowley Cancer Research Center, Dallas, Texas. · Department of Endocrine and Oncologic Surgery, Atlantic Melanoma Center, Atlantic Health System Cancer Care, Morristown, New Jersey. · Department of Oncology, Cone Health, Greensboro, North Carolina. · Division of Hematology and Oncology, Mount Sinai Medical Center, Miami Beach, Florida. · Center for Design and Analysis, Amgen Limited, Cambridge, UK. · Department of Clinical Research, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, California. · Department of Hematology and Oncology, Minnesota Oncology, Fridley, Minnesota. ·Melanoma Res · Pubmed #29176501.

ABSTRACT: Talimogene laherparepvec is a genetically modified herpes simplex virus-1-based oncolytic immunotherapy for the local treatment of unresectable cutaneous, subcutaneous, and nodal tumors in patients with melanoma recurrence following surgery. We aim to describe the safety of talimogene laherparepvec. Intralesional talimogene laherparepvec was administered at less than or equal to 4 ml×10 PFU/ml at protocol day 1, then less than or equal to 4 ml×10 PFU/ml 21 days later, and then every 14 days. Treatment continued until complete response, absence of injectable tumors, progressive disease, intolerance, or US Food and Drug Administration approval. Adverse events were graded during and 30 days after the end of treatment. Lesions suspected to have herpetic origin were tested for talimogene laherparepvec DNA by quantitative PCR (qPCR). Between September 2014 and October 2015, 41 patients were enrolled with stage IIIB (22%), IIIC (37%), IVM1a (34%), IVM1b (5%), and IVM1c (2%) melanoma. The median age was 72 (range: 32-96) years and 54% of the patients were men. Patients had an ECOG performance status of 0 (68%) or 1 (32%). The median treatment duration was 13.1 (3.0-41.1) weeks. Treatment-related adverse events of greater than or equal to grade 3 were reported in three (7.3%) patients and included vomiting, upper abdominal pain, chills, hyperhidrosis, nausea, pyrexia, and wound infection. Suspected herpetic lesions were swabbed in five (12%) patients. One of the five tested positive for talimogene laherparepvec DNA by qPCR, but this lesion had been injected previously with talimogene laherparepvec. During the study, five patients completed treatment because of complete response per investigators. In the clinical practice setting, talimogene laherparepvec has a safety profile comparable to that observed in previous clinical trials. Talimogene laherparepvec (IMLYGIC) is now approved in the US, European Union, and Australia.

3 Clinical Trial Vemurafenib treatment for patients with locally advanced, unresectable stage IIIC or metastatic melanoma and activating exon 15 BRAF mutations other than V600E. 2017

Hallmeyer, Sigrun / Gonzalez, Rene / Lawson, David H / Cranmer, Lee D / Linette, Gerald P / Puzanov, Igor / Taback, Bret / Cowey, C Lance / Ribas, Antoni / Daniels, Gregory A / Moore, Timothy / Gibney, Geoffrey T / Tawbi, Hussein / Whitman, Eric / Lee, Geraldine / Mun, Yong / Liu, Shiyao / Hamid, Omid. ·aDepartment of Internal Medicine, Advocate Medical Group - Oncology North, Park Ridge, Illinois bMelanoma Research Clinic, University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, Colorado cDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia dDepartment of Hematology and Oncology, The University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, Arizona eDepartment of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri fDepartment of Hematology-Oncology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee gDepartment of Surgery, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York hDepartment of Medical Oncology, Texas Oncology, Dallas, Texas iDepartment of Medicine, Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center at University of California jDepartment of Immuno-Oncology, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles kDepartment of Oncology, Moores Cancer Center, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla lGenentech Inc., South San Francisco, California mMid Ohio Oncology and Hematology Inc., Columbus, Ohio nDepartment of Melanoma, Georgetown-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC oDepartment of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute and University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania pDepartment of Melanoma, Carol G. Simon Cancer Center, Atlantic Health System, Morristown, New Jersey, USA. ·Melanoma Res · Pubmed #29076950.

ABSTRACT: BRAF mutations are found in ~50% of metastatic melanomas, most commonly in codon V600. Vemurafenib improves progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with advanced BRAF-mutated melanoma. The results of a descriptive study evaluating vemurafenib in patients with advanced melanoma harbouring BRAF mutations other than V600E are reported. Eligible patients with stage IIIC or IV melanoma and non-V600E BRAF mutations received vemurafenib (960 mg, twice daily). End points included investigator-assessed best overall response rate (primary), time to response, duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival and safety. Planned (V600K vs. non-V600K mutations) subgroup analyses were carried out. Thirty-one patients were enrolled; 13 (42%) had V600K mutations and 18 (58%) had other mutations. Investigator-assessed confirmed that the best overall response rate was 23% (95% confidence interval=10-41%) in the overall population, and was similar between patients with V600K mutations (23%; 95% confidence interval=5-54%) versus other mutations (22%; 95% confidence interval=6-48%). Responses were observed in patients with V600K (n=3), V600E2 (n=1), V600R (n=1), L597S (n=1) and D594G (n=1) mutations. No new safety signals were reported. Vemurafenib showed activity in patients with advanced melanoma with rarer BRAF mutations.

4 Clinical Trial TRPM1 (melastatin) expression is an independent predictor of overall survival in clinical AJCC stage I and II melanoma patients. 2017

Brożyna, Anna A / Guo, Huazhang / Yang, Sun-Eun / Cornelius, Lynn / Linette, Gerald / Murphy, Michael / Sheehan, Christine / Ross, Jeffrey / Slominski, Andrzej / Carlson, J Andrew. ·Department of Tumor Pathology and Pathomorphology, Oncology Centre-Prof. Franciszek Łukaszczyk Memorial Hospital, Department of Tumor Pathology and Pathomorphology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Nicolaus Copernicus University Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Bydgoszcz, Poland. · Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, UPMC Cancer Pavilion, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. · Department of Pathology, Albany Medical College MC-81, Albany, New York. · Division of Dermatology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri. · Division of Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri. · Department of Dermatology, MC-6230, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut. · Department of Dermatology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. ·J Cutan Pathol · Pubmed #27987328.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The expression of TRPM1 (melastatin) mRNA is an independent marker, as measured by radioactive in situ hybridization (RISH), of disease-free survival in primary cutaneous melanoma (PM). The aim of the study was to determine if chromogenic in situ hybridization (CISH) can reproduce results examining diagnostic and prognostic utility of TRPM1 mRNA expression in melanocytic proliferations as measured by RISH. METHODS: The expression of TRPM1 mRNA was detected by CISH in melanocytic nevi (MN, n = 61), PM (n = 145) and metastatic melanomas (MMs, n = 15). RESULTS: A progressive loss of TRPM1 was found moving from MN to PM to MM. The histologic stepwise model of melanoma progression revealed that loss of TRPM1 occurred at the transition of RGP PM to VGP PM. As a diagnostic marker, TRPM1 gradient loss showed 93.8% sensitivity and 52.4% specificity for PM. Loss of TRPM1 mRNA correlated with melanoma aggressiveness markers and was independent predictor of disease-free and overall survival. The corresponding survival curves for degree of melanoma pigmentation matched those for degree of loss of TPRM1 mRNA. CONCLUSION: Loss of TRPM1 mRNA expression appears to be a crucial event in the progression of melanoma to a more malignant, metastatic phenotype.

5 Clinical Trial Relationship between physician-adjudicated adverse events and patient-reported health-related quality of life in a phase II clinical trial (NCT01143402) of patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. 2017

Atkinson, Thomas M / Hay, Jennifer L / Shoushtari, Alexander / Li, Yuelin / Paucar, Daniel J / Smith, Sloane C / Kudchadkar, Ragini R / Doyle, Austin / Sosman, Jeffrey A / Quevedo, Jorge Fernando / Milhem, Mohammed M / Joshua, Anthony M / Linette, Gerald P / Gajewski, Thomas F / Lutzky, Jose / Lawson, David H / Lao, Christopher D / Flynn, Patrick J / Albertini, Mark R / Sato, Takami / Lewis, Karl / Marr, Brian / Abramson, David H / Dickson, Mark Andrew / Schwartz, Gary K / Carvajal, Richard D. ·Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Ave., 7th Floor, New York, NY, 10022, USA. atkinsot@mskcc.org. · Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Ave., 7th Floor, New York, NY, 10022, USA. · Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein Cancer Center, Bronx, NY, USA. · Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. · Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA. · Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA. · Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. · University of Iowa Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA, USA. · Princess Margaret Hospital University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. · Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. · Mount Sinai Medical Center, Miami Beach, FL, USA. · University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. · Minnesota Oncology, Woodbury, MN, USA. · Univeristy of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA. · Jefferson Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · University of Colorado - Denver, Denver, CO, USA. · Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. ·J Cancer Res Clin Oncol · Pubmed #27921276.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Clinical trials commonly use physician-adjudicated adverse event (AE) assessment via the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) for decision-making. Patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data are becoming more frequent in oncology; however, the relationship between physician-adjudicated AE assessment and HRQoL is understudied. METHODS: Data from a phase II trial (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01143402) where patients with metastatic uveal melanoma were randomized to receive selumetinib, an oral MEK inhibitor, or chemotherapy were analyzed. Patients reported HRQoL at baseline, after 1 month, and end of treatment (n = 118), whereas physicians adjudicated AEs via CTCAE. Mean HRQoL scores were compared between patient randomization arms, as well as between those patients who did/did not receive dose modifications. RESULTS: Ninety-four percent had a CTCAE grade ≥1 for at least one treatment-associated AE, with 18% undergoing dose modification due to toxicity. Mean HRQoL scores did not significantly differ at each of the three time points. Patient and physician-adjudicated reports of nausea were significantly correlated at the start (r = 0.31, p < 0.01) and end of treatment (r = 0.42, p < 0.05). There were no significant correlations between need for dose modification and HRQoL scores. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high rate of physician-adjudicated AEs and need for dose modifications with selumetinib, patient-reported HRQoL was not impacted by treatment. Since HRQoL did not differ in the subgroup of patients who received dosage reductions due to AEs, patients may be willing to tolerate select AEs without dose modification (if medically appropriate). More research is needed to determine how to best integrate HRQoL data into clinical trial conduct.

6 Clinical Trial Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma: 2-year overall survival outcomes in a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. 2016

Hodi, F Stephen / Chesney, Jason / Pavlick, Anna C / Robert, Caroline / Grossmann, Kenneth F / McDermott, David F / Linette, Gerald P / Meyer, Nicolas / Giguere, Jeffrey K / Agarwala, Sanjiv S / Shaheen, Montaser / Ernstoff, Marc S / Minor, David R / Salama, April K / Taylor, Matthew H / Ott, Patrick A / Horak, Christine / Gagnier, Paul / Jiang, Joel / Wolchok, Jedd D / Postow, Michael A. ·Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: stephen_hodi@dfci.harvard.edu. · University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA. · New York University, New York, NY, USA. · Gustave Roussy, INSERM U981, Paris, France. · Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. · Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA. · Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA. · Institut Universitaire du Cancer, Toulouse, France. · Greenville Health System Cancer Institute, Greenville, SC, USA. · St Luke's Cancer Center and Temple University, Bethlehem, PA, USA. · University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA. · Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA. · California Pacific Center for Melanoma Research, San Francisco, CA, USA. · Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA. · Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA. · Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. · Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA. · Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #27622997.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Results from phase 2 and 3 trials in patients with advanced melanoma have shown significant improvements in the proportion of patients achieving an objective response and prolonged progression-free survival with the combination of nivolumab (an anti-PD-1 antibody) plus ipilimumab (an anti-CTLA-4 antibody) compared with ipilimumab alone. We report 2-year overall survival data from a randomised controlled trial assessing this treatment in previously untreated advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial (CheckMate 069) we recruited patients from 19 specialist cancer centres in two countries (France and the USA). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with previously untreated, unresectable stage III or IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive an intravenous infusion of nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus placebo, every 3 weeks for four doses. Subsequently, patients assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, whereas patients allocated to ipilimumab alone received placebo every 2 weeks during this phase. Randomisation was done via an interactive voice response system with a permuted block schedule (block size of six) and stratification by BRAF mutation status. The study funder, patients, investigators, and study site staff were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint, which has been reported previously, was the proportion of patients with BRAF FINDINGS: Between Sept 16, 2013, and Feb 6, 2014, we screened 179 patients and enrolled 142, randomly assigning 95 patients to nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 47 to ipilimumab alone. In each treatment group, one patient no longer met the study criteria following randomisation and thus did not receive study drug. At a median follow-up of 24·5 months (IQR 9·1-25·7), 2-year overall survival was 63·8% (95% CI 53·3-72·6) for those assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 53·6% (95% CI 38·1-66·8) for those assigned to ipilimumab alone; median overall survival had not been reached in either group (hazard ratio 0·74, 95% CI 0·43-1·26; p=0·26). Treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 51 (54%) of 94 patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared with nine (20%) of 46 patients who received ipilimumab alone. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were colitis (12 [13%] of 94 patients) and increased alanine aminotransferase (ten [11%]) in the combination group and diarrhoea (five [11%] of 46 patients) and hypophysitis (two [4%]) in the ipilimumab alone group. Serious grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 34 (36%) of 94 patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab (including colitis in ten [11%] of 94 patients, and diarrhoea in five [5%]) compared with four (9%) of 46 patients who received ipilimumab alone (including diarrhoea in two [4%] of 46 patients, colitis in one [2%], and hypophysitis in one [2%]). No new types of treatment-related adverse events or treatment-related deaths occurred in this updated analysis. INTERPRETATION: Although follow-up of the patients in this study is ongoing, the results of this analysis suggest that the combination of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab might lead to improved outcomes compared with first-line ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma. The results suggest encouraging survival outcomes with immunotherapy in this population of patients. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

7 Clinical Trial Phase 2 study of sunitinib in patients with metastatic mucosal or acral melanoma. 2015

Buchbinder, Elizabeth I / Sosman, Jeffrey A / Lawrence, Donald P / McDermott, David F / Ramaiya, Nikhil H / Van den Abbeele, Annick D / Linette, Gerald P / Giobbie-Hurder, Anita / Hodi, F Stephen. ·Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts. · Hematology-Oncology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee. · Hematology-Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. · Hematology-Oncology, Beth Israel-Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts. · Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts. · Department of Imaging, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts. · Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. · Hematology-Oncology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri. · Department of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts. ·Cancer · Pubmed #26264378.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Patients with mucosal and acral melanomas have limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. Mutations of the KIT oncogene in these melanoma subtypes provide a potential therapeutic target. METHODS: A multicenter phase 2 trial of sunitinib was conducted in patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma of a mucosal or acral primary origin. Patients were treated in 2 cohorts: cohort A received sunitinib at a dose of 50 mg daily for 4 weeks of a 6-week cycle, and cohort B received sunitinib at a dose of 37.5 mg daily on a continuous basis. Dose reductions were permitted for treatment-related toxicities, and tumor assessments were performed every 2 months. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were enrolled: 21 in cohort A and 31 in cohort B. Four patients had confirmed partial responses, which lasted 5 to 10 months (1 with a KIT mutation). In both cohorts, the proportion of patients alive and progression-free at 2 months was 52% (95% confidence interval, 38%-66%); this was significantly larger than the hypothesized null of 5%. There was no significant difference in response or overall survival between the 25% of patients with a KIT mutation and those without one (response rate, 7.7% vs 9.7%; overall survival, 6.4 vs 8.6 months). The overall disease control rate was 44%, and a high rate of toxicity was associated with the treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Sunitinib showed activity in the treatment of mucosal and acral melanoma that was not dependent on the presence of a KIT mutation. However, the medication was poorly tolerated, and there were no prolonged responses. Cancer 2015;121:4007-4015. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

8 Clinical Trial Talimogene Laherparepvec Improves Durable Response Rate in Patients With Advanced Melanoma. 2015

Andtbacka, Robert H I / Kaufman, Howard L / Collichio, Frances / Amatruda, Thomas / Senzer, Neil / Chesney, Jason / Delman, Keith A / Spitler, Lynn E / Puzanov, Igor / Agarwala, Sanjiv S / Milhem, Mohammed / Cranmer, Lee / Curti, Brendan / Lewis, Karl / Ross, Merrick / Guthrie, Troy / Linette, Gerald P / Daniels, Gregory A / Harrington, Kevin / Middleton, Mark R / Miller, Wilson H / Zager, Jonathan S / Ye, Yining / Yao, Bin / Li, Ai / Doleman, Susan / VanderWalde, Ari / Gansert, Jennifer / Coffin, Robert S. ·Robert H.I. Andtbacka, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT · Howard L. Kaufman, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ · Frances Collichio, University of North Carolina Medical Center, Chapel Hill, NC · Thomas Amatruda, Minnesota Oncology, Fridley, MN · Neil Senzer, Mary Crowley Cancer Research Center, Dallas · Merrick Ross, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX · Jason Chesney, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY · Keith A. Delman, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA · Lynn E. Spitler, Northern California Melanoma Center, San Francisco · Gregory A. Daniels, University of California San Diego Medical Center, Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla · Yining Ye, Bin Yao, Ai Li, Ari Vander Walde, and Jennifer Gansert, Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA · Igor Puzanov, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN · Sanjiv S. Agarwala, St Luke's University Hospital and Health Network, Bethlehem, and Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA · Mohammed Milhem, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA · Lee Cranmer, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ · Brendan Curti, Earle A. Chiles Research Institute, Portland, OR · Karl Lewis, University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO · Troy Guthrie, Baptist Cancer Institute, Jacksonville · Jonathan S. Zager, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL · Gerald P. Linette, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO · Kevin Harrington, Institute of Cancer Research, Royal Marsden Hospital, London · Mark R. Middleton, National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, United Kingdom · Wilson H. Miller Jr, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada · and Susan Doleman and Robert S. Coffin, Amgen, Woburn, MA. ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #26014293.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is a herpes simplex virus type 1-derived oncolytic immunotherapy designed to selectively replicate within tumors and produce granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) to enhance systemic antitumor immune responses. T-VEC was compared with GM-CSF in patients with unresected stage IIIB to IV melanoma in a randomized open-label phase III trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with injectable melanoma that was not surgically resectable were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to intralesional T-VEC or subcutaneous GM-CSF. The primary end point was durable response rate (DRR; objective response lasting continuously ≥ 6 months) per independent assessment. Key secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and overall response rate. RESULTS: Among 436 patients randomly assigned, DRR was significantly higher with T-VEC (16.3%; 95% CI, 12.1% to 20.5%) than GM-CSF (2.1%; 95% CI, 0% to 4.5%]; odds ratio, 8.9; P < .001). Overall response rate was also higher in the T-VEC arm (26.4%; 95% CI, 21.4% to 31.5% v 5.7%; 95% CI, 1.9% to 9.5%). Median OS was 23.3 months (95% CI, 19.5 to 29.6 months) with T-VEC and 18.9 months (95% CI, 16.0 to 23.7 months) with GM-CSF (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.00; P = .051). T-VEC efficacy was most pronounced in patients with stage IIIB, IIIC, or IVM1a disease and in patients with treatment-naive disease. The most common adverse events (AEs) with T-VEC were fatigue, chills, and pyrexia. The only grade 3 or 4 AE occurring in ≥ 2% of T-VEC-treated patients was cellulitis (2.1%). No fatal treatment-related AEs occurred. CONCLUSION: T-VEC is the first oncolytic immunotherapy to demonstrate therapeutic benefit against melanoma in a phase III clinical trial. T-VEC was well tolerated and resulted in a higher DRR (P < .001) and longer median OS (P = .051), particularly in untreated patients or those with stage IIIB, IIIC, or IVM1a disease. T-VEC represents a novel potential therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma.

9 Clinical Trial Cancer immunotherapy. A dendritic cell vaccine increases the breadth and diversity of melanoma neoantigen-specific T cells. 2015

Carreno, Beatriz M / Magrini, Vincent / Becker-Hapak, Michelle / Kaabinejadian, Saghar / Hundal, Jasreet / Petti, Allegra A / Ly, Amy / Lie, Wen-Rong / Hildebrand, William H / Mardis, Elaine R / Linette, Gerald P. ·Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. bcarreno@dom.wustl.edu. · Genome Institute, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. · Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. · Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Oklahoma Health Science Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA. · EMD Millipore Corporation, Billerica, MA, USA. ·Science · Pubmed #25837513.

ABSTRACT: T cell immunity directed against tumor-encoded amino acid substitutions occurs in some melanoma patients. This implicates missense mutations as a source of patient-specific neoantigens. However, a systematic evaluation of these putative neoantigens as targets of antitumor immunity is lacking. Moreover, it remains unknown whether vaccination can augment such responses. We found that a dendritic cell vaccine led to an increase in naturally occurring neoantigen-specific immunity and revealed previously undetected human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class I-restricted neoantigens in patients with advanced melanoma. The presentation of neoantigens by HLA-A*02:01 in human melanoma was confirmed by mass spectrometry. Vaccination promoted a diverse neoantigen-specific T cell receptor (TCR) repertoire in terms of both TCR-β usage and clonal composition. Our results demonstrate that vaccination directed at tumor-encoded amino acid substitutions broadens the antigenic breadth and clonal diversity of antitumor immunity.

10 Clinical Trial Nivolumab versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma who progressed after anti-CTLA-4 treatment (CheckMate 037): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial. 2015

Weber, Jeffrey S / D'Angelo, Sandra P / Minor, David / Hodi, F Stephen / Gutzmer, Ralf / Neyns, Bart / Hoeller, Christoph / Khushalani, Nikhil I / Miller, Wilson H / Lao, Christopher D / Linette, Gerald P / Thomas, Luc / Lorigan, Paul / Grossmann, Kenneth F / Hassel, Jessica C / Maio, Michele / Sznol, Mario / Ascierto, Paolo A / Mohr, Peter / Chmielowski, Bartosz / Bryce, Alan / Svane, Inge M / Grob, Jean-Jacques / Krackhardt, Angela M / Horak, Christine / Lambert, Alexandre / Yang, Arvin S / Larkin, James. ·Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA. Electronic address: jeffrey.weber@moffitt.org. · Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. · California Pacific Center for Melanoma Research, San Francisco, CA, USA. · Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. · Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany. · Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Brussels, Belgium. · Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. · Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA. · Segal Cancer Centre, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. · University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. · Washington University, St Louis, MO, USA. · Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lyon, Lyon, France. · Christie Hospital, Manchester, UK. · Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. · German Cancer Research Centre University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. · Medical Oncology and Immunotherapy, University Hospital of Siena, Istituto Toscano Tumori, Siena, Italy. · Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, CT, USA. · Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G Pascale, Naples, Italy. · Elbe Kliniken Buxtehude, Buxtehude, Germany. · Department of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. · Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA. · Department of Oncology, Herlev Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. · Aix-Marseille University, Hopital de la Timone, Marseille, France. · Technische Universität München School of Medicine, II Medical Department, Munich, Germany. · Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA. · Bristol-Myers Squibb, Braine-I'Alleud, Belgium. · Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #25795410.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor antibody, can result in durable responses in patients with melanoma who have progressed after ipilimumab and BRAF inhibitors. We assessed the efficacy and safety of nivolumab compared with investigator's choice of chemotherapy (ICC) as a second-line or later-line treatment in patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients at 90 sites in 14 countries. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, had unresectable or metastatic melanoma, and progressed after ipilimumab, or ipilimumab and a BRAF inhibitor if they were BRAF(V 600) mutation-positive. Participating investigators randomly assigned (with an interactive voice response system) patients 2:1 to receive an intravenous infusion of nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or ICC (dacarbazine 1000 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks or paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) combined with carboplatin area under the curve 6 every 3 weeks) until progression or unacceptable toxic effects. We stratified randomisation by BRAF mutation status, tumour expression of PD-L1, and previous best overall response to ipilimumab. We used permuted blocks (block size of six) within each stratum. Primary endpoints were the proportion of patients who had an objective response and overall survival. Treatment was given open-label, but those doing tumour assessments were masked to treatment assignment. We assessed objective responses per-protocol after 120 patients had been treated with nivolumab and had a minimum follow-up of 24 weeks, and safety in all patients who had had at least one dose of treatment. The trial is closed and this is the first interim analysis, reporting the objective response primary endpoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01721746. FINDINGS: Between Dec 21, 2012, and Jan 10, 2014, we screened 631 patients, randomly allocating 272 patients to nivolumab and 133 to ICC. Confirmed objective responses were reported in 38 (31·7%, 95% CI 23·5-40·8) of the first 120 patients in the nivolumab group versus five (10·6%, 3·5-23·1) of 47 patients in the ICC group. Grade 3-4 adverse events related to nivolumab included increased lipase (three [1%] of 268 patients), increased alanine aminotransferase, anaemia, and fatigue (two [1%] each); for ICC, these included neutropenia (14 [14%] of 102), thrombocytopenia (six [6%]), and anaemia (five [5%]). We noted grade 3-4 drug-related serious adverse events in 12 (5%) nivolumab-treated patients and nine (9%) patients in the ICC group. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab led to a greater proportion of patients achieving an objective response and fewer toxic effects than with alternative available chemotherapy regimens for patients with advanced melanoma that has progressed after ipilimumab or ipilimumab and a BRAF inhibitor. Nivolumab represents a new treatment option with clinically meaningful durable objective responses in a population of high unmet need. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

11 Clinical Trial Effect of selumetinib vs chemotherapy on progression-free survival in uveal melanoma: a randomized clinical trial. 2014

Carvajal, Richard D / Sosman, Jeffrey A / Quevedo, Jorge Fernando / Milhem, Mohammed M / Joshua, Anthony M / Kudchadkar, Ragini R / Linette, Gerald P / Gajewski, Thomas F / Lutzky, Jose / Lawson, David H / Lao, Christopher D / Flynn, Patrick J / Albertini, Mark R / Sato, Takami / Lewis, Karl / Doyle, Austin / Ancell, Kristin / Panageas, Katherine S / Bluth, Mark / Hedvat, Cyrus / Erinjeri, Joseph / Ambrosini, Grazia / Marr, Brian / Abramson, David H / Dickson, Mark Andrew / Wolchok, Jedd D / Chapman, Paul B / Schwartz, Gary K. ·Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York2Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York. · Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Department of Hematology-Oncology, Nashville, Tennessee. · Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. · University of Iowa Hospital and Clinics, Iowa City. · Division of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. · H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida. · Washington University, St Louis, Missouri. · University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. · Mount Sinai Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami Beach, Florida. · Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia. · University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. · Metro Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program, St Louis Park. · University of Wisconsin, Madison. · Jefferson Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. · University of Colorado, Aurora. · Investigational Drug Branch, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Maryland. · Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. ·JAMA · Pubmed #24938562.

ABSTRACT: IMPORTANCE: Uveal melanoma is characterized by mutations in GNAQ and GNA11, resulting in mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway activation. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of selumetinib, a selective, non-adenosine triphosphate competitive inhibitor of MEK1 and MEK2, in uveal melanoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, open-label, phase 2 clinical trial comparing selumetinib vs chemotherapy conducted from August 2010 through December 2013 among 120 patients with metastatic uveal melanoma at 15 academic oncology centers in the United States and Canada. INTERVENTIONS: One hundred one patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive selumetinib, 75 mg orally twice daily on a continual basis (n = 50), or chemotherapy (temozolomide, 150 mg/m2 orally daily for 5 of every 28 days, or dacarbazine, 1000 mg/m2 intravenously every 21 days [investigator choice]; n = 51) until disease progression, death, intolerable adverse effects, or withdrawal of consent. After primary outcome analysis, 19 patients were registered and 18 treated with selumetinib without randomization to complete the planned 120-patient enrollment. Patients in the chemotherapy group could receive selumetinib at the time of radiographic progression. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Progression-free survival, the primary end point, was assessed as of April 22, 2013. Additional end points, including overall survival, response rate, and safety/toxicity, were assessed as of December 31, 2013. RESULTS: Median progression-free survival among patients randomized to chemotherapy was 7 weeks (95% CI, 4.3-8.4 weeks; median treatment duration, 8 weeks; interquartile range [IQR], 4.3-16 weeks) and among those randomized to selumetinib was 15.9 weeks (95% CI, 8.4-21.1 weeks; median treatment duration, 16.1 weeks; IQR, 8.1-25.3 weeks) (hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.30-0.71; P < .001). Median overall survival time was 9.1 months (95% CI, 6.1-11.1 months) with chemotherapy and 11.8 months (95% CI, 9.8-15.7 months) with selumetinib (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.41-1.06; P = .09). No objective responses were observed with chemotherapy. Forty-nine percent of patients treated with selumetinib achieved tumor regression, with 14% achieving an objective radiographic response to therapy. Treatment-related adverse events were observed in 97% of patients treated with selumetinib, with 37% requiring at least 1 dose reduction. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this hypothesis-generating study of patients with advanced uveal melanoma, selumetinib compared with chemotherapy resulted in a modestly improved progression-free survival and response rate; however, no improvement in overall survival was observed. Improvement in clinical outcomes was accompanied by a high rate of adverse events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01143402.

12 Clinical Trial A single-arm, open-label, expanded access study of vemurafenib in patients with metastatic melanoma in the United States. 2014

Flaherty, Lawrence / Hamid, Omid / Linette, Gerald / Schuchter, Lynn / Hallmeyer, Sigrun / Gonzalez, Rene / Cowey, C Lance / Pavlick, Anna / Kudrik, Fred / Curti, Brendan / Lawson, David / Chapman, Paul B / Margolin, Kim / Ribas, Antoni / McDermott, David / Flaherty, Keith / Cranmer, Lee / Hodi, F Stephen / Day, Bann-Mo / Linke, Rolf / Hainsworth, John. ·From the *Karmanos Cancer Center, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI; †The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA; ‡Washington University, St Louis, MO; §University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; ∥Oncology Specialists S.C., Park Ridge, IL; ¶University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, CO; #Baylor Sammons Cancer Center, Texas Oncology, PA, Dallas, TX; **NYU Medical Center, New York, NY; ††South Carolina Oncology Associates, Columbia, SC; ‡‡Providence Portland Medical Center, Portland, OR; §§Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, GA; ∥∥Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY; ¶¶Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA; ##UCLA School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA; ***Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and †††Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; ‡‡‡University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ; §§§Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA; ∥∥∥Genentech, San Francisco, CA; ¶¶¶The SFJ Pharma Group, Pleasanton, CA; and ###Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, TN. ·Cancer J · Pubmed #24445759.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: This open-label, multicenter study was designed to allow access to vemurafenib for patients with metastatic melanoma, bridging the time between end of enrollment in the phase III registration trial (December 2010) and commercial availability following US Food and Drug Administration approval of vemurafenib for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic BRAF-mutated melanoma (August 2011). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had metastatic melanoma with a BRAF mutation (detected by the cobas 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test). Unlike previous vemurafenib trials, patients with poor performance status (PS) and treated brain metastases were permitted. Enrolled patients received oral vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily. RESULTS: Of 374 patients enrolled at 29 US sites (December 2010 to October 2011), 371 patients received vemurafenib and were followed up for a median of 2.8 months (the study had a prespecified end upon vemurafenib approval and commercial availability). At baseline, most patients (75%) had stage M1c disease, and 19% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS of 2 or 3; 72% of patients had received prior systemic therapy for metastatic melanoma, 27% received prior ipilimumab, and 29% radiotherapy for prior brain metastases. Because reassessment data to confirm response were not available for most patients, point estimates of objective response rate (ORR) are reported. Among 241 efficacy-evaluable patients, the ORR was 54% (median time to response, 1.9 months). The ORR in non-central nervous system sites in patients with previously treated brain metastases (n = 68) was 53%. The ORR in prior ipilimumab-treated patients (n = 68) was 52%. For patients with PS of 0 or 1 (n = 210) and 2 or 3 (n = 31), the ORRs were 55%, and 42%, respectively. The safety profile observed was consistent with that reported in previous studies. The number of patients with grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was higher in patients with PS 2 or 3 than in those with PS 0 or 1 (10% vs. 5%, respectively). Adverse events requiring a dose reduction (at least 1 level) occurred in 11% of patients, and 9 patients (2%) experienced events leading to vemurafenib withdrawal, including 2 with repeated QT interval prolongation. DISCUSSION: This study confirmed the established rapid and high tumor response rate achievable with vemurafenib in BRAF mutation-positive metastatic melanoma. Several groups not included in previous studies, including patients with previously treated brain metastases, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS 2 to 3, or previous ipilimumab treatment had benefitted from vemurafenib similar to the overall population. No new safety signals were detected.

13 Clinical Trial IL-12p70-producing patient DC vaccine elicits Tc1-polarized immunity. 2013

Carreno, Beatriz M / Becker-Hapak, Michelle / Huang, Alexander / Chan, Megan / Alyasiry, Amer / Lie, Wen-Rong / Aft, Rebecca L / Cornelius, Lynn A / Trinkaus, Kathryn M / Linette, Gerald P. ·Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri 63110, USA. bcarreno@dom.wustl.edu ·J Clin Invest · Pubmed #23867552.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Systemic administration of IL-12p70 has demonstrated clinical activity in cancer patients, but dose-limiting toxicities have hindered its incorporation in vaccine formulations. Here, we report on the immunological and clinical outcomes upon vaccination with CD40L/IFN-γ-matured, IL-12p70-producing DCs. METHODS: 7 HLA-A*0201+ newly diagnosed stage IV melanoma patients were immunized against the gp100 melanoma antigen using autologous peptide-pulsed, CD40L/IFN-γ-matured DCs. PBMCs were taken weekly for immune monitoring by tetramer analysis and functional assays. CT imaging was performed at baseline, week 9, and week 18 for clinical assessment using RECIST. RESULTS: 6 of 7 treated patients developed sustained T cell immunity to all 3 melanoma gp100 antigen-derived peptides. 3 of the 6 immunological responders developed confirmed clinical responses (1 complete remission >4 years, 2 partial response). Importantly, DC vaccine-derived IL-12p70 levels positively correlated with time to progression (P = 0.019, log-rank), as did T-cytotoxic 1 (Tc1) immunity, as assessed by IFN-γ/IL-13 and IFN-γ/IL-5 ratios (P = 0.035 and P = 0.030, respectively, log-rank). In contrast, a pathway-specific defect in IL-12p35 transcription was identified upon CD40L/IFN-γ activation in clinical nonresponder patient DCs, and gp100-specific T cells from these patients displayed a Tc2 phenotype. Incorporation of TLR3 and TLR8 agonists into the CD40L/IFN-γ activation protocol corrected the IL-12p70 production defect in DCs derived from clinical nonresponder patients. CONCLUSION: These findings underscore the essential role of IL-12p70 in the development of therapeutic type 1 antigen-specific CD8+ T cell immunity in humans with cancer.

14 Clinical Trial Phase III randomized clinical trial comparing tremelimumab with standard-of-care chemotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma. 2013

Ribas, Antoni / Kefford, Richard / Marshall, Margaret A / Punt, Cornelis J A / Haanen, John B / Marmol, Maribel / Garbe, Claus / Gogas, Helen / Schachter, Jacob / Linette, Gerald / Lorigan, Paul / Kendra, Kari L / Maio, Michele / Trefzer, Uwe / Smylie, Michael / McArthur, Grant A / Dreno, Brigitte / Nathan, Paul D / Mackiewicz, Jacek / Kirkwood, John M / Gomez-Navarro, Jesus / Huang, Bo / Pavlov, Dmitri / Hauschild, Axel. ·Division of Hematology-Oncology, 11-934 Factor Building, UCLA Medical Center, 10833 Le Conte Ave, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1782, USA. aribas@mednet.ucla.edu ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #23295794.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: In phase I/II trials, the cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4-blocking monoclonal antibody tremelimumab induced durable responses in a subset of patients with advanced melanoma. This phase III study evaluated overall survival (OS) and other safety and efficacy end points in patients with advanced melanoma treated with tremelimumab or standard-of-care chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with treatment-naive, unresectable stage IIIc or IV melanoma were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to tremelimumab (15 mg/kg once every 90 days) or physician's choice of standard-of-care chemotherapy (temozolomide or dacarbazine). RESULTS: In all, 655 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned. The test statistic crossed the prespecified futility boundary at second interim analysis after 340 deaths, but survival follow-up continued. At final analysis with 534 events, median OS by intent to treat was 12.6 months (95% CI, 10.8 to 14.3) for tremelimumab and 10.7 months (95% CI, 9.36 to 11.96) for chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.88; P = .127). Objective response rates were similar in the two arms: 10.7% in the tremelimumab arm and 9.8% in the chemotherapy arm. However, response duration (measured from date of random assignment) was significantly longer after tremelimumab (35.8 v 13.7 months; P = .0011). Diarrhea, pruritus, and rash were the most common treatment-related adverse events in the tremelimumab arm; 7.4% had endocrine toxicities. Seven deaths in the tremelimumab arm and one in the chemotherapy arm were considered treatment related by either investigators or sponsor. CONCLUSION: This study failed to demonstrate a statistically significant survival advantage of treatment with tremelimumab over standard-of-care chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma.

15 Clinical Trial Phase II study of the farnesyltransferase inhibitor R115777 in advanced melanoma (CALGB 500104). 2012

Gajewski, Thomas F / Salama, April K S / Niedzwiecki, Donna / Johnson, Jeffrey / Linette, Gerald / Bucher, Cynthia / Blaskovich, Michelle A / Sebti, Said M / Haluska, Frank / Anonymous3810744. ·The University of Chicago, Section of Hematology/Oncology, 5841 S, Maryland Ave, MC2115, Chicago, IL 60637, USA. tgajewsk@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu ·J Transl Med · Pubmed #23228035.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Multiple farnesylated proteins are involved in signal transduction in cancer. Farnesyltransferase inhibitors (FTIs) have been developed as a strategy to inhibit the function of these proteins. As FTIs inhibit proliferation of melanoma cell lines, we undertook a study to assess the impact of a FTI in advanced melanoma. As farnesylated proteins are also important for T cell activation, measurement of effects on T cell function was also pursued. METHODS: A 3-stage trial design was developed with a maximum of 40 patients and early stopping if there were no responders in the first 14, or fewer than 2 responders in the first 28 patients. Eligibility included performance status of 0-1, no prior chemotherapy, at most 1 prior immunotherapy, no brain metastases, and presence of at least 2 cutaneous lesions amenable to biopsy. R115777 was administered twice per day for 21 days of a 28-day cycle. Patients were evaluated every 2 cycles by RECIST. Blood and tumor were analyzed pre-treatment and during week 7. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were enrolled. Two patients had grade 3 toxicities, which included myelosuppression, nausea/vomiting, elevated BUN, and anorexia. There were no clinical responses. All patients analyzed showed potent inhibition of FT activity (85-98%) in tumor tissue; inhibition of phosphorylated ERK and Akt was also observed. T cells showed evidence of FT inhibition and diminished IFN-γ production. CONCLUSIONS: Despite potent target inhibition, R115777 showed no evidence of clinical activity in this cohort of melanoma patients. Inhibition of T cell function by FTIs has potential clinical implications. Clinicaltrials.gov number NCT00060125.

16 Clinical Trial Phase II trial of intravenous administration of Reolysin(®) (Reovirus Serotype-3-dearing Strain) in patients with metastatic melanoma. 2012

Galanis, Evanthia / Markovic, Svetomir N / Suman, Vera J / Nuovo, Gerard J / Vile, Richard G / Kottke, Timothy J / Nevala, Wendy K / Thompson, Michael A / Lewis, Jean E / Rumilla, Kandelaria M / Roulstone, Victoria / Harrington, Kevin / Linette, Gerald P / Maples, William J / Coffey, Matt / Zwiebel, James / Kendra, Kari. ·Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA. galanis.evanthia@mayo.edu ·Mol Ther · Pubmed #22871663.

ABSTRACT: Reovirus, a replication competent RNA virus, has preclinical activity against melanoma lines and xenografts. We conducted a phase II trial of reovirus in metastatic melanoma patients. Patients received 3 × 10(10) TCID50 on days 1-5 of each 28 day cycle, administered intravenously. Twenty-one eligible patients were enrolled. Treatment was well tolerated without any dose reductions having to be implemented. Post-treatment biopsy samples were obtained in 15 patients, 13/15 contained adequate tumor for correlative analysis. In two patients, productive reoviral replication (viral antigen coexpression with tubulin) was demonstrated, despite increase in neutralizing antibody titers. There were no objective responses although 75-90% tumor necrosis, consistent with treatment effect, was observed in one patient who had metastatic lesions surgically removed. Median time to progression and survival were 45 days (range 13-96 days) and 165 days (range 15 days-15.8 months) respectively. In conclusion, reovirus treatment was well tolerated in metastatic melanoma patients; viral replication was demonstrated in biopsy samples. Based on preclinical data showing synergy with taxane and platinum compounds, a phase II combination trial in metastatic melanoma patients is ongoing.

17 Clinical Trial Health related quality of life outcomes for unresectable stage III or IV melanoma patients receiving ipilimumab treatment. 2012

Revicki, Dennis A / van den Eertwegh, Alfons J M / Lorigan, Paul / Lebbe, Celeste / Linette, Gerald / Ottensmeier, Christian H / Safikhani, Shima / Messina, Marianne / Hoos, Axel / Wagner, Samuel / Kotapati, Srividya. ·United BioSource Corporation, Bethesda, MD 20814, USA. dennis.revicki@unitedbiosource.com ·Health Qual Life Outcomes · Pubmed #22694829.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: In an international, randomized Phase III trial ipilimumab demonstrated a significant overall survival benefit in previously treated advanced melanoma patients. This report summarizes health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes for ipilimumab with/without gp100 vaccine compared to gp100 alone during the clinical trial's 12 week treatment induction period. METHODS: The Phase III clinical trial (MDX010-20) was a double-blind, fixed dose study in 676 previously treated advanced unresectable stage III or IV melanoma patients. Patients were randomized 3:1:1 to receive either ipilimumab (3 mg/kg q3w x 4 doses) + gp100 (peptide vaccine; 1 mg q3w x 4 doses; ipilimumab plus gp100, n = 403); gp100 vaccine + placebo (gp100 alone, n = 136); or ipilimumab + placebo (ipilimumab alone, n = 137). The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) assessed HRQL. Baseline to Week 12 changes in EORTC QLQ-C30 function, global health status, and symptom scores were analyzed for ipilimumab with/without gp100 vaccine compared to gp100 alone. Mean change in scores were categorized "no change" (0-5), "a little" (5-10 points), "moderate" (10-20 points), and "very much" (>20). RESULTS: In the ipilimumab plus gp100 and ipilimumab alone groups, mean changes from baseline to Week 12 generally indicated "no change" or "a little" impairment across EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status, function, and symptom subscales. Significant differences in constipation, favoring ipilimumab, were observed (p < 0.05). For ipilimumab alone arm, subscales with no or a little impairment were physical, emotional, cognitive, social function, global health, nausea, pain, dyspnea, constipation, and diarrhea subscales. For the gp100 alone group, the observed changes were moderate to large for global health, role function, fatigue, and for pain. CONCLUSIONS: Ipilimumab with/without gp100 vaccine does not have a significant negative HRQL impact during the treatment induction phase relative to gp100 alone in stage III or IV melanoma patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identification number NCT00094653.

18 Clinical Trial BEAM: a randomized phase II study evaluating the activity of bevacizumab in combination with carboplatin plus paclitaxel in patients with previously untreated advanced melanoma. 2012

Kim, Kevin B / Sosman, Jeffrey A / Fruehauf, John P / Linette, Gerald P / Markovic, Svetomir N / McDermott, David F / Weber, Jeffrey S / Nguyen, Hoa / Cheverton, Peter / Chen, Daniel / Peterson, Amy C / Carson, William E / O'Day, Steven J. ·The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #22124101.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Metastatic melanoma, a highly vascularized tumor with strong expression of vascular endothelial growth factor, has an overall poor prognosis. We conducted a placebo-controlled, double-blind phase II study of carboplatin plus paclitaxel with or without bevacizumab in patients with previously untreated metastatic melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned in a two-to-one ratio to carboplatin (area under the curve, 5) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)) and bevacizumab (15 mg/kg; CPB) or placebo (CP) administered intravenously once every 3 weeks. Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary end point. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: Two hundred fourteen patients (73% with M1c disease) were randomly assigned. With a median follow-up of 13 months, median PFS was 4.2 months for the CP arm (n = 71) and 5.6 months for the CPB arm (n = 143; hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; P = .1414). Overall response rates were 16.4% and 25.5%, respectively (P = .1577). With 13-month follow-up, median OS was 8.6 months in the CP arm versus 12.3 months in the CPB arm (HR, 0.67; P = .0366), whereas in an evaluation 4 months later, it was 9.2 versus 12.3 months, respectively (HR, 0.79; P = .1916). In patients with elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase (n = 84), median PFS and OS were longer in the CPB arm (PFS: 4.4 v 2.7 months; HR, 0.62; OS: 8.5 v 7.5 months; HR, 0.52). No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: The study did not meet the primary objective of statistically significant improvement in PFS with the addition of bevacizumab to carboplatin plus paclitaxel. A larger phase III study will be necessary to determine whether there is benefit to the addition of bevacizumab to carboplatin plus paclitaxel in this disease setting.

19 Clinical Trial A study of paclitaxel, carboplatin, and bortezomib in the treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma: a phase 2 consortium study. 2010

Croghan, Gary A / Suman, Vera J / Maples, William J / Albertini, Mark / Linette, Gerald / Flaherty, Lawrence / Eckardt, John / Ma, Cynthia / Markovic, Svetomir N / Erlichman, Charles. ·Department of Medical Oncology, Melanoma Study Group, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA. croghan.gary@mayo.edu ·Cancer · Pubmed #20564112.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy has not been reported to have a significant impact on survival for patients with metastatic melanoma. Bortezomib was shown to have additive/synergistic effects with several chemotherapeutic agents, including paclitaxel and platinum. A phase 1 trial of this 3-drug combination reported that 6 of 28 patients treated with bortezomib followed by paclitaxel and carboplatin achieved a partial response (including 2 of 5 patients with metastatic melanoma). METHODS: A 2-stage phase 2 clinical trial was conducted to assess the antitumor activity of this 3-agent combination in patients with metastatic melanoma who had received at most 1 prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Treatment included bortezomib at a dose of 1.3 mg/m2 intravenously on Days 1, 4, and 8; paclitaxel at a dose of 175 mg/m2; and carboplatin at an area under the concentration (AUC) of 6 on Day 2 of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint of this trial was tumor response rate (TRR). RESULTS: Seventeen eligible patients were enrolled. A median of 4 cycles were administered (range, 1-7 cycles). Three patients discontinued treatment due to persistent grade 4 (based on National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [version 3.0]) neutropenia with grade 3 leukopenia (2 patients) or grade 4 pulmonary embolism (1 patient). Grade>or=3 toxicities included neutropenia (71%), leukopenia (41%), thrombocytopenia (29%), and arthralgia (12%). Two partial responses were observed (TRR, 11.8%). Four patients had stable disease at >12 weeks. The median progression-free survival was 3.2 months, and the median overall survival was 7.0 months. CONCLUSIONS: Due to insufficient clinical efficacy, this trial did not proceed to second-stage accrual. The combination of paclitaxel, carboplatin, and bortezomib demonstrated limited clinical benefit and was associated with significant toxicity.

20 Clinical Trial Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. 2010

Hodi, F Stephen / O'Day, Steven J / McDermott, David F / Weber, Robert W / Sosman, Jeffrey A / Haanen, John B / Gonzalez, Rene / Robert, Caroline / Schadendorf, Dirk / Hassel, Jessica C / Akerley, Wallace / van den Eertwegh, Alfons J M / Lutzky, Jose / Lorigan, Paul / Vaubel, Julia M / Linette, Gerald P / Hogg, David / Ottensmeier, Christian H / Lebbé, Celeste / Peschel, Christian / Quirt, Ian / Clark, Joseph I / Wolchok, Jedd D / Weber, Jeffrey S / Tian, Jason / Yellin, Michael J / Nichol, Geoffrey M / Hoos, Axel / Urba, Walter J. ·Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02115, USA. stephen_hodi@dfci.harvard.edu ·N Engl J Med · Pubmed #20525992.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: An improvement in overall survival among patients with metastatic melanoma has been an elusive goal. In this phase 3 study, ipilimumab--which blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 to potentiate an antitumor T-cell response--administered with or without a glycoprotein 100 (gp100) peptide vaccine was compared with gp100 alone in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma. METHODS: A total of 676 HLA-A*0201-positive patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, whose disease had progressed while they were receiving therapy for metastatic disease, were randomly assigned, in a 3:1:1 ratio, to receive ipilimumab plus gp100 (403 patients), ipilimumab alone (137), or gp100 alone (136). Ipilimumab, at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight, was administered with or without gp100 every 3 weeks for up to four treatments (induction). Eligible patients could receive reinduction therapy. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: The median overall survival was 10.0 months among patients receiving ipilimumab plus gp100, as compared with 6.4 months among patients receiving gp100 alone (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; P<0.001). The median overall survival with ipilimumab alone was 10.1 months (hazard ratio for death in the comparison with gp100 alone, 0.66; P=0.003). No difference in overall survival was detected between the ipilimumab groups (hazard ratio with ipilimumab plus gp100, 1.04; P=0.76). Grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 10 to 15% of patients treated with ipilimumab and in 3% treated with gp100 alone. There were 14 deaths related to the study drugs (2.1%), and 7 were associated with immune-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Ipilimumab, with or without a gp100 peptide vaccine, as compared with gp100 alone, improved overall survival in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma. Adverse events can be severe, long-lasting, or both, but most are reversible with appropriate treatment. (Funded by Medarex and Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00094653.)

21 Clinical Trial Ipilimumab monotherapy in patients with pretreated advanced melanoma: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 2, dose-ranging study. 2010

Wolchok, Jedd D / Neyns, Bart / Linette, Gerald / Negrier, Sylvie / Lutzky, Jose / Thomas, Luc / Waterfield, William / Schadendorf, Dirk / Smylie, Michael / Guthrie, Troy / Grob, Jean-Jacques / Chesney, Jason / Chin, Kevin / Chen, Kun / Hoos, Axel / O'Day, Steven J / Lebbé, Celeste. ·Ludwig Center for Cancer Immunotherapy, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10021, USA. wolchokj@mskcc.org ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #20004617.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 and has shown promising activity in advanced melanoma. We aimed to ascertain the antitumour efficacy of ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS: We undertook a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial in 66 centres from 12 countries. 217 patients with previously treated stage III (unresectable) or stage IV melanoma were randomly assigned a fixed dose of ipilimumab of either 10 mg/kg (n=73), 3 mg/kg (n=72), or 0.3 mg/kg (n=72) every 3 weeks for four cycles (induction) followed by maintenance therapy every 3 months. Randomisation was done with a permuted block procedure, stratified on the basis of type of previous treatment. The primary endpoint was best overall response rate (the proportion of patients with a complete or partial response, according to modified WHO criteria). Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat, whereas safety analyses included patients who received at least one dose of ipilimumab. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00289640. FINDINGS: The best overall response rate was 11.1% (95% CI 4.9-20.7) for 10 mg/kg, 4.2% (0.9-11.7) for 3 mg/kg, and 0% (0.0-4.9) for 0.3 mg/kg (p=0.0015; trend test). Immune-related adverse events of any grade arose in 50 of 71, 46 of 71, and 19 of 72 patients at doses of 10 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, and 0.3 mg/kg, respectively; the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were gastrointestinal immune-related events (11 in the 10 mg/kg group, two in the 3 mg/kg group, none in the 0.3 mg/kg group) and diarrhoea (ten in the 10 mg/kg group, one in the 3 mg/kg group, none in the 0.3 mg/kg group). INTERPRETATION: Ipilimumab elicited a dose-dependent effect on efficacy and safety measures in pretreated patients with advanced melanoma, lending support to further studies at a dose of 10 mg/kg. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

22 Clinical Trial Double-blind randomized phase II study of the combination of sorafenib and dacarbazine in patients with advanced melanoma: a report from the 11715 Study Group. 2008

McDermott, David F / Sosman, Jeffrey A / Gonzalez, Rene / Hodi, F Stephen / Linette, Gerald P / Richards, Jon / Jakub, James W / Beeram, Muralidhar / Tarantolo, Stefano / Agarwala, Sanjiv / Frenette, Gary / Puzanov, Igor / Cranmer, Lee / Lewis, Karl / Kirkwood, John / White, J Michael / Xia, Chenghua / Patel, Kiran / Hersh, Evan. ·Division of Hematology/Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Ave, East KS-159, Boston, MA, USA. dmcdermo@bidmc.harvard.edu ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #18445842.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of sorafenib plus dacarbazine in patients with advanced melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study enrolled chemotherapy-naive patients with stage III (unresectable) or IV melanoma. A total of 101 patients received placebo plus dacarbazine (n = 50) or sorafenib plus dacarbazine (n = 51). On day 1 of a 21-day cycle, patients received intravenous dacarbazine 1,000 mg/m(2) for a maximum of 16 cycles. Oral sorafenib 400 mg or placebo was administered twice a day continuously. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent assessment. Secondary and tertiary end points included time to progression (TTP), response rate, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Median PFS in the sorafenib plus dacarbazine arm was 21.1 weeks versus 11.7 weeks in the placebo plus dacarbazine arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.665; P = .068). There were statistically significant improvements in PFS rates at 6 and 9 months, and in TTP (median, 21.1 v 11.7 weeks; HR, 0.619) in favor of the sorafenib plus dacarbazine arm. No difference in OS was observed (median, 51.3 v 45.6 weeks in the placebo plus dacarbazine and sorafenib plus dacarbazine arms, respectively; HR, 1.022). The regimen was well tolerated and had a manageable toxicity profile. CONCLUSION: Sorafenib plus dacarbazine was well tolerated in patients with advanced melanoma and yielded an encouraging improvement in PFS. Based on these findings, additional studies with the combination are warranted in this patient population.

23 Article Noninvasive Determination of Melanoma Depth using a Handheld Photoacoustic Probe. 2017

Zhou, Yong / Tripathi, Shivani V / Rosman, Ilana / Ma, Jun / Hai, Pengfei / Linette, Gerald P / Council, M Laurin / Fields, Ryan C / Wang, Lihong V / Cornelius, Lynn A. ·Washington University in St. Louis, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Optical Imaging Laboratory, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. · Washington University School of Medicine, Division of Dermatology, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. · Washington University School of Medicine, Division of Dermatology, St. Louis, Missouri, USA; Washington University School of Medicine, Department of Pathology and Immunology, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. · Washington University School of Medicine, Division of Dermatology, St. Louis, Missouri, USA; Washington University School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Oncology, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. · Washington University School of Medicine, Division of Dermatology, St. Louis, Missouri, USA; Washington University School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. · Washington University in St. Louis, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Optical Imaging Laboratory, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. Electronic address: lhwang@wustl.edu. · Washington University School of Medicine, Division of Dermatology, St. Louis, Missouri, USA. Electronic address: cornelil@wustl.edu. ·J Invest Dermatol · Pubmed #28163070.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

24 Article Nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab in untreated melanoma. 2015

Postow, Michael A / Chesney, Jason / Pavlick, Anna C / Robert, Caroline / Grossmann, Kenneth / McDermott, David / Linette, Gerald P / Meyer, Nicolas / Giguere, Jeffrey K / Agarwala, Sanjiv S / Shaheen, Montaser / Ernstoff, Marc S / Minor, David / Salama, April K / Taylor, Matthew / Ott, Patrick A / Rollin, Linda M / Horak, Christine / Gagnier, Paul / Wolchok, Jedd D / Hodi, F Stephen. ·From Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (M.A.P., J.D.W.), Weill Cornell Medical College (M.A.P., J.D.W.), and New York University, Perlmutter Cancer Center (A.C.P.) - all in New York · J. Graham Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY (J.C.) · Institute Gustave Roussy, Villejuif (C.R.), Paris-Sud University, Orsay (C.R.), and Institut Universitaire du Cancer, Toulouse (N.M.) - all in France · Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City (K.G.) · Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (D. McDermott) and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (P.A.O., F.S.H.) - both in Boston · Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis (G.P.L.) · Greenville Health System, Greenville, SC (J.K.G.) · St. Luke's Cancer Center, Bethlehem, PA (S.S.A.) · University of New Mexico, Albuquerque (M.S.) · Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland (M.S.E.) · California Pacific Center for Melanoma Research, San Francisco (D. Minor) · Duke University, Durham, NC (A.K.S.) · Oregon Health and Science University, Portland (M.T.) · Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lawrenceville, NJ (C.H.) · and Bristol-Myers Squibb, Wallingford, CT (L.M.R., P.G.). ·N Engl J Med · Pubmed #25891304.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: In a phase 1 dose-escalation study, combined inhibition of T-cell checkpoint pathways by nivolumab and ipilimumab was associated with a high rate of objective response, including complete responses, among patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this double-blind study involving 142 patients with metastatic melanoma who had not previously received treatment, we randomly assigned patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram of body weight) combined with either nivolumab (1 mg per kilogram) or placebo once every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) or placebo every 2 weeks until the occurrence of disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary end point was the rate of investigator-assessed, confirmed objective response among patients with BRAF V600 wild-type tumors. RESULTS: Among patients with BRAF wild-type tumors, the rate of confirmed objective response was 61% (44 of 72 patients) in the group that received both ipilimumab and nivolumab (combination group) versus 11% (4 of 37 patients) in the group that received ipilimumab and placebo (ipilimumab-monotherapy group) (P<0.001), with complete responses reported in 16 patients (22%) in the combination group and no patients in the ipilimumab-monotherapy group. The median duration of response was not reached in either group. The median progression-free survival was not reached with the combination therapy and was 4.4 months with ipilimumab monotherapy (hazard ratio associated with combination therapy as compared with ipilimumab monotherapy for disease progression or death, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.23 to 0.68; P<0.001). Similar results for response rate and progression-free survival were observed in 33 patients with BRAF mutation-positive tumors. Drug-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported in 54% of the patients who received the combination therapy as compared with 24% of the patients who received ipilimumab monotherapy. Select adverse events with potential immunologic causes were consistent with those in a phase 1 study, and most of these events resolved with immune-modulating medication. CONCLUSIONS: The objective-response rate and the progression-free survival among patients with advanced melanoma who had not previously received treatment were significantly greater with nivolumab combined with ipilimumab than with ipilimumab monotherapy. Combination therapy had an acceptable safety profile. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01927419.).

25 Article Clonal architectures and driver mutations in metastatic melanomas. 2014

Ding, Li / Kim, Minjung / Kanchi, Krishna L / Dees, Nathan D / Lu, Charles / Griffith, Malachi / Fenstermacher, David / Sung, Hyeran / Miller, Christopher A / Goetz, Brian / Wendl, Michael C / Griffith, Obi / Cornelius, Lynn A / Linette, Gerald P / McMichael, Joshua F / Sondak, Vernon K / Fields, Ryan C / Ley, Timothy J / Mulé, James J / Wilson, Richard K / Weber, Jeffrey S. ·The Genome Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Department of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Department of Genetics, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America. · Donald A. Adam Comprehensive Melanoma Research Center, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, United States of America. · The Genome Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America. · The Genome Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Department of Genetics, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America. · Department of Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America. · The Genome Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Department of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America. · Department of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Department of Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America. · Department of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America. · Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Department of Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America. · The Genome Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Department of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America. · The Genome Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Department of Genetics, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America; Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America. ·PLoS One · Pubmed #25393105.

ABSTRACT: To reveal the clonal architecture of melanoma and associated driver mutations, whole genome sequencing (WGS) and targeted extension sequencing were used to characterize 124 melanoma cases. Significantly mutated gene analysis using 13 WGS cases and 15 additional paired extension cases identified known melanoma genes such as BRAF, NRAS, and CDKN2A, as well as a novel gene EPHA3, previously implicated in other cancer types. Extension studies using tumors from another 96 patients discovered a large number of truncation mutations in tumor suppressors (TP53 and RB1), protein phosphatases (e.g., PTEN, PTPRB, PTPRD, and PTPRT), as well as chromatin remodeling genes (e.g., ASXL3, MLL2, and ARID2). Deep sequencing of mutations revealed subclones in the majority of metastatic tumors from 13 WGS cases. Validated mutations from 12 out of 13 WGS patients exhibited a predominant UV signature characterized by a high frequency of C->T transitions occurring at the 3' base of dipyrimidine sequences while one patient (MEL9) with a hypermutator phenotype lacked this signature. Strikingly, a subclonal mutation signature analysis revealed that the founding clone in MEL9 exhibited UV signature but the secondary clone did not, suggesting different mutational mechanisms for two clonal populations from the same tumor. Further analysis of four metastases from different geographic locations in 2 melanoma cases revealed phylogenetic relationships and highlighted the genetic alterations responsible for differential drug resistance among metastatic tumors. Our study suggests that clonal evaluation is crucial for understanding tumor etiology and drug resistance in melanoma.

Next