Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Melanoma: HELP
Articles by Dr. Jeffrey Weber
Based on 77 articles published since 2009
(Why 77 articles?)
||||

Between 2009 and 2019, J. S. Weber wrote the following 77 articles about Melanoma.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
Pages: 1 · 2 · 3 · 4
1 Editorial Up close and personal: the challenges of precision medicine in melanoma. 2014

Smalley, Keiran S M / Weber, Jeffrey S. ·Affiliations of authors: Department of Cutaneous Oncology (KSMS, JSW), Department of Molecular Oncology (KSMS), Melanoma Research Center of Excellence (KSMS, JSW), Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL. ·J Natl Cancer Inst · Pubmed #24511111.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

2 Editorial Taming the wild-types: targeting PAK1 in melanomas that lack BRAF mutations. 2013

Smalley, Keiran S M / Weber, Jeffrey S. · ·J Natl Cancer Inst · Pubmed #23535072.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

3 Editorial Melanoma: promising new discoveries and treatment modalities for difficult clinical scenarios - part II. 2009

Zager, Jonathan S / Weber, Jeffrey S. · ·Cancer Control · Pubmed #19556959.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

4 Review Challenging Cases: Management of Immune-Related Toxicity. 2018

Weber, Jeffrey S. ·From the Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York, NY. ·Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book · Pubmed #30231403.

ABSTRACT: The approvals of six checkpoint inhibitory antibodies since 2011 have established immunotherapy for cancer as a fifth treatment modality after chemotherapy, surgery, radiation, and targeted therapy. Long-lasting responses have been observed in melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, renal cell cancer, and head and neck cancer, to name a few, and more approvals for these drugs undoubtedly are coming in the near future. The application of checkpoint inhibitors has expanded well beyond melanoma, and, with wider use, the management of the immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that accompany these drugs has received increased attention. In this work, several patient cases are presented that highlight how to optimally manage these unique toxicities and that illustrate the basic principles of care for patients who receive checkpoint inhibition.

5 Review Immunotherapy in the adjuvant setting for high-risk melanoma. 2018

Weber, Jeffrey S. ·NYU School of Medicine, New York, New York. ·Clin Adv Hematol Oncol · Pubmed #30148825.

ABSTRACT: -- No abstract --

6 Review Management of Adverse Events Following Treatment With Anti-Programmed Death-1 Agents. 2016

Weber, Jeffrey S / Postow, Michael / Lao, Christopher D / Schadendorf, Dirk. ·Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, New York, USA jeffrey.weber2@nyumc.org. · Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA. · Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. · University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany. ·Oncologist · Pubmed #27401894.

ABSTRACT: : Immune checkpoint inhibitors have emerged as a mainstay of melanoma therapy and are playing an increasingly important role in the treatment of other tumor types. The clinical benefit afforded by these treatments can be accompanied by a unique spectrum of adverse events, called immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which reflect the drug's immune-based mechanism of action. IrAEs typically originate in the skin, gastrointestinal tract, liver, and endocrine system, although other organ systems may also be affected. This article provides an overview of irAEs associated with anti-programmed death-1 (anti-PD-1) antibodies (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) as monotherapy or in combination with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 inhibition (ipilimumab), followed by a discussion of irAEs of special clinical interest based on the potential for morbidity, frequent steroid use, and inpatient admission. We review clinical trial data and provide recommendations on how to manage irAEs associated with anti-PD-1 agents based on clinical experience and established management guidelines. We further illustrate the practical considerations of managing irAEs by presenting three cases of immune-related toxicity in melanoma patients treated with nivolumab or pembrolizumab. A better understanding of the identification and management of irAEs will help inform health care providers about the risks associated with anti-PD-1 treatment, to ensure the safe and appropriate use of these important new treatments. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Immune checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated significant clinical benefit in advanced melanoma and other tumor types. These treatments are associated with immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which most commonly affect the skin and gastrointestinal tract, and, to a lesser extent, the liver, endocrine system, and other organs. This review focuses on the management of irAEs after treatment with anti-programmed death-1 (anti-PD-1) antibodies (nivolumab or pembrolizumab) as monotherapy or in combination with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 inhibition (ipilimumab) in patients with advanced melanoma. A better understanding of the management of irAEs will help ensure the safe and appropriate use of anti-PD-1 agents in melanoma and other tumor types.

7 Review Durable benefit and the potential for long-term survival with immunotherapy in advanced melanoma. 2014

McDermott, David / Lebbé, Celeste / Hodi, F Stephen / Maio, Michele / Weber, Jeffrey S / Wolchok, Jedd D / Thompson, John A / Balch, Charles M. ·Department of Hematology/Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 375 Longwood Ave, Mailstop: MASCO 428, Boston, MA 02215, USA. Electronic address: dmcdermo@bidmc.harvard.edu. · APHP Department of Dermatology, CIC, U976 Hôpital Saint-Louis University Paris Diderot, 1 Avenue Claude Vellefaux, Paris 75010, France. Electronic address: celeste.lebbe@sls.aphp.fr. · Center for Immuno-Oncology, Melanoma Center, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA 02215, USA. Electronic address: Stephen_Hodi@dfci.harvard.edu. · Medical Oncology and Immunotherapy, Department of Oncology, University Hospital of Siena, Siena 53100, Italy. Electronic address: mmaiocro@gmail.com. · Department of Cutaneous Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, 12902 Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA. Electronic address: jeffrey.weber@moffitt.org. · Ludwig Center for Cancer Immunotherapy, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10065, USA. Electronic address: wolchokj@mskcc.org. · Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 825 Eastlake Ave E, G4-830, Seattle, WA 98109, USA. Electronic address: jat@uw.edu. · Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 5323 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, TX 75390, USA. Electronic address: charles.balch@utsouthwestern.edu. ·Cancer Treat Rev · Pubmed #25060490.

ABSTRACT: Historically, the median overall survival for patients with stage IV melanoma was less than 1 year and the 5-year survival rate was ∼10%. Recent advances in therapy have raised 5-year survival expectations to ∼20%. Notably, a subset of melanoma patients who receive immunotherapy with high-dose interleukin-2, and now ipilimumab, can achieve long-term survival of at least 5 years. A major goal in melanoma research is to increase the number of patients who experience this overall survival benefit. In this review, we discuss the attributes of immunotherapy and newer targeted agents, and consider how combination strategies might improve the chances of achieving durable benefit and long-term survival. We also discuss three areas that we believe will be critical to making further advances in melanoma treatment. To better understand the clinical profile of patients who achieve long-term survival with immunotherapy, we first present data from ipilimumab clinical trials in which a subset of patients experienced durable responses. Second, we discuss the limitations of traditional metrics used to evaluate the benefits of immunotherapies. Third, we consider emerging issues that clinicians are currently facing when making treatment decisions regarding immunotherapy. A better understanding of these novel treatments may improve survival outcomes in melanoma, increase the number of patients who experience this overall survival benefit, and inform the future use of these agents in the treatment of other cancer types.

8 Review At the bedside: adoptive cell therapy for melanoma-clinical development. 2014

Weber, Jeffrey S. ·Moffitt Cancer Center and the Donald A. Adam Comprehensive Melanoma Research Center, Tampa, Florida, USA jeffrey.weber@moffitt.org. ·J Leukoc Biol · Pubmed #24732024.

ABSTRACT: Adoptive cell therapy for melanoma, particularly using TIL, consists of a complex and difficult set of procedures, although it has a strong preclinical background and justification and has been pursued clinically by one small group of investigators over the last 20 years. More recent developments and a better understanding of the molecular basis of the anti-tumor immune response have led to the conduct of clinical trials that use lymphoid depletion with chemotherapy and/or TBI to exploit the favorable immune milieu of homeostatic lymphoid reconstitution during transfer of effector T cells. Improved ways of propagating T cells ex vivo have also simplified and shortened the cell-growth process. Current TIL trials have now been expanded beyond the initial center where it was developed, reproducing excellent objective response rates of 40-50% in previously treated melanoma patients and more importantly, demonstrating that a significant proportion of patients will be alive and free of disease 3-5 years after treatment, raising the possibility that those patients may be cured of their disease. Newer methods for growing the infiltrating T cells using immune-checkpoint antibodies or other agents to condition the tumor before harvest and improved technology to simplify the complex and often cumbersome cell-growth process suggest that this technology may be able to be disseminated to a wide selection of cancer centers and may be a candidate for testing in a randomized Phase III trial to show definitively its benefit in patients with metastatic melanoma. In the accompanying review, the preclinical work that supports the idea of adoptive cell therapy with TIL and expands the concept in promising new ways will be explored.

9 Review Ipilimumab and its toxicities: a multidisciplinary approach. 2013

Fecher, Leslie A / Agarwala, Sanjiv S / Hodi, F Stephen / Weber, Jeffrey S. ·University of Pennsylvania Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. lafecher@iu.edu ·Oncologist · Pubmed #23774827.

ABSTRACT: The treatment for metastatic melanoma has evolved significantly in the past few years. Ipilimumab, an immunotherapy, is now in mainstream oncology practice given that it has shown improved overall survival in randomized clinical trials. Other immune modulating agents, such as programmed death receptor-1 and programmed death receptor ligand-1 antibodies, are showing promise in early clinical trials. This manuscript will review ipilimumab and its most common side effects. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are important to recognize early, and their presentation, timing of onset, and general recommendations for workup and management will be reviewed. Assembling a multidisciplinary team, as well as thorough education of the patient, is recommended to optimize patient care.

10 Review Development of ipilimumab: a novel immunotherapeutic approach for the treatment of advanced melanoma. 2013

Wolchok, Jedd D / Hodi, F Stephen / Weber, Jeffrey S / Allison, James P / Urba, Walter J / Robert, Caroline / O'Day, Steven J / Hoos, Axel / Humphrey, Rachel / Berman, David M / Lonberg, Nils / Korman, Alan J. ·Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York 10021, USA. wolchokj@mskcc.org ·Ann N Y Acad Sci · Pubmed #23772560.

ABSTRACT: The immunotherapeutic agent ipilimumab has helped address a significant unmet need in the treatment of advanced melanoma. Ipilimumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that targets cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), thereby augmenting antitumor immune responses. After decades in which a number of clinical trials were conducted, ipilimumab was the first therapy to improve overall survival in a randomized, controlled phase III trial of patients with advanced melanoma. These results led to the regulatory approval of ipilimumab at 3 mg/kg for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic melanoma. More than 17,000 patients worldwide have received ipilimumab, either as a commercial drug at 3 mg/kg or in clinical trials and expanded access programs at different doses. Consistent with its proposed mechanism of action, the most common toxicities associated with ipilimumab therapy are inflammatory in nature. These immune-related adverse events were mostly reversible when effective treatment guidelines were followed. Importantly, long-term follow-up of patients who received ipilimumab in a phase III trial showed that 24% survived at least two years, and in phase II studies, a proportion of patients survived at least five years. Evaluation of ipilimumab is ongoing in the adjuvant setting for melanoma, and for advanced disease in nonsmall cell lung, small cell lung, prostate, ovarian, and gastric cancers.

11 Review Management of immune-related adverse events and kinetics of response with ipilimumab. 2012

Weber, Jeffrey S / Kähler, Katharina C / Hauschild, Axel. ·H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, 12902 Magnolia Drive, Tampa, FL 33612, USA. jeffrey.weber@moffitt.org ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #22614989.

ABSTRACT: Monoclonal antibodies directed against the immune checkpoint protein cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4; CD152)-ipilimumab and tremelimumab-have been investigated in metastatic melanoma and other cancers and have shown promising results. Recently, ipilimumab was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of metastatic melanoma. We review the literature on managing the adverse effects and kinetics of tumor regression with ipilimumab and provide guidelines on their management. During treatment with these antibodies, a unique set of adverse effects may occur, called immune-related adverse events (irAEs). These include rashes, which may rarely progress to life-threatening toxic epidermal necrolysis, and colitis, characterized by a mild to moderate, but occasionally also severe and persistent diarrhea. Hypophysitis, hepatitis, pancreatitis, iridocyclitis, lymphadenopathy, neuropathies, and nephritis have also been reported with ipilimumab. Early recognition of irAEs and initiation of treatment are critical to reduce the risk of sequelae. Interestingly, irAEs correlated with treatment response in some studies. Unique kinetics of response have been observed with CTLA-4 blockade with at least four patterns: (1) response in baseline lesions by week 12, with no new lesions seen; (2) stable disease, followed by a slow, steady decline in total tumor burden; (3) regression of tumor after initial increase in total tumor burden; and (4) reduction in total tumor burden during or after the appearance of new lesion(s) after week 12. We provide a detailed description of irAEs and recommendations for practicing oncologists who are managing them, along with the unusual kinetics of response associated with ipilimumab therapy.

12 Review Recent advances using anti-CTLA-4 for the treatment of melanoma. 2009

Sarnaik, Amod A / Weber, Jeffrey S. ·Department of Cutaneous Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL 33612, USA. ·Cancer J · Pubmed #19556898.

ABSTRACT: Metastatic melanoma is a disease associated with poor prognosis, with a median survival reported to range from 6 to 9 months. Patients who are not candidates for surgical resection have an even worse expected survival. This is largely due to the lack of effective chemotherapeutic regimens and has led to the investigation of alternative treatment strategies including immunotherapy. Although melanoma is felt to be an immunogenic tumor and has been associated with the development of spontaneous tumor-specific immune responses in patients, the implementation of vaccine-based treatment has had limited success. Because the administration of a melanoma-specific vaccine alone has not been sufficient to generate robust and reproducible clinical responses, investigators are currently pursuing additional methods to augment antimelanoma immune responses by optimizing T-cell activation. T-cell activation requires both antigen presentation to the T-cell receptor and a second signal mediated by CD80 and CD86 on antigen-presenting cells and CD28 on the T cell. Ligand binding to CD28 on the T-cell surface leads to T-cell proliferation and expression of activating cytokines such as interleukin-2. Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), an inhibitory protein expressed on T cells, competes for the same ligands as CD28 and modulates T-cell activation. Because CTLA-4 has a significantly higher binding efficiency than CD28, CTLA-4 is critical in maintaining immune tolerance to self-antigens and may also limit responses to tumor antigens and vaccine therapy. CTLA-4 blockade either alone or in combination with melanoma-specific vaccines has been explored as a potential means to treat advanced stage melanoma. In this article, we review the spectrum of clinical trials involving CTLA-4 blockade and also review recent correlative studies attempting to elucidate the potential mechanisms by which CTLA-4 blockade achieves its therapeutic effects.

13 Review c-KIT signaling as the driving oncogenic event in sub-groups of melanomas. 2009

Smalley, Keiran S M / Sondak, Vernon K / Weber, Jeffrey S. ·The Comprehensive Melanoma Research Center and the Department of Cutaneous Oncology, The Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA. keiran.smalley@moffitt.org ·Histol Histopathol · Pubmed #19283671.

ABSTRACT: As we enter the era of targeted therapy for melanoma, attempts are being made to sub-group tumors on the basis of their driving oncogenic mutations, with the hope of developing truly personalized therapeutic regimens. c-KIT is a receptor tyrosine kinase whose aberrant activation is implicated in the progression of gastrointestinal stromal tumors and some acute myeloid leukemias. The role of c-KIT signaling in melanoma has been controversial; although c-KIT activity is critical to melanocyte development, its expression tends to be lost in most melanomas. Some reports have even shown that the re-expression of c-KIT induces apoptosis in melanoma cell lines. The recent publication of work showing the presence of activating c-KIT mutations in acral and mucosal melanomas, as well as melanomas arising on skin with chronic sun damage, has renewed interest in c-KIT signaling in melanoma. Recent work from our own laboratory has further identified melanomas with constitutive c-KIT signaling activity resulting from c-KIT receptor overexpression. Although the initial clinical trials of the c-KIT inhibitor imatinib mesylate in melanoma were negative, some dramatic responses have been seen in patients with very high c-KIT expression and/or documented activating mutations, fostering the belief that focused studies in patients selected on the basis of c-KIT mutational status will yield more encouraging results. The current review discusses the role of c-KIT signaling in melanoma progression and how this new information can be applied to the targeted therapy of melanoma.

14 Clinical Trial Durable Complete Response After Discontinuation of Pembrolizumab in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma. 2018

Robert, Caroline / Ribas, Antoni / Hamid, Omid / Daud, Adil / Wolchok, Jedd D / Joshua, Anthony M / Hwu, Wen-Jen / Weber, Jeffrey S / Gangadhar, Tara C / Joseph, Richard W / Dronca, Roxana / Patnaik, Amita / Zarour, Hassane / Kefford, Richard / Hersey, Peter / Zhang, Jin / Anderson, James / Diede, Scott J / Ebbinghaus, Scot / Hodi, F Stephen. ·Caroline Robert, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus and Paris Sud University, Villejuif Paris-Sud, France · Antoni Ribas, University of California, Los Angeles · Omid Hamid, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles · Adil Daud, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA · Jedd D. Wolchok, Ludwig Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY · Anthony M. Joshua, The Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada · Wen-Jen Hwu, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston · Amita Patnaik, South Texas Accelerated Research Therapeutics, San Antonio, TX · Jeffrey S. Weber, H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa · Richard W. Joseph, Mayo Clinic Cancer Center-Florida, Jacksonville, FL · Tara C. Gangadhar, Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia · Hassane Zarour, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA · Roxana Dronca, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN · Richard Kefford, Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital, Westmead · Melanoma Institute Australia, Wollstonecraft · and Macquarie University, MQ Health, Health Sciences Centre · Peter Hersey, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia · Jin Zhang, James Anderson, Scott J. Diede, and Scot Ebbinghaus, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ · F. Stephen Hodi, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA. ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #29283791.

ABSTRACT: Purpose Pembrolizumab provides durable antitumor activity in metastatic melanoma, including complete response (CR) in about 15% of patients. Data are limited on potential predictors of CR and patient disposition after pembrolizumab discontinuation after CR. We describe baseline characteristics and long-term follow-up in patients who experienced CR with pembrolizumab in the KEYNOTE-001 study ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01295827). Patients and Methods Patients with ipilimumab-naive or -treated advanced/metastatic melanoma received one of three dose regimens of pembrolizumab. Eligible patients who received pembrolizumab for ≥ 6 months and at least two treatments beyond confirmed CR could discontinue therapy. Response was assessed every 12 weeks by central Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. For this analysis, CR was defined per investigator assessment, immune-related response criteria, and potential predictors of CR were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analyses. Results Of 655 treated patients, 105 (16.0%) achieved CR after median follow-up of 43 months. At data cutoff, 92 patients (87.6%) had CR, with median follow-up of 30 months from first CR. Fourteen (13.3%) patients continued to receive treatment for a median of ≥ 40 months. Pembrolizumab was discontinued by 91 patients (86.7%), including 67 (63.8%) who proceeded to observation without additional anticancer therapy. The 24-month disease-free survival rate from time of CR was 90.9% in all 105 patients with CR and 89.9% in the 67 patients who discontinued pembrolizumab after CR for observation. Tumor size and programmed death-ligand 1 status were among the baseline factors independently associated with CR by univariate analysis. Conclusion Patients with metastatic melanoma can have durable complete remission after discontinuation of pembrolizumab, and the low incidence of relapse after median follow-up of approximately 2 years from discontinuation provides hope for a cure for some patients. The mechanisms underlying durable CR require further investigation.

15 Clinical Trial Health-related quality of life with adjuvant ipilimumab versus placebo after complete resection of high-risk stage III melanoma (EORTC 18071): secondary outcomes of a multinational, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. 2017

Coens, Corneel / Suciu, Stefan / Chiarion-Sileni, Vanna / Grob, Jean-Jacques / Dummer, Reinhard / Wolchok, Jedd D / Schmidt, Henrik / Hamid, Omid / Robert, Caroline / Ascierto, Paolo A / Richards, Jon M / Lebbé, Celeste / Ferraresi, Virginia / Smylie, Michael / Weber, Jeffrey S / Maio, Michele / Bottomley, Andrew / Kotapati, Srividya / de Pril, Veerle / Testori, Alessandro / Eggermont, Alexander M M. ·EORTC Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium. Electronic address: corneel.coens@eortc.be. · EORTC Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium. · IOV-IRCCS, Melanoma Oncology Unit, Padova, Italy. · Hôpital de la Timone, Marseille, France. · University of Zürich Hospital, Zürich, Switzerland. · Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. · Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. · The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA. · Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus Grand Paris, Villejuif, France. · Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione "G. Pascale", Naples, Italy. · Oncology Specialists S C, Park Ridge, IL, USA. · Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Hôpital Saint-Louis, Paris. · Istituti Fisioterapici Ospitalieri, Rome, Italy. · Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada. · H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA. · University Hospital of Siena, Istituto Toscano Tumori, Siena, Italy. · Bristol-Myers Squibb, Wallingford, CT, USA. · Bristol-Myers Squibb, Braine-l'Alleud, Belgium. · European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #28162999.

ABSTRACT: 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.

16 Clinical Trial Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Expression and Response to the Anti-Programmed Death 1 Antibody Pembrolizumab in Melanoma. 2016

Daud, Adil I / Wolchok, Jedd D / Robert, Caroline / Hwu, Wen-Jen / Weber, Jeffrey S / Ribas, Antoni / Hodi, F Stephen / Joshua, Anthony M / Kefford, Richard / Hersey, Peter / Joseph, Richard / Gangadhar, Tara C / Dronca, Roxana / Patnaik, Amita / Zarour, Hassane / Roach, Charlotte / Toland, Grant / Lunceford, Jared K / Li, Xiaoyun Nicole / Emancipator, Kenneth / Dolled-Filhart, Marisa / Kang, S Peter / Ebbinghaus, Scot / Hamid, Omid. ·Adil I. Daud, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco · Antoni Ribas, University of California, Los Angeles · Omid Hamid, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles · Charlotte Roach and Grant Toland, Dako North America, Carpinteria, CA · Jedd D. Wolchok, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY · Wen-Jen Hwu, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston · Amita Patnaik, South Texas Accelerated Research Therapeutics, San Antonio, TX · Jeffrey S. Weber, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa · Richard Joseph, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL · F. Stephen Hodi, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA · Tara C. Gangadhar, Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia · Hassane Zarour, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA · Roxana Dronca, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN · Jared K. Lunceford, Xiaoyun Nicole Li, Kenneth Emancipator, Marisa Dolled-Filhart, S. Peter Kang, and Scot Ebbinghaus, Merck & Co, Kenilworth, NJ · Caroline Robert, Gustave Roussy and Paris-Sud University, Villejuif, France · Anthony M. Joshua, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada · Richard Kefford, Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital and Melanoma Institute Australia · Richard Kefford, Macquarie University · and Richard Kefford and Peter Hersey, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #27863197.

ABSTRACT: Purpose Expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) is a potential predictive marker for response and outcome after treatment with anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1). This study explored the relationship between anti-PD-1 activity and PD-L1 expression in patients with advanced melanoma who were treated with pembrolizumab in the phase Ib KEYNOTE-001 study (clinical trial information: NCT01295827). Patients and Methods Six hundred fifty-five patients received pembrolizumab10 mg/kg once every 2 weeks or once every 3 weeks, or 2 mg/kg once every 3 weeks. Tumor response was assessed every 12 weeks per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 by independent central review. Primary outcome was objective response rate. Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Membranous PD-L1 expression in tumor and tumor-associated immune cells was assessed by a clinical trial immunohistochemistry assay (22C3 antibody) and scored on a unique melanoma (MEL) scale of 0 to 5 by one of three pathologists who were blinded to clinical outcome; a score ≥ 2 (membranous staining in ≥ 1% of cells) was considered positive. Results Of 451 patients with evaluable PD-L1 expression, 344 (76%) had PD-L1-positive tumors. Demographic and staging variables were equally distributed among PD-L1-positive and -negative patients. An association between higher MEL score and higher response rate and longer PFS (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.82) and OS (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.83) was observed ( P < .001 for each). Objective response rate was 8%, 12%, 22%, 43%, 57%, and 53% for MEL 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. Conclusion PD-L1 expression in pretreatment tumor biopsy samples was correlated with response rate, PFS, and OS; however, patients with PD-L1-negative tumors may also achieve durable responses.

17 Clinical Trial Prolonged Survival in Stage III Melanoma with Ipilimumab Adjuvant Therapy. 2016

Eggermont, Alexander M M / Chiarion-Sileni, Vanna / Grob, Jean-Jacques / Dummer, Reinhard / Wolchok, Jedd D / Schmidt, Henrik / Hamid, Omid / Robert, Caroline / Ascierto, Paolo A / Richards, Jon M / Lebbé, Céleste / Ferraresi, Virginia / Smylie, Michael / Weber, Jeffrey S / Maio, Michele / Bastholt, Lars / Mortier, Laurent / Thomas, Luc / Tahir, Saad / Hauschild, Axel / Hassel, Jessica C / Hodi, F Stephen / Taitt, Corina / de Pril, Veerle / de Schaetzen, Gaetan / Suciu, Stefan / Testori, Alessandro. ·From Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus Grand Paris, Villejuif (A.M.M.E., C.R.), Aix-Marseille University, Hôpital de La Timone, Marseille (J.-J.G.), Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Paris (C.L.), University Lille, INSERM Unité-1189, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Lille, Service de Dermatologie, Lille (L.M.), and CHU Lyon, Lyon (L.T.) - all in France · the Oncology Institute of Veneto-Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Padua (V.C.-S.), Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G. Pascale, Naples (P.A.A.), Istituti Fisioterapici Ospitalieri, Rome (V.F.), University Hospital of Siena, Istituto Toscano Tumori, Siena (M.M.), and the European Institute of Oncology, Milan (A.T.) - all in Italy · University of Zurich Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland (R.D.) · Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York (J.D.W.) · Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus (H.S.), and Odense University Hospital, Odense (L.B.) - both in Denmark · the Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles (O.H.) · Oncology Specialists, Park Ridge, IL (J.M.R.) · Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, AB, Canada (M.S.) · H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL (J.S.W.) · Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, United Kingdom (S.T.) · Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel (A.H.), and University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg (J.C.H.) - both in Germany · Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston (F.S.H.) · Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ (C.T., V.P.) · and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels (G.S., S.S.). ·N Engl J Med · Pubmed #27717298.

ABSTRACT: 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; P<0.001). The rate of overall survival at 5 years was 65.4% in the ipilimumab group, as compared with 54.4% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.72; 95.1% CI, 0.58 to 0.88; P=0.001). The rate of distant metastasis-free survival at 5 years was 48.3% in the ipilimumab group, as compared with 38.9% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death or distant metastasis, 0.76; 95.8% CI, 0.64 to 0.92; P=0.002). Adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 54.1% of the patients in the ipilimumab group and in 26.2% of those in the placebo group. Immune-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 41.6% of the patients in the ipilimumab group and in 2.7% of those in the placebo group. In the ipilimumab group, 5 patients (1.1%) died owing to immune-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: 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 .).

18 Clinical Trial Sequential administration of nivolumab and ipilimumab with a planned switch in patients with advanced melanoma (CheckMate 064): an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial. 2016

Weber, Jeffrey S / Gibney, Geoff / Sullivan, Ryan J / Sosman, Jeffrey A / Slingluff, Craig L / Lawrence, Donald P / Logan, Theodore F / Schuchter, Lynn M / Nair, Suresh / Fecher, Leslie / Buchbinder, Elizabeth I / Berghorn, Elmer / Ruisi, Mary / Kong, George / Jiang, Joel / Horak, Christine / Hodi, F Stephen. ·New York University Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA. · H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA; Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC, USA. · Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. · Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Nashville, TN, USA. · University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, USA. · Indiana University Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN, USA. · University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. · Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, PA, USA. · Indiana University Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN, USA; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. · Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA. · Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA. · Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: stephen_hodi@dfci.harvard.edu. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #27269740.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Concurrent administration of the immune checkpoint inhibitors nivolumab and ipilimumab has shown greater efficacy than either agent alone in patients with advanced melanoma, albeit with more high-grade adverse events. We assessed whether sequential administration of nivolumab followed by ipilimumab, or the reverse sequence, could improve safety without compromising efficacy. METHODS: We did this randomised, open-label, phase 2 study at nine academic medical centres in the USA. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma (treatment-naive or who had progressed after no more than one previous systemic therapy, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1) were randomly assigned (1:1) to induction with intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks for six doses followed by a planned switch to intravenous ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, or the reverse sequence. Randomisation was done by an independent interactive voice response system with a permuted block schedule (block size four) without stratification factors. After induction, both groups received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was treatment-related grade 3-5 adverse events until the end of the induction period (week 25), analysed in the as-treated population. Secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients who achieved a response at week 25 and disease progression at weeks 13 and 25. Overall survival was a prespecified exploratory endpoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01783938, and is ongoing but no longer enrolling patients. FINDINGS: Between April 30, 2013, and July 21, 2014, 140 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to nivolumab followed by ipilimumab (n=70) or to the reverse sequence of ipilimumab followed by nivolumab (n=70), of whom 68 and 70 patients, respectively, received at least one dose of study drug and were included in the analyses. The frequencies of treatment-related grade 3-5 adverse events up to week 25 were similar in the nivolumab followed by ipilimumab group (34 [50%; 95% CI 37·6-62·4] of 68 patients) and in the ipilimumab followed by nivolumab group (30 [43%; 31·1-55·3] of 70 patients). The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events during the whole study period were colitis (ten [15%]) in the nivolumab followed by ipilimumab group vs 14 [20%] in the reverse sequence group), increased lipase (ten [15%] vs 12 [17%]), and diarrhoea (eight [12%] vs five [7%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. The proportion of patients with a response at week 25 was higher with nivolumab followed by ipilimumab than with the reverse sequence (28 [41%; 95% CI 29·4-53·8] vs 14 [20%; 11·4-31·3]). Progression was reported in 26 (38%; 95% CI 26·7-50·8) patients in the nivolumab followed by ipilimumab group and 43 (61%; 49·0-72·8) patients in the reverse sequence group at week 13 and in 26 (38%; 26·7-50·8) and 42 (60%; 47·6-71·5) patients at week 25, respectively. After a median follow-up of 19·8 months (IQR 12·8-25·7), median overall survival was not reached in the nivolumab followed by ipilimumab group (95% CI 23·7-not reached), whereas over a median follow-up of 14·7 months (IQR 5·6-23·9) in the ipilimumab followed by nivolumab group, median overall survival was 16·9 months (95% CI 9·2-26·5; HR 0·48 [95% CI 0·29-0·80]). A higher proportion of patients in the nivolumab followed by ipilimumab group achieved 12-month overall survival than in the ipilimumab followed by nivolumab group (76%; 95% CI 64-85 vs 54%; 42-65). INTERPRETATION: Nivolumab followed by ipilimumab appears to be a more clinically beneficial option compared with the reverse sequence, albeit with a higher frequency of adverse events. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

19 Clinical Trial Association of Pembrolizumab With Tumor Response and Survival Among Patients With Advanced Melanoma. 2016

Ribas, Antoni / Hamid, Omid / Daud, Adil / Hodi, F Stephen / Wolchok, Jedd D / Kefford, Richard / Joshua, Anthony M / Patnaik, Amita / Hwu, Wen-Jen / Weber, Jeffrey S / Gangadhar, Tara C / Hersey, Peter / Dronca, Roxana / Joseph, Richard W / Zarour, Hassane / Chmielowski, Bartosz / Lawrence, Donald P / Algazi, Alain / Rizvi, Naiyer A / Hoffner, Brianna / Mateus, Christine / Gergich, Kevin / Lindia, Jill A / Giannotti, Maxine / Li, Xiaoyun Nicole / Ebbinghaus, Scot / Kang, S Peter / Robert, Caroline. ·Division of Hematology and Oncology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles. · Department of Hematology/Oncology, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, California. · Department of Hematology/Oncology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco. · Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts. · Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. · Department of Medical Oncology, Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital and Melanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, Australia7Department of Clinical Medicine, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia. · Department of Medical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. · Department of Clinical Research, South Texas Accelerated Research Therapeutics, San Antonio. · Department of Melanoma, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston. · Department of Cutaneous Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida. · Division of Hematology and Oncology, Abramson Cancer Center at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. · Department of Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. · Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. · Department of Hematology/Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida. · Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. · Department of Hematology/Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston. · Department of Medical Oncology, Gustave-Roussy Cancer Campus and Paris Sud University, Villejuif Paris-Sud, France. · Department of Clinical Oncology, Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, New Jersey. · BARDS, Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, New Jersey. ·JAMA · Pubmed #27092830.

ABSTRACT: IMPORTANCE: The programmed death 1 (PD-1) pathway limits immune responses to melanoma and can be blocked with the humanized anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody pembrolizumab. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the association of pembrolizumab with tumor response and overall survival among patients with advanced melanoma. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: Open-label, multicohort, phase 1b clinical trials (enrollment, December 2011-September 2013). Median duration of follow-up was 21 months. The study was performed in academic medical centers in Australia, Canada, France, and the United States. Eligible patients were aged 18 years and older and had advanced or metastatic melanoma. Data were pooled from 655 enrolled patients (135 from a nonrandomized cohort [n = 87 ipilimumab naive; n = 48 ipilimumab treated] and 520 from randomized cohorts [n = 226 ipilimumab naive; n = 294 ipilimumab treated]). Cutoff dates were April 18, 2014, for safety analyses and October 18, 2014, for efficacy analyses. EXPOSURES: Pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks, 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks, or 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks continued until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or investigator decision. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (best overall response of complete response or partial response) in patients with measurable disease at baseline per independent central review. Secondary end points included toxicity, duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival. RESULTS: Among the 655 patients (median [range] age, 61 [18-94] years; 405 [62%] men), 581 had measurable disease at baseline. An objective response was reported in 194 of 581 patients (33% [95% CI, 30%-37%]) and in 60 of 133 treatment-naive patients (45% [95% CI, 36% to 54%]). Overall, 74% (152/205) of responses were ongoing at the time of data cutoff; 44% (90/205) of patients had response duration for at least 1 year and 79% (162/205) had response duration for at least 6 months. Twelve-month progression-free survival rates were 35% (95% CI, 31%-39%) in the total population and 52% (95% CI, 43%-60%) among treatment-naive patients. Median overall survival in the total population was 23 months (95% CI, 20-29) with a 12-month survival rate of 66% (95% CI, 62%-69%) and a 24-month survival rate of 49% (95% CI, 44%-53%). In treatment-naive patients, median overall survival was 31 months (95% CI, 24 to not reached) with a 12-month survival rate of 73% (95% CI, 65%-79%) and a 24-month survival rate of 60% (95% CI, 51%-68%). Ninety-two of 655 patients (14%) experienced at least 1 treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse event (AE) and 27 of 655 (4%) patients discontinued treatment because of a treatment-related AE. Treatment-related serious AEs were reported in 59 patients (9%). There were no drug-related deaths. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with advanced melanoma, pembrolizumab administration was associated with an overall objective response rate of 33%, 12-month progression-free survival rate of 35%, and median overall survival of 23 months; grade 3 or 4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 14%. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01295827.

20 Clinical Trial Evaluation of Immune-Related Response Criteria and RECIST v1.1 in Patients With Advanced Melanoma Treated With Pembrolizumab. 2016

Hodi, F Stephen / Hwu, Wen-Jen / Kefford, Richard / Weber, Jeffrey S / Daud, Adil / Hamid, Omid / Patnaik, Amita / Ribas, Antoni / Robert, Caroline / Gangadhar, Tara C / Joshua, Anthony M / Hersey, Peter / Dronca, Roxana / Joseph, Richard / Hille, Darcy / Xue, Dahai / Li, Xiaoyun Nicole / Kang, S Peter / Ebbinghaus, Scot / Perrone, Andrea / Wolchok, Jedd D. ·F. Stephen Hodi, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA · Wen-Jen Hwu, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston · Amita Patnaik, South Texas Accelerated Research Therapeutics, San Antonio, TX · Richard Kefford, Westmead Hospital, Melanoma Institute Australia, and Macquarie University · Peter Hersey, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia · Jeffrey S. Weber, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa · Richard Joseph, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL · Adil Daud, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco · Omid Hamid, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute · Antoni Ribas, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA · Caroline Robert, Gustave-Roussy and Paris-Sud University, Villejuif-Paris-Sud, France · Tara C. Gangadhar, Abramson Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA · Anthony M. Joshua, Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada · Roxana Dronca, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN · Darcy Hille, Dahai Xue, Xiaoyun Nicole Li, S. Peter Kang, Scot Ebbinghaus, and Andrea Perrone, Merck, Kenilworth, NJ · and Jedd D. Wolchok, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #26951310.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: We evaluated atypical response patterns and the relationship between overall survival and best overall response measured per immune-related response criteria (irRC) and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 (RECIST v1.1) in patients with advanced melanoma treated with pembrolizumab in the phase Ib KEYNOTE-001 study (clinical trial information: NCT01295827). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received pembrolizumab 2 or 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or every 3 weeks. Atypical responses were identified by using centrally assessed irRC data in patients with ≥ 28 weeks of imaging. Pseudoprogression was defined as ≥ 25% increase in tumor burden at week 12 (early) or any assessment after week 12 (delayed) that was not confirmed as progressive disease at next assessment. Response was assessed centrally per irRC and RECIST v1.1. RESULTS: Of the 655 patients with melanoma enrolled, 327 had ≥ 28 weeks of imaging follow-up. Twenty-four (7%) of these 327 patients had atypical responses (15 [5%] with early pseudoprogression and nine [3%] with delayed pseudoprogression). Of the 592 patients who survived ≥ 12 weeks, 84 (14%) experienced progressive disease per RECIST v1.1 but nonprogressive disease per irRC. Two-year overall survival rates were 77.6% in patients with nonprogressive disease per both criteria (n = 331), 37.5% in patients with progressive disease per RECIST v1.1 but nonprogressive disease per irRC (n = 84), and 17.3% in patients with progressive disease per both criteria (n = 177). CONCLUSION: Atypical responses were observed in patients with melanoma treated with pembrolizumab. Based on survival analysis, conventional RECIST might underestimate the benefit of pembrolizumab in approximately 15% of patients; modified criteria that permit treatment beyond initial progression per RECIST v1.1 might prevent premature cessation of treatment.

21 Clinical Trial Overall Survival and Durable Responses in Patients With BRAF V600-Mutant Metastatic Melanoma Receiving Dabrafenib Combined With Trametinib. 2016

Long, Georgina V / Weber, Jeffrey S / Infante, Jeffrey R / Kim, Kevin B / Daud, Adil / Gonzalez, Rene / Sosman, Jeffrey A / Hamid, Omid / Schuchter, Lynn / Cebon, Jonathan / Kefford, Richard F / Lawrence, Donald / Kudchadkar, Ragini / Burris, Howard A / Falchook, Gerald S / Algazi, Alain / Lewis, Karl / Puzanov, Igor / Ibrahim, Nageatte / Sun, Peng / Cunningham, Elizabeth / Kline, Amy S / Del Buono, Heather / McDowell, Diane Opatt / Patel, Kiran / Flaherty, Keith T. ·Georgina V. Long, Melanoma Institute Australia · The University of Sydney · Richard F. Kefford, Melanoma Institute Australia · The University of Sydney · Macquarie University, Sydney · Westmead Hospital, Westmead · Jonathan Cebon, Austin Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia · Jeffrey S. Weber and Ragini Kudchadkar, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL · Jeffrey R. Infante and Howard A. Burris III, Sarah Cannon Research Institute/Tennessee Oncology · Kevin B. Kim, California Pacific Medical Center · Adil Daud, Alain Algazi, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco · Omid Hamid, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA · Rene Gonzalez, Karl Lewis, University of Colorado · Gerald S. Falchook, Sarah Cannon Research Institute at HealthONE, Denver, CO · Jeffrey A. Sosman, Igor Puzanov, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN · Lynn Schuchter, University of Pennsylvania Abramson Cancer Center · Nageatte Ibrahim, Elizabeth Cunningham, Merck · Peng Sun, Amy S. Kline, Heather Del Buono, Diane Opatt McDowell, GlaxoSmithKline, Philadelphia, PA · Donald Lawrence and Kiran Patel, Incyte Corporation, Wilmington, DE · and Keith T. Flaherty, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center, Boston, MA. ·J Clin Oncol · Pubmed #26811525.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: To report the overall survival (OS) and clinical characteristics of BRAF inhibitor-naive long-term responders and survivors treated with dabrafenib plus trametinib in a phase I and II study of patients with BRAF V600 mutation-positive metastatic melanoma. METHODS: BRAF inhibitor-naive patients treated with dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily plus trametinib 2 mg daily (the 150/2 group) from the non-randomly assigned (part B) and randomly assigned (part C) cohorts of the study were analyzed for progression-free and OS separately. Baseline characteristics and factors on treatment were analyzed for associations with durable responses and OS. RESULTS: For BRAF inhibitor-naive patients in the 150/2 groups (n = 78), the progression-free survival at 1, 2, and 3 years was 44%, 22%, and 18%, respectively, for part B (n = 24) and 41%, 25%, and 21%, respectively, for part C (n = 54). Median OS was 27.4 months in part B and 25 months in part C. OS at 1, 2, and 3 years was 72%, 60%, and 47%, respectively, for part B and 80%, 51%, and 38%, respectively, for part C. Prolonged survival was associated with metastases in fewer than three organ sites and lower baseline lactate dehydrogenase. OS at 3 years was 62% in patients with normal baseline lactate dehydrogenase and 63% in patients with a complete response. CONCLUSION: Dabrafenib plus trametinib results in a median OS of more than 2 years in BRAF inhibitor-naive patients with BRAF V600 mutation-positive metastatic melanoma, and approximately 20% were progression free at 3 years. Durable responses occurred in patients with good prognostic features at baseline, which may be predictive.

22 Clinical Trial Nivolumab in Resected and Unresectable Metastatic Melanoma: Characteristics of Immune-Related Adverse Events and Association with Outcomes. 2016

Freeman-Keller, Morganna / Kim, Youngchul / Cronin, Heather / Richards, Allison / Gibney, Geoffrey / Weber, Jeffrey S. ·Department of Graduate Medical Education, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida. morganna.freemankeller@moffitt.org. · Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida. · Clinical Trials Office, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida. · Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC. · Donald A. Adam Comprehensive Melanoma Research Center, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida. ·Clin Cancer Res · Pubmed #26446948.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Retrospective analysis of irAEs in melanoma patients treated with nivolumab. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Data were pooled from 148 patients (33 resected, 115 unresectable) treated with nivolumab plus peptide vaccine or nivolumab alone every 2 weeks for 12 weeks. Patients with stable disease or regression received an additional 12-week cycle, then nivolumab alone every 12 weeks for up to 2 additional years. Frequency, grade, and characteristics of immune-related adverse events (irAE) were analyzed. A 12-week landmark survival analysis using a multivariate time-dependent Cox proportional hazard model assessed difference in overall survival (OS) in the presence or absence of irAEs. RESULTS: IrAEs of any grade were observed in 68.2% of patients (101 of 148). Grade III/IV irAEs were infrequent: 3 (2%) had grade III rash, 2 (1.35%) had asymptomatic grade III elevation in amylase/lipase, and 2 (1.35%) had grade III colitis. A statistically significant OS difference was noted among patients with any grade of irAE versus those without (P ≤ 0.001), and OS benefit was noted in patients who reported three or more irAE events (P ≤ 0.001). Subset analyses showed statistically significant OS differences with rash [P = 0.001; HR, 0.423; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.243-0.735] and vitiligo (P = 0.012; HR, 0.184; 95% CI, 0.036-0.94). Rash and vitiligo also correlated with statistically significant OS differences in patients with metastatic disease (P = 0.004 and P = 0.028, respectively). No significant survival differences were seen with other irAEs (endocrinopathies, colitis, or pneumonitis). CONCLUSIONS: Cutaneous irAEs are associated with improved survival in melanoma patients treated with nivolumab, and clinical benefit should be validated in larger prospective analyses.

23 Clinical Trial Adjuvant ipilimumab versus placebo after complete resection of high-risk stage III melanoma (EORTC 18071): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. 2015

Eggermont, Alexander M M / Chiarion-Sileni, Vanna / Grob, Jean-Jacques / Dummer, Reinhard / Wolchok, Jedd D / Schmidt, Henrik / Hamid, Omid / Robert, Caroline / Ascierto, Paolo A / Richards, Jon M / Lebbé, Céleste / Ferraresi, Virginia / Smylie, Michael / Weber, Jeffrey S / Maio, Michele / Konto, Cyril / Hoos, Axel / de Pril, Veerle / Gurunath, Ravichandra Karra / de Schaetzen, Gaetan / Suciu, Stefan / Testori, Alessandro. ·Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus Grand Paris, Villejuif, France. Electronic address: alexander.eggermont@gustaveroussy.fr. · IOV-IRCCS, Melanoma Oncology Unit, Padova, Italy. · Aix-Marseille University, Hôpital de La Timone APHM, Marseille, France. · University of Zürich Hospital, Zürich, Switzerland. · Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. · Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. · The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA. · Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus Grand Paris, Villejuif, France. · Istituto Nazionale Tumori Fondazione G Pascale, Naples, Italy. · Oncology Specialists SC, Park Ridge, IL, USA. · Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, Dermatology and CIC Departments, Hôpital Saint Louis, University Paris 7, INSERM U976, France. · Istituti Fisioterapici Ospitalieri, Rome, Italy. · Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. · H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA. · University Hospital of Siena, Istituto Toscano Tumori, Siena, Italy. · Bristol-Myers Squibb, Wallingford, CT, USA. · Bristol-Myers Squibb, Braine-l'Alleud, Belgium. · EORTC Headquarters, Brussels, Belgium. · European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #25840693.

ABSTRACT: 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 [<1%] in the placebo group), hepatic (50 [11%] vs one [<1%]), and endocrine (40 [8%] vs none). Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in 245 (52%) of 471 patients who started ipilimumab (182 [39%] during the initial treatment period of four doses). Five patients (1%) died due to drug-related adverse events. Five (1%) participants died because of drug-related adverse events in the ipilimumab group; three patients died because of colitis (two with gastrointestinal perforation), one patient because of myocarditis, and one patient because of multiorgan failure with Guillain-Barré syndrome. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant ipilimumab significantly improved recurrence-free survival for patients with completely resected high-risk stage III melanoma. The adverse event profile was consistent with that observed in advanced melanoma, but at higher incidences in particular for endocrinopathies. The risk-benefit ratio of adjuvant ipilimumab at this dose and schedule requires additional assessment based on distant metastasis-free survival and overall survival endpoints to define its definitive value. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

24 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.

25 Clinical Trial Phase II Study of Nilotinib in Melanoma Harboring KIT Alterations Following Progression to Prior KIT Inhibition. 2015

Carvajal, Richard D / Lawrence, Donald P / Weber, Jeffrey S / Gajewski, Thomas F / Gonzalez, Rene / Lutzky, Jose / O'Day, Steven J / Hamid, Omid / Wolchok, Jedd D / Chapman, Paul B / Sullivan, Ryan J / Teitcher, Jerrold B / Ramaiya, Nikhil / Giobbie-Hurder, Anita / Antonescu, Cristina R / Heinrich, Michael C / Bastian, Boris C / Corless, Christopher L / Fletcher, Jonathan A / Hodi, F Stephen. ·Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York. · Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. · H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida. · The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois. · The University of Colorado Cancer Center, Aurora, Colorado. · Mount Sinai Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami Beach, Florida. · Beverly Hills Cancer Center, Beverly Hills, California. · Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, California. · Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. · Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts. · Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon. · The University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California. · Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts. Stephen_hodi@dfci.harvard.edu. ·Clin Cancer Res · Pubmed #25695690.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Although durable responses can be achieved with tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as imatinib in melanomas harboring KIT mutations, the efficacy of alternative inhibitors after progression to imatinib and the activity of these agents on brain metastases are unknown. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a phase II study of nilotinib 400 mg twice a day in two cohorts of patients with melanomas harboring KIT mutations or amplification: (A) those refractory or intolerant to a prior KIT inhibitor; and (B) those with brain metastases. The primary endpoint was 4-month disease control rate. Secondary endpoints included response rate, time-to-progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). A Simon two-stage and a single-stage design was planned to assess for the primary endpoint in cohorts A and B, respectively. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled and 19 treated (11 in cohort A; 8 in cohort B). Three patients on cohort A [27%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 8%-56%] and 1 on cohort B (12.5%; 90% CI, 0.6%-47%) achieved the primary endpoint. Two partial responses were observed in cohort A (18.2%; 90% CI, 3%-47%); none were observed in cohort B. The median TTP and OS was 3.3 (90% CI, 2.1-3.9 months) and 9.1 months (90% CI, 4.3-14.2 months), respectively, in all treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Nilotinib may achieve disease control in patients with melanoma harboring KIT alterations and whose disease progressed after imatinib therapy. The efficacy of this agent in KIT-altered melanoma with brain metastasis is limited.

Next