Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 207
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Cell ; 170(6): 1109-1119.e10, 2017 Sep 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28886381

RESUMEN

Here we report a phase 1b clinical trial testing the impact of oncolytic virotherapy with talimogene laherparepvec on cytotoxic T cell infiltration and therapeutic efficacy of the anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab. Twenty-one patients with advanced melanoma were treated with talimogene laherparepvec followed by combination therapy with pembrolizumab. Therapy was generally well tolerated, with fatigue, fevers, and chills as the most common adverse events. No dose-limiting toxicities occurred. Confirmed objective response rate was 62%, with a complete response rate of 33% per immune-related response criteria. Patients who responded to combination therapy had increased CD8+ T cells, elevated PD-L1 protein expression, as well as IFN-γ gene expression on several cell subsets in tumors after talimogene laherparepvec treatment. Response to combination therapy did not appear to be associated with baseline CD8+ T cell infiltration or baseline IFN-γ signature. These findings suggest that oncolytic virotherapy may improve the efficacy of anti-PD-1 therapy by changing the tumor microenvironment. VIDEO ABSTRACT.


Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Melanoma/terapia , Viroterapia Oncolítica/efectos adversos , Terapia Combinada , Herpesviridae/genética , Humanos , Inmunoterapia , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Microambiente Tumoral
3.
Cancer ; 130(12): 2191-2204, 2024 Jun 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38376917

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 can have a particularly detrimental effect on patients with cancer, but no studies to date have examined if the presence, or site, of metastatic cancer is related to COVID-19 outcomes. METHODS: Using the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry, the authors identified 10,065 patients with COVID-19 and cancer (2325 with and 7740 without metastasis at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis). The primary ordinal outcome was COVID-19 severity: not hospitalized, hospitalized but did not receive supplemental O2, hospitalized and received supplemental O2, admitted to an intensive care unit, received mechanical ventilation, or died from any cause. The authors used ordinal logistic regression models to compare COVID-19 severity by presence and specific site of metastatic cancer. They used logistic regression models to assess 30-day all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Compared to patients without metastasis, patients with metastases have increased hospitalization rates (59% vs. 49%) and higher 30 day mortality (18% vs. 9%). Patients with metastasis to bone, lung, liver, lymph nodes, and brain have significantly higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted odds ratios [ORs], 1.38, 1.59, 1.38, 1.00, and 2.21) compared to patients without metastases at those sites. Patients with metastasis to the lung have significantly higher odds of 30-day mortality (adjusted OR, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.00) when adjusting for COVID-19 severity. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with metastatic cancer, especially with metastasis to the brain, are more likely to have severe outcomes after COVID-19 whereas patients with metastasis to the lung, compared to patients with cancer metastasis to other sites, have the highest 30-day mortality after COVID-19.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Hospitalización , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Neoplasias , Sistema de Registros , SARS-CoV-2 , Humanos , COVID-19/mortalidad , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/patología , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Anciano , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias/patología , Neoplasias/mortalidad , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Respiración Artificial/estadística & datos numéricos
4.
Lancet ; 402(10407): 1043-1051, 2023 09 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37524096

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing resection of renal cell carcinoma are at risk of disease relapse. We evaluated the effectiveness of the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus administered after surgery. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we enrolled adults with histologically confirmed renal cell carcinoma who had undergone a full surgical resection and were at intermediate-high or very high risk of recurrence at 398 academic and community institution centres in the USA. After nephrectomy, patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a central web-based application using a dynamic balancing algorithm to receive 10 mg oral everolimus daily or placebo for 54 weeks. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival. Efficacy analyses included all eligible, randomly assigned patients; safety analysis included all patients who received treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01120249 and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between April 1, 2011, and Sept 15, 2016, a total of 1545 patients were randomly assigned to receive everolimus (n=775) or placebo (n=770), of whom 755 assigned to everolimus and 744 assigned to placebo were eligible for inclusion in the efficacy analysis. With a median follow-up of 76 months (IQR 61-92), recurrence-free survival was longer with everolimus than with placebo (5-year recurrence-free survival 67% [95% CI 63-70] vs 63% [60-67]; stratified log-rank p=0·050; stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·85, 95% CI 0·72-1·00; p=0·051) but did not meet the prespecified p value for statistical significance of 0·044. Recurrence-free survival was longer with everolimus than with placebo in the very-high-risk group (HR 0·79, 95% CI 0·65-0·97; p=0·022) but not in the intermediate-high-risk group (0·99, 0·73-1·35; p=0·96). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 343 (46%) of 740 patients who received everolimus and 79 (11%) of 723 who received placebo. INTERPRETATION: Postoperative everolimus did not improve recurrence-free survival compared with placebo among patients with renal cell carcinoma at high risk of recurrence after nephrectomy. These results do not support the adjuvant use of everolimus for renal cell carcinoma after surgery. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, National Clinical Trials Network, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, and The Hope Foundation.


Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Renales , Neoplasias Renales , Estados Unidos , Adulto , Humanos , Everolimus/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma de Células Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Renales/cirugía , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/tratamiento farmacológico , Sirolimus/uso terapéutico , Adyuvantes Inmunológicos/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Renales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Renales/cirugía
5.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; 22(1D): e240002, 2024 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38244274

RESUMEN

The NCCN Guidelines for Merkel Cell Carcinoma (MCC) provide recommendations for diagnostic workup, clinical stage, and treatment options for patients. The panel meets annually to discuss updates to the guidelines based on comments from expert review from panel members, institutional review, as well as submissions from within NCCN and external organizations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the introduction of a new page for locally advanced disease in the setting of clinical node negative status, entitled "Clinical N0 Disease, Locally Advanced MCC." This new algorithm page addresses locally advanced disease, and the panel clarifies the meaning behind the term "nonsurgical" by further defining locally advanced disease. In addition, the guideline includes the management of in-transit disease and updates to the systemic therapy options.


Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células de Merkel , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Humanos , Carcinoma de Células de Merkel/diagnóstico , Carcinoma de Células de Merkel/terapia , Neoplasias Cutáneas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/terapia
6.
Int J Mol Sci ; 25(4)2024 Feb 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38396800

RESUMEN

Prostate cancer (PCa) remains a common cancer with high mortality in men due to its heterogeneity and the emergence of drug resistance. A critical factor contributing to its lethality is the presence of prostate cancer stem cells (PCSCs), which can self-renew, long-term propagate tumors, and mediate treatment resistance. MicroRNA-34a (miR-34a) has shown promise as an anti-PCSC therapeutic by targeting critical molecules involved in cancer stem cell (CSC) survival and functions. Despite extensive efforts, the development of miR-34a therapeutics still faces challenges, including non-specific delivery and delivery-associated toxicity. One emerging delivery approach is ligand-mediated conjugation, aiming to achieve specific delivery of miR-34a to cancer cells, thereby enhancing efficacy while minimizing toxicity. Folate-conjugated miR-34a (folate-miR-34a) has demonstrated promising anti-tumor efficacy in breast and lung cancers by targeting folate receptor α (FOLR1). Here, we first show that miR-34a, a TP53 transcriptional target, is reduced in PCa that harbors TP53 loss or mutations and that miR-34a mimic, when transfected into PCa cells, downregulated multiple miR-34a targets and inhibited cell growth. When exploring the therapeutic potential of folate-miR-34a, we found that folate-miR-34a exhibited impressive inhibitory effects on breast, ovarian, and cervical cancer cells but showed minimal effects on and targeted delivery to PCa cells due to a lack of appreciable expression of FOLR1 in PCa cells. Folate-miR-34a also did not display any apparent effect on PCa cells expressing prostate-specific membrane antigen (PMSA) despite the reported folate's binding capability to PSMA. These results highlight challenges in the specific delivery of folate-miR-34a to PCa due to a lack of target (receptor) expression. Our study offers novel insights into the challenges and promises within the field and casts light on the development of ligand-conjugated miR-34a therapeutics for PCa.


Asunto(s)
Ácido Fólico , Neoplasias Pulmonares , MicroARNs , Neoplasias de la Próstata , Humanos , Masculino , Línea Celular Tumoral , Proliferación Celular/genética , Receptor 1 de Folato/genética , Receptor 1 de Folato/metabolismo , Receptor 1 de Folato/uso terapéutico , Regulación Neoplásica de la Expresión Génica , Ligandos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/genética , MicroARNs/metabolismo , MicroARNs/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias de la Próstata/genética , Ácido Fólico/farmacología , Ácido Fólico/uso terapéutico
7.
J Transl Med ; 21(1): 275, 2023 04 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37087493

RESUMEN

The 2022 Immunotherapy Bridge congress (November 30-December 1, Naples, Italy) featured a Great Debate session which addressed three contemporary topics in the field of immunotherapy. The debates included counterpoint views from leading experts and considered whether adoptive cell therapy (ACT) has a role in the treatment of solid tumors, the use of peripheral/blood biomarkers versus tumor microenvironment biomarkers for cancer immunotherapy and the role of chimeric antigen receptor T cell versus natural killer cell therapy. As is the tradition in the Immunotherapy Bridge Great Debates, speakers are invited by the meeting Chairs to express one side of the assigned debate and the opinions given may not fully reflect their own personal views. Audiences voted in favour of either side of the topic both before and after each debate.


Asunto(s)
Inmunoterapia , Neoplasias , Humanos , Neoplasias/terapia , Inmunoterapia Adoptiva , Linfocitos T , Biomarcadores de Tumor , Microambiente Tumoral
8.
J Transl Med ; 21(1): 265, 2023 04 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37072748

RESUMEN

The Great Debate session at the 2022 Melanoma Bridge congress (December 1-3) featured counterpoint views from leading experts on five contemporary topics of debate in the management of melanoma. The debates considered the choice of anti-lymphocyte-activation gene (LAG)-3 therapy or ipilimumab in combination with anti-programmed death (PD)-1 therapy, whether anti-PD-1 monotherapy is still acceptable as a comparator arm in clinical trials, whether adjuvant treatment of melanoma is still a useful treatment option, the role of adjuvant therapy in stage II melanoma, what role surgery will continue to have in the treatment of melanoma. As is customary in the Melanoma Bridge Great Debates, the speakers are invited by the meeting Chairs to express one side of the assigned debate and the opinions given may not fully reflect personal views. Audiences voted in favour of either side of the argument both before and after each debate.


Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Humanos , Inmunoterapia , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Melanoma/genética , Ipilimumab/uso terapéutico , Terapia Combinada
9.
J Transl Med ; 21(1): 488, 2023 07 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37475035

RESUMEN

The discovery and development of novel treatments that harness the patient's immune system and prevent immune escape has dramatically improved outcomes for patients across cancer types. However, not all patients respond to immunotherapy, acquired resistance remains a challenge, and responses are poor in certain tumors which are considered to be immunologically cold. This has led to the need for new immunotherapy-based approaches, including adoptive cell transfer (ACT), therapeutic vaccines, and novel immune checkpoint inhibitors. These new approaches are focused on patients with an inadequate response to current treatments, with emerging evidence of improved responses in various cancers with new immunotherapy agents, often in combinations with existing agents. The use of cell therapies, drivers of immune response, and trends in immunotherapy were the focus of the Immunotherapy Bridge (November 30th-December 1st, 2022), organized by the Fondazione Melanoma Onlus, Naples, Italy, in collaboration with the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer.


Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Humanos , Inmunoterapia , Inmunoterapia Adoptiva , Italia , Melanoma/patología , Microambiente Tumoral
10.
J Transl Med ; 21(1): 508, 2023 07 28.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37507765

RESUMEN

Outcomes for patients with melanoma have improved over the past decade with the clinical development and approval of immunotherapies targeting immune checkpoint receptors such as programmed death-1 (PD-1), programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) or cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4). Combinations of these checkpoint therapies with other agents are now being explored to improve outcomes and enhance benefit-risk profiles of treatment. Alternative inhibitory receptors have been identified that may be targeted for anti-tumor immune therapy, such as lymphocyte-activation gene-3 (LAG-3), as have several potential target oncogenes for molecularly targeted therapy, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Unfortunately, many patients still progress and acquire resistance to immunotherapy and molecularly targeted therapies. To bypass resistance, combination treatment with immunotherapies and single or multiple TKIs have been shown to improve prognosis compared to monotherapy. The number of new combinations treatment under development for melanoma provides options for the number of patients to achieve a therapeutic benefit. Many diagnostic and prognostic assays have begun to show clinical applicability providing additional tools to optimize and individualize treatments. However, the question on the optimal algorithm of first- and later-line therapies and the search for biomarkers to guide these decisions are still under investigation. This year, the Melanoma Bridge Congress (Dec 1st-3rd, 2022, Naples, Italy) addressed the latest advances in melanoma research, focusing on themes of paramount importance for melanoma prevention, diagnosis and treatment. This included sessions dedicated to systems biology on immunotherapy, immunogenicity and gene expression profiling, biomarkers, and combination treatment strategies.


Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Humanos , Melanoma/terapia , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Inmunoterapia , Antígeno CTLA-4 , Italia
11.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; 21(11): 1181-1203, 2023 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37935106

RESUMEN

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common form of skin cancer in the United States. Due to the high frequency, BCC occurrences are not typically recorded, and annual rates of incidence can only be estimated. Current estimated rates are 2 million Americans affected annually, and this continues to rise. Exposure to radiation, from either sunlight or previous medical therapy, is a key player in BCC development. BCC is not as aggressive as other skin cancers because it is less likely to metastasize. However, surgery and radiation are prevalent treatment options, therefore disfigurement and limitation of function are significant considerations. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) outline an updated risk stratification and treatment options available for BCC.


Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Basocelular , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Carcinoma Basocelular/diagnóstico , Carcinoma Basocelular/epidemiología , Carcinoma Basocelular/etiología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/epidemiología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/etiología , Luz Solar , Oncología Médica , Incidencia
12.
J Transl Med ; 20(1): 179, 2022 04 21.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35449104

RESUMEN

As part of the 2021 Immunotherapy Bridge virtual congress (December 1-2, Naples, Italy), the Great Debate sessions featured experts who were assigned counter opposing views on four important questions in immunotherapy today. The first topic was whether oncolytic viruses or other specific immunomodulators were the more promising approach for intralesional therapy. The second was whether early surrogate endpoints, such as response rate or progression-free survival, correlate with long-term overall survival was considered. Thirdly, whether vaccines can transform cold into hot tumors was discussed and, finally, broad versus deep analytic profiling approaches to gain insights into immune-oncology development were compared. As with previous Bridge congresses, presenters were invited by the meeting Chairs and positions taken during the debates may not have reflected their respective personal view. In addition, the views summarised in this article are based on available evidence but may reflect personal interpretation of these data, clinical experience and subjective opinion of the speaker.


Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Humanos , Factores Inmunológicos , Inmunoterapia , Oncología Médica , Melanoma/patología , Supervivencia sin Progresión
13.
J Transl Med ; 20(1): 200, 2022 05 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35538491

RESUMEN

The Great Debate session at the 2021 Melanoma Bridge virtual congress (December 2-4) featured counterpoint views from experts on seven important issues in melanoma. The debates considered the use of adoptive cell therapy versus use of bispecific antibodies, mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) inhibitors versus immunotherapy in the adjuvant setting, whether the use of corticosteroids for the management of side effects have an impact on outcomes, the choice of programmed death (PD)-1 combination therapy with cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen (CTLA)-4 or lymphocyte-activation gene (LAG)-3, whether radiation is needed for brain metastases, when lymphadenectomy should be integrated into the treatment plan and then the last debate, telemedicine versus face-to-face. As with previous Bridge congresses, the debates were assigned by meeting Chairs and positions taken by experts during the debates may not have necessarily reflected their respective personal view. Audiences voted both before and after each debate.


Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Antígeno CTLA-4 , Terapia Combinada , Humanos , Inmunoterapia , Escisión del Ganglio Linfático , Melanoma/genética , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/uso terapéutico
14.
J Transl Med ; 20(1): 257, 2022 06 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35672823

RESUMEN

Over the past decade, immunotherapy has become an increasingly fundamental modality in the treatment of cancer. The positive impact of immune checkpoint inhibition, especially anti-programmed death (PD)-1/PD-ligand (L)1 blockade, in patients with different cancers has focused attention on the potential for other immunotherapeutic approaches. These include inhibitors of additional immune checkpoints, adoptive cell transfer (ACT), and therapeutic vaccines. Patients with advanced cancers who previously had limited treatment options available may now benefit from immunotherapies that can offer durable responses and improved survival outcomes. However, despite this, a significant proportion of patients fail to respond to immunotherapy, especially those with less immunoresponsive cancer types, and there remains a need for new treatment strategies.The virtual Immunotherapy Bridge (December 1st-2nd, 2021), organized by the Fondazione Melanoma Onlus, Naples, Italy in collaboration with the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer addressed several areas of current research in immunotherapy, including lessons learned from cell therapies, drivers of immune response, and trends in immunotherapy across different cancers, and these are summarised here.


Asunto(s)
Biomarcadores de Tumor , Melanoma , Biomarcadores de Tumor/metabolismo , Humanos , Factores Inmunológicos , Inmunoterapia , Italia
15.
J Transl Med ; 20(1): 391, 2022 09 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36058945

RESUMEN

Advances in immune checkpoint and combination therapy have led to improvement in overall survival for patients with advanced melanoma. Improved understanding of the tumor, tumor microenvironment and tumor immune-evasion mechanisms has resulted in new approaches to targeting and harnessing the host immune response. Combination modalities with other immunotherapy agents, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, electrochemotherapy are also being explored to overcome resistance and to potentiate the immune response. In addition, novel approaches such as adoptive cell therapy, oncogenic viruses, vaccines and different strategies of drug administration including sequential, or combination treatment are being tested. Despite the progress in diagnosis of melanocytic lesions, correct classification of patients, selection of appropriate adjuvant and systemic theràapies, and prediction of response to therapy remain real challenges in melanoma. Improved understanding of the tumor microenvironment, tumor immunity and response to therapy has prompted extensive translational and clinical research in melanoma. There is a growing evidence that genomic and immune features of pre-treatment tumor biopsies may correlate with response in patients with melanoma and other cancers, but they have yet to be fully characterized and implemented clinically. Development of novel biomarker platforms may help to improve diagnostics and predictive accuracy for selection of patients for specific treatment. Overall, the future research efforts in melanoma therapeutics and translational research should focus on several aspects including: (a) developing robust biomarkers to predict efficacy of therapeutic modalities to guide clinical decision-making and optimize treatment regimens, (b) identifying mechanisms of therapeutic resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors that are potentially actionable, (c) identifying biomarkers to predict therapy-induced adverse events, and (d) studying mechanism of actions of therapeutic agents and developing algorithms to optimize combination treatments. During the Melanoma Bridge meeting (December 2nd-4th, 2021, Naples, Italy) discussions focused on the currently approved systemic and local therapies for advanced melanoma and discussed novel biomarker strategies and advances in precision medicine as well as the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on management of melanoma patients.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Melanoma , Biomarcadores , Humanos , Inmunoterapia/métodos , Italia , Melanoma/genética , Pandemias , Microambiente Tumoral
16.
Invest New Drugs ; 40(5): 1051-1065, 2022 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35635631

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Targeting the MDM2-p53 interaction using AMG 232 is synergistic with MAPK inhibitors (MAPKi) in preclinical melanoma models. We postulated that AMG 232 plus MAPKi is safe and more effective than MAPKi alone in TP53-wild type, MAPKi-naïve metastatic melanoma. METHODS: Patients were treated with increasing (120 mg, 180 mg, 240 mg) oral doses of AMG 232 (seven-days-on, 15-days-off, 21-day cycle) plus dabrafenib (D) and trametinib (T) (Arm 1, BRAFV600-mutant) or T alone (Arm 2, BRAFV600-wild type). Patients were treated for seven days with AMG 232 alone before adding T±D. Safety and efficacy were assessed using CTCAE v4.0 and RECIST v1.1 criteria, respectively. Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed at baseline and steady-state levels for AMG 232. RESULTS: 31 patients were enrolled. Ten and 21 patients were enrolled in Arm 1 and Arm 2, respectively. The most common AMG 232-related adverse events (AEs) were nausea (87%), diarrhea (77%), and fatigue (74%). Seven patients (23%) were withdrawn from the study due to AMG 232-related AEs. Three dose-limiting AEs occurred (Arm 1, 180 mg, nausea; Arm 2, 240 mg, grade 3 pulmonary embolism; Arm 2, 180 mg, grade 4 thrombocytopenia). AMG 232 PK exposures were not altered when AMG 232 was combined with T±D. Objective responses were seen in 8/10 (Arm 1) and 3/20 (Arm 2) evaluable patients. The median progression-free survival for Arm 1 and Arm 2 was 19.0 months-not reached and 2.8 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: The maximum tolerated dose of AMG 232 for both arms was 120 mg. AMG 232 plus T±D exhibited a favorable PK profile. Although objective responses occurred in both arms, adding AMG 232 to T±D did not confer additional clinical benefit.


Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Proteína p53 Supresora de Tumor , Acetatos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/farmacocinética , Humanos , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Melanoma/genética , Melanoma/patología , Náusea/inducido químicamente , Piperidonas , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/efectos adversos , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf , Piridonas/efectos adversos , Pirimidinonas/efectos adversos
17.
Future Oncol ; 18(12): 1449-1459, 2022 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35040698

RESUMEN

Aim: Monitoring treatment of tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) is complicated by the irregular shape and asymmetrical growth of the tumor. We compared responses to pexidartinib by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 with those by tumor volume score (TVS) and modified RECIST (m-RECIST). Materials & methods: MRIs acquired every two cycles were assessed centrally using RECIST 1.1, m-RECIST and TVS and tissue damage score (TDS). Results: Thirty-one evaluable TGCT patients were treated with pexidartinib. From baseline to last visit, 94% of patients (29/31) showed a decrease in tumor size (median change: -60% [RECIST], -66% [m-RECIST], -79% [TVS]). All methods showed 100% disease control rate. For TDS, improvements were seen in bone erosion (32%), bone marrow edema (58%) and knee effusion (46%). Conclusion: TVS and m-RECIST offer potentially superior alternatives to conventional RECIST for monitoring disease progression and treatment response in TGCT. TDS adds important information about joint damage associated with TGCT.


Asunto(s)
Tumor de Células Gigantes de las Vainas Tendinosas , Receptor de Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Macrófagos , Receptores de Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos y Macrófagos , Tumor de Células Gigantes de las Vainas Tendinosas/diagnóstico por imagen , Tumor de Células Gigantes de las Vainas Tendinosas/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Receptores de Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos y Macrófagos/antagonistas & inhibidores , Criterios de Evaluación de Respuesta en Tumores Sólidos , Carga Tumoral
18.
Lancet Oncol ; 22(12): 1692-1704, 2021 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34774225

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Combination nivolumab plus ipilimumab was efficacious in patients with asymptomatic melanoma brain metastases (MBM) in CheckMate 204, but showed low efficacy in patients with symptomatic MBM. Here, we provide final 3-year follow-up data from the trial. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, phase 2 study (CheckMate 204) included adults (aged ≥18 years) with measurable MBM (0·5-3·0 cm in diameter). Asymptomatic patients (cohort A) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1 and no neurological symptoms or baseline corticosteroid use; symptomatic patients (cohort B) had an ECOG performance status of 0-2 with stable neurological symptoms and could be receiving low-dose dexamethasone. Nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg was given intravenously every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks for up to 2 years, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was intracranial clinical benefit rate (complete responses, partial responses, or stable disease lasting ≥6 months) assessed in all treated patients. Intracranial progression-free survival and overall survival were key secondary endpoints. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02320058. FINDINGS: Between Feb 19, 2015, and Nov 1, 2017, 119 (72%) of 165 screened patients were enrolled and treated: 101 patients were asymptomatic (cohort A; median follow-up 34·3 months [IQR 14·7-36·4]) and 18 were symptomatic (cohort B; median follow-up 7·5 months [1·2-35·2]). Investigator-assessed intracranial clinical benefit was observed in 58 (57·4% [95% CI 47·2-67·2]) of 101 patients in cohort A and three (16·7% [3·6-41·4]) of 18 patients in cohort B; investigator-assessed objective response was observed in 54 (53·5% [43·3-63·5]) patients in cohort A and three (16·7% [3·6-41·4]) patients in cohort B. 33 (33%) patients in cohort A and three (17%) patients in cohort B had an investigator-assessed intracranial complete response. For patients in cohort A, 36-month intracranial progression-free survival was 54·1% (95% CI 42·7-64·1) and overall survival was 71·9% (61·8-79·8). For patients in cohort B, 36-month intracranial progression-free survival was 18·9% (95% CI 4·6-40·5) and overall survival was 36·6% (14·0-59·8). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase (15 [15%] of 101 patients each) in cohort A; no grade 3 TRAEs occurred in more than one patient each in cohort B, and no grade 4 events occurred. The most common serious TRAEs were colitis, diarrhoea, hypophysitis, and increased alanine aminotransferase (five [5%] of each among the 101 patients in cohort A); no serious TRAE occurred in more than one patient each in cohort B. There was one treatment-related death (myocarditis in cohort A). INTERPRETATION: The durable 3-year response, overall survival, and progression-free survival rates for asymptomatic patients support first-line use of nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Symptomatic disease in patients with MBM remains difficult to treat, but some patients achieve a long-term response with the combination. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb.


Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Encefálicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano , Neoplasias Encefálicas/secundario , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Ipilimumab/administración & dosificación , Masculino , Melanoma/patología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nivolumab/administración & dosificación , Pronóstico , Tasa de Supervivencia
19.
N Engl J Med ; 379(8): 722-730, 2018 Aug 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30134131

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases are a common cause of disabling neurologic complications and death in patients with metastatic melanoma. Previous studies of nivolumab combined with ipilimumab in metastatic melanoma have excluded patients with untreated brain metastases. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with melanoma who had untreated brain metastases. METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter, phase 2 study, patients with metastatic melanoma and at least one measurable, nonirradiated brain metastasis (tumor diameter, 0.5 to 3 cm) and no neurologic symptoms received nivolumab (1 mg per kilogram of body weight) plus ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 3 weeks for up to four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary end point was the rate of intracranial clinical benefit, defined as the percentage of patients who had stable disease for at least 6 months, complete response, or partial response. RESULTS: Among 94 patients with a median follow-up of 14.0 months, the rate of intracranial clinical benefit was 57% (95% confidence interval [CI], 47 to 68); the rate of complete response was 26%, the rate of partial response was 30%, and the rate of stable disease for at least 6 months was 2%. The rate of extracranial clinical benefit was 56% (95% CI, 46 to 67). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 55% of patients, including events involving the central nervous system in 7%. One patient died from immune-related myocarditis. The safety profile of the regimen was similar to that reported in patients with melanoma who do not have brain metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab had clinically meaningful intracranial efficacy, concordant with extracranial activity, in patients with melanoma who had untreated brain metastases. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and the National Cancer Institute; CheckMate 204 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02320058 .).


Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Encefálicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Inmunoterapia , Ipilimumab/uso terapéutico , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anticuerpos Monoclonales/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Neoplasias Encefálicas/secundario , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Inmunoterapia/efectos adversos , Ipilimumab/efectos adversos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Melanoma/secundario , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nivolumab
20.
J Transl Med ; 19(1): 144, 2021 04 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33827609

RESUMEN

As part of the 2020 Immunotherapy Bridge virtual congress (December 2nd-3rd, Italy), the Great Debate session featured counterpoint views from leading experts on three clinical questions in immunotherapy today. The first of these was whether antitumoral vaccination is still a treatment option. The second topic debated whether anti-programmed death (PD)-1/PD-ligand (L)1 blockade should be the backbone for immunotherapy combination. Finally, the use of innovative study designs and surrogate endpoints was considered from both an academic and industry perspective. For each topic, two experts presented the argument and counter-argument in support of two different points of view. As with previous Bridge congresses, the debates were assigned by meeting Chairs and positions taken by experts during the debates may not have necessarily reflected their respective personal view. The views summarised in this article are based on available evidence but may reflect personal interpretation of these data, clinical experience and subjective opinion of the speaker.


Asunto(s)
Inmunoterapia , Italia
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA