VE303, a Defined Bacterial Consortium, for Prevention of Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The effect of rationally defined nonpathogenic, nontoxigenic, commensal strains of Clostridia on prevention of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is unknown. Objective: To determine the efficacy of VE303, a defined bacterial consortium of 8 strains of commensal Clostridia, in adults at high risk for CDI recurrence. The primary objective was to determine the recommended VE303 dosing for a phase 3 trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study conducted from February 2019 to September 2021 at 27 sites in the US and Canada. The study included 79 participants aged 18 years or older who were diagnosed with laboratory-confirmed CDI with 1 or more prior CDI episodes in the last 6 months and those with primary CDI at high risk for recurrence (defined as aged ≥75 years or ≥65 years with ≥1 risk factors: creatinine clearance <60 mL/min/1.73 m2, proton pump inhibitor use, remote [>6 months earlier] CDI history). Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to high-dose VE303 (8.0 × 109 colony-forming units [CFUs]) (n = 30), low-dose VE303 (1.6 × 109 CFUs) (n = 27), or placebo capsules (n = 22) orally once daily for 14 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary efficacy end point was the proportion of participants with CDI recurrence at 8 weeks using a combined clinical and laboratory definition. The primary efficacy end point was analyzed in 3 prespecified analyses, using successively broader definitions for an on-study CDI recurrence: (1) diarrhea consistent with CDI plus a toxin-positive stool sample; (2) diarrhea consistent with CDI plus a toxin-positive, polymerase chain reaction-positive, or toxigenic culture-positive stool sample; and (3) diarrhea consistent with CDI plus laboratory confirmation or (in the absence of a stool sample) treatment with a CDI-targeted antibiotic. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar across the high-dose VE303 (n = 29; 1 additional participant excluded from efficacy analysis), low-dose VE303 (n = 27), and placebo (n = 22) groups. The participants' median age was 63.5 years (range, 24-96); 70.5% were female; and 1.3% were Asian, 1.3% Black, 2.6% Hispanic, and 96.2% White. CDI recurrence rates through week 8 (using the efficacy analysis 3 definition) were 13.8% (4/29) for high-dose VE303, 37.0% (10/27) for low-dose VE303, and 45.5% (10/22) for placebo (P = .006, high-dose VE303 vs placebo). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with laboratory-confirmed CDI with 1 or more prior CDI episodes in the last 6 months and those with primary CDI at high risk for recurrence, high-dose VE303 prevented recurrent CDI compared with placebo. A larger, phase 3 study is needed to confirm these findings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03788434.

Avelumab Dose Selection for Clinical Studies in Pediatric Patients with Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A phase I/II trial evaluated the safety, antitumor activity, and pharmacokinetics of avelumab (anti-PD-L1 antibody) in pediatric patients with refractory/relapsed solid tumors (NCT03451825). This study aimed to inform avelumab dose selection in pediatric populations using population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulations. METHODS: Patients aged < 18 years with refractory/relapsed solid tumors enrolled in phase I received avelumab 10 or 20 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. A pediatric population pharmacokinetic model was developed via the frequentist prior approach. RESULTS: Pharmacokinetic parameters from 21 patients who received avelumab 10 mg/kg (n = 6) or 20 mg/kg (n = 15) were analyzed. Patients had a wide range of weights and ages (medians, 37.3 kg and 12 years). Exposures with 10-mg/kg dosing were lower vs adult dosing, particularly in patients weighing < 40 kg, whereas 20-mg/kg dosing achieved or exceeded adult exposures, irrespective of body weight. A two-compartment linear model with time-varying clearance using body weight as a covariate, with the frequentist prior approach, best described pediatric data. In this model, optimal overlap in exposure with adult data was achieved with 800 mg every 2 weeks for patients aged ≥ 12 years and weighing ≥ 40 kg, and 15 mg/kg every 2 weeks for patients aged < 12 years or weighing < 40 kg. CONCLUSIONS: Based on exposure matching, the recommended doses for further avelumab studies, including combination studies, are 15 mg/kg every 2 weeks for pediatric patients aged < 12 years or weighing < 40 kg and the adult flat dose of 800 mg every 2 weeks for pediatric patients aged ≥ 12 years and weighing ≥ 40 kg. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03451825.

Avelumab in paediatric patients with refractory or relapsed solid tumours: dose-escalation results from an open-label, single-arm, phase 1/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: We report dose-escalation results from an open-label, phase 1/2 trial evaluating avelumab (anti-PD-L1) in paediatric patients with refractory/relapsed solid tumours. METHODS: In phase 1, patients aged < 18 years with solid (including central nervous system [CNS]) tumours for which standard therapy did not exist or had failed were enrolled in sequential cohorts of 3-6 patients. Patients received avelumab 10 or 20 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks. Primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: At data cut-off (27 July 2021), 21 patients aged 3-17 years had received avelumab 10 mg/kg (n = 6) or 20 mg/kg (n = 15). One patient had three events that were classified as a DLT (fatigue with hemiparesis and muscular weakness associated with pseudoprogression; 20 mg/kg cohort). Grade ≥ 3 AEs occurred in five (83%) and 11 (73%) patients in the 10 and 20 mg/kg cohorts, respectively, and were treatment-related in one patient (7%; grade 3 [DLT]) in the 20 mg/kg cohort. Avelumab exposure in paediatric patients receiving 20 mg/kg dosing, but not 10 mg/kg, was comparable or higher compared with approved adult dosing (10 mg/kg or 800 mg flat dose). No objective responses were observed. Four patients with CNS tumours (20 mg/kg cohort) achieved stable disease, which was ongoing in two patients with astrocytoma at cut-off (for 24.7 and 30.3 months). CONCLUSION: In paediatric patients with refractory/relapsed solid tumours, avelumab monotherapy showed a safety profile consistent with previous adult studies, but clinical benefits were limited.

Long-term avelumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: summaries and post hoc analyses from JAVELIN Solid Tumor.

Background: This study examined patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who received long-term avelumab (anti-PD-L1) in a large phase Ib trial (JAVELIN Solid Tumor). Methods: Patients receiving >2 years of avelumab were reviewed and exploratory descriptive analyses were conducted. Results: Individuals with varying baseline characteristics who had received up to 6 years of avelumab were reviewed. Overall, 37/340 (10.9%) had received ≥2 years of treatment; in this subgroup, best response was complete response in 5.4%, partial response in 59.5% and stable disease in 29.7%; 51.4% had continued treatment beyond disease progression. Conclusions: In this study, 11% of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer received ≥2 years of avelumab treatment and experienced prolonged response or continued clinical benefit. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02395172 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Pharmacometric modeling and machine learning analyses of prognostic and predictive factors in the JAVELIN Gastric 100 phase III trial of avelumab.

Avelumab (anti-PD-L1) is an approved anticancer treatment for several indications. The JAVELIN Gastric 100 phase III trial did not meet its primary objective of demonstrating superior overall survival (OS) with avelumab maintenance versus continued chemotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer; however, the OS rate was numerically higher with avelumab at timepoints after 12 months. Machine learning (random forests, SIDEScreen, and variable-importance assessments) was used to build models to identify prognostic/predictive factors associated with long-term OS and tumor growth dynamics (TGDs). Baseline, re-baseline, and longitudinal variables were evaluated as covariates in a parametric time-to-event model for OS and Gompertzian population model for TGD. The final OS model incorporated a treatment effect on the log-logistic shape parameter but did not identify a treatment effect on OS or TGD. Variables identified as prognostic for longer OS included older age; higher gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) or albumin; absence of peritoneal carcinomatosis; lower neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, lactate dehydrogenase, or C-reactive protein (CRP); response to induction chemotherapy; and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0. Among baseline and time-varying covariates, the largest effects were found for GGT and CRP, respectively. Liver metastasis at re-baseline predicted higher tumor growth. Tumor size after induction chemotherapy was associated with number of metastatic sites and stable disease (vs. response). Asian region did not impact OS or TGD. Overall, an innovative workflow supporting pharmacometric modeling of OS and TGD was established. Consistent with the primary trial analysis, no treatment effect was identified. However, potential prognostic factors were identified.

Real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in PD-L1-positive non-small cell lung cancer.

Aim: We report real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with PD-L1+ non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: This retrospective, observational study using the ConcertAI Oncology Dataset (Symphony AI, CA, USA), included patients with PD-L1+ (≥1% expression) metastatic NSCLC who began first-line (1L) treatment between 2016 and 2019. Treatment outcomes were assessed by treatment class (immune checkpoint inhibitor [ICI] monotherapy, ICI combinations or chemotherapy). Results: In total, 128 (25.5%), 237 (47.3%) and 136 patients (27.1%) received 1L chemotherapy, 1L ICI monotherapy and 1L ICI combinations, respectively. ICI combinations and monotherapy had improved clinical outcomes versus chemotherapy. Adjusted analyses showed no significant difference in outcome between ICI monotherapy and ICI combinations. Conclusion: ICI-based treatments are being increasingly adopted into clinical practice and were associated with better outcomes versus chemotherapy.

Avelumab Versus Docetaxel in Patients With Platinum-Treated Advanced NSCLC: 2-Year Follow-Up From the JAVELIN Lung 200 Phase 3 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In the JAVELIN Lung 200 trial, avelumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1] antibody) did not significantly prolong overall survival (OS) versus docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated PD-L1+ NSCLC. We report greater than 2-year follow-up data. METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB or IV or recurrent NSCLC with disease progression after platinum-doublet chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. The primary end point was OS in patients with PD-L1+ tumors (greater than or equal to 1% tumor cell expression; IHC 73-10 pharmDx assay). RESULTS: Of 792 patients, 529 had PD-L1+ tumors (264 versus 265 in the avelumab versus docetaxel arms, respectively). As of March 4, 2019, median duration of follow-up for OS in the PD-L1+ population was 35.4 months in the avelumab arm and 34.7 months in the docetaxel arm; study treatment was ongoing in 25 (9.5%) versus 0 patients, respectively. In the PD-L1+ population, 2-year OS rates (95% confidence interval [CI]) with avelumab versus docetaxel were 29.9% (24.5%-35.5%) versus 20.5% (15.6%-25.8%); in greater than or equal to 50% PD-L1+ subgroups, 2-year OS rates were 36.4% (29.1%-43.7%) versus 17.7% (11.8%-24.7%) and in the greater than or equal to 80% subgroup were 40.2% (31.3%-49.0%) versus 20.3% (12.9%-28.8%), respectively. Median duration of response (investigator assessed) was 19.1 months (95% CI: 10.8-34.8) versus 5.7 months (95% CI: 4.1-8.3). Safety profiles for both arms were consistent with the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Although the JAVELIN Lung 200 primary analysis (reported previously) revealed that avelumab did not significantly prolong OS versus docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated PD-L1+ NSCLC, posthoc analyses at 2 years of follow-up revealed that 2-year OS rates were doubled with avelumab in subgroups with higher PD-L1 expression (greater than or equal to 50% and greater than or equal to 80%).

Impact of subsequent immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment on overall survival with avelumab vs docetaxel in platinum-treated advanced NSCLC: Post hoc analyses from the phase 3 JAVELIN Lung 200 trial.

OBJECTIVES: The JAVELIN Lung 200 phase 3 trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improving overall survival (OS) with avelumab vs docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated PD-L1+ NSCLC. We report post hoc analyses assessing the effects of subsequent immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment on OS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC progressed following platinum-doublet therapy were randomized to receive avelumab or docetaxel. OS was analyzed in the PD-L1+ population (≥1% of tumor cells) and full analysis set (PD-L1+ or PD-L1-). Effects of subsequent ICI (after permanent discontinuation of study treatment) on OS were analyzed using a preplanned naive sensitivity analysis and post hoc inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) analysis. Subgroups with or without subsequent ICI treatment were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: In the avelumab and docetaxel arms, a subsequent ICI was received by 16/396 (4.0 %) and 104/396 (26.3 %) after a median of 10.5 months (range, 3.9-20.4) and 5.7 months (range, 0.1-24.4), respectively. Some subgroups showed trends for higher subsequent ICI treatment, including patients with non-squamous NSCLC (avelumab arm, 4.3 % vs docetaxel arm, 32.1 %) or with a baseline ECOG performance status of 0 (6.3 % vs 31.3 %); those enrolled in the early recruitment wave (11.6 % vs 54.3 %), or enrolled in the US/Western Europe (2.8 % vs 45.5 %) or Asia (11.0 % vs 35.4 %); and non-white patients (10.1 % vs 35.0 %). The hazard ratio for OS with avelumab vs docetaxel was lower in the IPCW analysis than in the naive sensitivity analysis (PD-L1+ population: 0.80 [95 % CI, 0.62-1.04] vs 0.86 [95 % CI, 0.68-1.09], respectively). CONCLUSION: In the JAVELIN Lung 200 trial, avelumab showed clinical activity as second-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC. Post hoc analyses suggest that the primary OS analysis may have been confounded by subsequent ICI use in the docetaxel arm. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02395172.

Reduced expression of annexin A2 is associated with impaired cell surface fibrinolysis and venous thromboembolism.

Reduced plasma fibrinolysis has been identified as a potential risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE), but the role of cell surface fibrinolysis in VTE is unknown. The annexin A2/S100A10 complex serves as a coreceptor for plasminogen and tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), augmenting plasmin generation by 60-fold on the endothelial cell surface. Several studies in both mice and humans support the concept that A2 regulates fibrin homeostasis and intravascular thrombosis in vivo. Here, we examined A2 protein expression and function in 115 adult subjects with VTE and 87 healthy controls. Using peripheral blood mononuclear cells as a surrogate for endothelial cells, we found a 41% mean decrease in cell surface tPA-dependent fibrinolytic activity in subjects who had a positive personal and family history of VTE but tested negative for known inherited thrombophilias (ITs). A2 protein was reduced on average by 70% and messenger RNA levels by 30%, but neither decrease correlated with anticoagulant therapy. Neither cell A2 protein nor cell surface plasmin generation correlated with plasma-based clot lysis times, suggesting that the plasma and cell surface fibrinolytic systems operate independently of one another. These data suggest that reduced expression of annexin A2 protein is associated with cell surface hypofibrinolysis and may represent a novel risk factor for IT.

Avelumab as second-line therapy for metastatic, platinum-treated urothelial carcinoma in the phase Ib JAVELIN Solid Tumor study: 2-year updated efficacy and safety analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1)/programmed cell death 1 antibodies have shown clinical activity in platinum-treated metastatic urothelial carcinoma, resulting in regulatory approval of several agents, including avelumab (anti-PD-L1). We report ≥2-year follow-up data for avelumab treatment and exploratory subgroup analyses in patients with urothelial carcinoma. METHODS: Patients with previously treated advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma, pooled from two cohorts of the phase Ib JAVELIN Solid Tumor trial, received avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal. End points included best overall response and progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST V.1.1, overall survival (OS) and safety. Post hoc analyses included objective response rates (ORRs) in subgroups defined by established high-risk/poor-prognosis characteristics and association between time to response and outcome. RESULTS: 249 patients received avelumab; efficacy was assessed in 242 postplatinum patients. Median follow-up was 31.9 months (range 24-43), and median treatment duration was 2.8 months (range 0.5-42.8). The confirmed ORR was 16.5% (95% CI 12.1% to 21.8%; complete response in 4.1% and partial response in 12.4%). Median duration of response was 20.5 months (95% CI 9.7 months to not estimable). Median PFS was 1.6 months (95% CI 1.4 to 2.7 months) and the 12-month PFS rate was 16.8% (95% CI 11.9% to 22.4%). Median OS was 7.0 months (95% CI 5.9 to 8.5 months) and the 24-month OS rate was 20.1% (95% CI 15.2% to 25.4%). In post hoc exploratory analyses, avelumab showed antitumor activity in high-risk subgroups, including elderly patients and those with renal insufficiency or upper tract disease; ORRs were numerically lower in patients with liver metastases or low albumin levels. Objective response achieved by 3 months versus later was associated with longer OS (median not reached (95% CI 18.9 months to not estimable) vs 7.1 months (95% CI 5.2 to 9.0 months)). Safety findings were consistent with previously reported 6-month analyses. CONCLUSIONS: After ≥2 years of follow-up, avelumab showed prolonged efficacy and acceptable safety in patients with platinum-treated advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma, including high-risk subgroups. Survival appeared longer in patients who responded within 3 months. Long-term safety findings were consistent with earlier reports with avelumab treatment in this patient population.

Programmed Death-Ligand 1 Immunohistochemistry Assay Comparison Studies in NSCLC: Characterization of the 73-10 Assay.

INTRODUCTION: Several programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) assays have been developed independently within clinical programs for therapeutic anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) or PD-L1 antibodies, necessitating assessment of assay comparability. We characterized the Dako PD-L1 IHC 73-10 assay used in clinical trials of avelumab (anti-PD-L1) or bintrafusp alfa (M7824; bifunctional immunotherapy) and compared it with the Dako PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx assay, an approved companion diagnostic for pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC. METHODS: Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded NSCLC tumor samples from a commercial source and from the JAVELIN Solid Tumor phase 1 trial of avelumab (NCT01772004) were stained using the 73-10 and 22C3 IHC assays with a standard protocol. RESULTS: Both assays displayed expected PD-L1 staining patterns. In 148 commercial NSCLC samples, the 73-10 assay stained greater than or equal to 1%, greater than or equal to 50%, and greater than or equal to 80% of tumor cells as PD-L1+ in 64.2%, 36.5%, and 23.6% of the samples, respectively, whereas the 22C3 assay stained 20.3% of the samples as greater than or equal to 50% PD-L1+. In 83 NSCLC clinical trial samples, the 73-10 assay stained 79.5% and 31.3% of the samples as greater than or equal to 1% and greater than or equal to 80% PD-L1+, respectively, whereas the 22C3 assay stained 59.0% and 21.7% as greater than or equal to 1% and greater than or equal to 50% PD-L1+, respectively. Efficacy of avelumab was similar in the subgroups classified with the 73-10 and 22C3 assays using greater than or equal to 80% and greater than or equal to 50% PD-L1+ cutoffs, with objective response rates of 26.9% and 33.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The 73-10 assay demonstrated high sensitivity for PD-L1 staining, and staining was comparable between the greater than or equal to 80% cutoff of the 73-10 assay and greater than or equal to 50% cutoff of the 22C3 assay.

Avelumab versus docetaxel in patients with platinum-treated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (JAVELIN Lung 200): an open-label, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Antibodies targeting the immune checkpoint molecules PD-1 or PD-L1 have demonstrated clinical efficacy in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this trial we investigated the efficacy and safety of avelumab, an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in patients with NSCLC who had already received platinum-based therapy. METHODS: JAVELIN Lung 200 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial at 173 hospitals and cancer treatment centres in 31 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had stage IIIB or IV or recurrent NSCLC and disease progression after treatment with a platinum-containing doublet, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, an estimated life expectancy of more than 12 weeks, and adequate haematological, renal, and hepatic function. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice-response system with a stratified permuted block method with variable block length, to receive either avelumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or docetaxel 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by PD-L1 expression (≥1% vs <1% of tumour cells), which was measured with the 73-10 assay, and histology (squamous vs non-squamous). The primary endpoint was overall survival, analysed when roughly 337 events (deaths) had occurred in the PD-L1-positive population. Efficacy was analysed in all PD-L1-positive patients (ie, PD-L1 expression in ≥1% of tumour cells) randomly assigned to study treatment (the primary analysis population) and then in all randomly assigned patients through a hierarchical testing procedure. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02395172. Enrolment is complete, but the trial is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between March 24, 2015, and Jan 23, 2017, 792 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive avelumab (n=396) or docetaxel (n=396). 264 participants in the avelumab group and 265 in the docetaxel group had PD-L1-positive tumours. In patients with PD-L1-positive tumours, median overall survival did not differ significantly between the avelumab and docetaxel groups (11·4 months [95% CI 9·4-13·9] vs 10·3 months [8·5-13·0]; hazard ratio 0·90 [96% CI 0·72-1·12]; one-sided p=0·16). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 251 (64%) of 393 avelumab-treated patients and 313 (86%) of 365 docetaxel-treated patients, including grade 3-5 events in 39 (10%) and 180 (49%) patients, respectively. The most common grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events were infusion-related reaction (six patients [2%]) and increased lipase (four [1%]) in the avelumab group and neutropenia (51 [14%]), febrile neutropenia (37 [10%]), and decreased neutrophil counts (36 [10%]) in the docetaxel group. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 34 (9%) patients in the avelumab group and 75 (21%) in the docetaxel group. Treatment-related deaths occurred in four (1%) participants in the avelumab group, two due to interstitial lung disease, one due to acute kidney injury, and one due to a combination of autoimmune myocarditis, acute cardiac failure, and respiratory failure. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 14 (4%) patients in the docetaxel group, three due to pneumonia, and one each due to febrile neutropenia, septic shock, febrile neutropenia with septic shock, acute respiratory failure, cardiovascular insufficiency, renal impairment, leucopenia with mucosal inflammation and pyrexia, infection, neutropenic infection, dehydration, and unknown causes. INTERPRETATION: Compared with docetaxel, avelumab did not improve overall survival in patients with platinum-treated PD-L1-positive NSCLC, but had a favourable safety profile. FUNDING: Merck and Pfizer.

Efficacy and Safety of Nivolumab Alone or in Combination With Ipilimumab in Patients With Mucosal Melanoma: A Pooled Analysis.

Purpose Mucosal melanoma is an aggressive malignancy with a poor response to conventional therapies. The efficacy and safety of nivolumab (a programmed death-1 checkpoint inhibitor), alone or combined with ipilimumab (a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 checkpoint inhibitor), have not been reported in this rare melanoma subtype. Patients and Methods Data were pooled from 889 patients who received nivolumab monotherapy in clinical studies, including phase III trials; 86 (10%) had mucosal melanoma and 665 (75%) had cutaneous melanoma. Data were also pooled for patients who received nivolumab combined with ipilimumab (n = 35, mucosal melanoma; n = 326, cutaneous melanoma). Results Among patients who received nivolumab monotherapy, median progression-free survival was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.2 to 5.4 months) and 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.1 to 7.5 months) for mucosal and cutaneous melanoma, with objective response rates of 23.3% (95% CI, 14.8% to 33.6%) and 40.9% (95% CI, 37.1% to 44.7%), respectively. Median progression-free survival in patients treated with nivolumab combined with ipilimumab was 5.9 months (95% CI, 2.8 months to not reached) and 11.7 months (95% CI, 8.9 to 16.7 months) for mucosal and cutaneous melanoma, with objective response rates of 37.1% (95% CI, 21.5% to 55.1%) and 60.4% (95% CI, 54.9% to 65.8%), respectively. For mucosal and cutaneous melanoma, respectively, the incidence of grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was 8.1% and 12.5% for nivolumab monotherapy and 40.0% and 54.9% for combination therapy. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the largest analysis of data for anti-programmed death-1 therapy in mucosal melanoma to date. Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab seemed to have greater efficacy than either agent alone, and although the activity was lower in mucosal melanoma, the safety profile was similar between subtypes.

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

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.

Ipilimumab administration for advanced melanoma in patients with pre-existing Hepatitis B or C infection: a multicenter, retrospective case series.

Ipilimumab is a fully human, monoclonal antibody directed against Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte Antigen-4 (CTLA-4) that has demonstrated a survival benefit and durable disease control in patients with advanced melanoma. Ipilimumab is associated with potentially serious immune-related adverse events, including autoimmune hepatitis. Because clinical trials of ipilimumab excluded patients with pre-existing hepatitis B or C infection, there is a paucity of data on the safety of ipilimumab administration to that patient population. Here, we report the largest case series to date of patients with hepatitis B or C who received ipilimumab for advanced melanoma. Two of the nine patients described in this case series experienced fluctuations in their liver function tests (LFTs) and were subsequently treated with corticosteroids. Although this is a small series, the rate of hepatotoxicity appears similar to what has been seen in the general population treated with ipilimumab, and the ability to administer ipilimumab did not appear to be affected by concomitant hepatitis B or C infection. The use of ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma who have pre-existing hepatitis can be considered among other therapeutic options.

Platelet production and platelet destruction: assessing mechanisms of treatment effect in immune thrombocytopenia.

This study investigated the immature platelet fraction (IPF) in assessing treatment effects in immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). IPF was measured on the Sysmex XE2100 autoanalyzer. The mean absolute-IPF (A-IPF) was lower for ITP patients than for healthy controls (3.2 vs 7.8 × 109/L, P < .01), whereas IPF percentage was greater (29.2% vs 3.2%, P < .01). All 5 patients with a platelet response to Eltrombopag, a thrombopoietic agent, but none responding to an anti-FcγRIII antibody, had corresponding A-IPF responses. Seven of 7 patients responding to RhoD immuneglobulin (anti-D) and 6 of 8 responding to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) did not have corresponding increases in A-IPF, but 2 with IVIG and 1 with IVIG anti-D did. This supports inhibition of platelet destruction as the primary mechanism of intravenous anti-D and IVIG, although IVIG may also enhance thrombopoiesis. Plasma glycocalicin, released during platelet destruction, normalized as glycocalicin index, was higher in ITP patients than controls (31.36 vs 1.75, P = .001). There was an inverse correlation between glycocalicin index and A-IPF in ITP patients (r² = -0.578, P = .015), demonstrating the relationship between platelet production and destruction. Nonresponders to thrombopoietic agents had increased megakaryocytes but not increased A-IPF, suggesting that antibodies blocked platelet release. In conclusion, A-IPF measures real-time thrombopoiesis, providing insight into mechanisms of treatment effect.