Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: extended 8-year follow-up results of efficacy and safety from the phase III CheckMate 214 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab+ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) has demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) and durable response benefits versus sunitinib (SUN) with long-term follow-up in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). We report updated analyses with 8 years median follow-up from CheckMate 214. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with aRCC (N=1096) were randomized to NIVO 3 mg/kg plus IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W × four doses, followed by NIVO (3 mg/kg or 240 mg Q2W or 480 mg Q4W); or SUN (50 mg) once daily for 4 weeks on, 2 weeks off. Endpoints included OS, and independent radiology review committee-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) in intermediate/poor-risk (I/P; primary), intent-to-treat (ITT; secondary), and favorable-risk (FAV; exploratory) patients. RESULTS: With 8 years (99.1 months) median follow-up, the HR (95% CI) for OS with NIVO+IPI versus SUN was 0.72 (0.62-0.83) in ITT patients, 0.69 (0.59-0.81) in I/P patients, and 0.82 (0.60-1.13) in FAV patients. PFS probabilities at 90 months were 22.8% versus 10.8% (ITT), 25.4% versus 8.5% (I/P), and 12.7% versus 17.0% (FAV), respectively. ORR with NIVO+IPI versus SUN was 39.5% versus 33.0% (ITT), 42.4% versus 27.5% (I/P), and 29.6% versus 51.6% (FAV). Rates of complete response were higher with NIVO+IPI versus SUN in all IMDC risk groups (ITT, 12.0% versus 3.5%; I/P, 11.8% versus 2.6%; FAV, 12.8% versus 6.5%). Median duration of response (95% CI) with NIVO+IPI versus SUN was 76.2 versus 25.1 months [59.1-not estimable (NE) versus 19.8-33.2; ITT], 82.8 versus 19.8 months [54.1-NE versus 16.4-26.4; I/P], and 61.5 versus 33.2 months [27.8-NE versus 24.8-51.4; FAV]). Incidence of treatment-related adverse events was consistent with previous reports. Exploratory post hoc analyses are reported for FAV patients, those receiving subsequent therapy based on their response status, clinical subpopulations, and adverse events over time. CONCLUSIONS: Superior survival, durable response benefits, and a manageable safety profile were maintained with NIVO+IPI versus SUN at 8 years, the longest phase III follow-up for a first-line checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy in aRCC.

Updated efficacy results from the JAVELIN Renal 101 trial: first-line avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The phase 3 JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (NCT02684006) demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) with first-line avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). We report updated efficacy data from the second interim analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with aRCC were randomized (1 : 1) to receive avelumab (10 mg/kg) intravenously every 2 weeks plus axitinib (5 mg) orally twice daily or sunitinib (50 mg) orally once daily for 4 weeks (6-week cycle). The two independent primary end points were PFS and overall survival (OS) among patients with programmed death ligand 1-positive (PD-L1+) tumors. Key secondary end points were OS and PFS in the overall population. RESULTS: Of 886 patients, 442 were randomized to the avelumab plus axitinib arm and 444 to the sunitinib arm; 270 and 290 had PD-L1+ tumors, respectively. After a minimum follow-up of 13 months (data cut-off 28 January 2019), PFS was significantly longer in the avelumab plus axitinib arm than in the sunitinib arm {PD-L1+ population: hazard ratio (HR) 0.62 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.490-0.777]}; one-sided P < 0.0001; median 13.8 (95% CI 10.1-20.7) versus 7.0 months (95% CI 5.7-9.6); overall population: HR 0.69 (95% CI 0.574-0.825); one-sided P < 0.0001; median 13.3 (95% CI 11.1-15.3) versus 8.0 months (95% CI 6.7-9.8)]. OS data were immature [PD-L1+ population: HR 0.828 (95% CI 0.596-1.151); one-sided P = 0.1301; overall population: HR 0.796 (95% CI 0.616-1.027); one-sided P = 0.0392]. CONCLUSION: Among patients with previously untreated aRCC, treatment with avelumab plus axitinib continued to result in a statistically significant improvement in PFS versus sunitinib; OS data were still immature. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT02684006.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced renal cell carcinoma: experience to date and future directions.

In recent years, there has been dramatic expansion of the treatment armamentarium for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC), including drugs targeting vascular endothelial growth factor and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathways. Despite these advances, patient outcomes remain suboptimal, underscoring the need for therapeutic interventions with novel mechanisms of action. The advent of immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors has led to significant changes in the treatment landscape for several solid malignancies. Specifically, drugs targeting the programmed death 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated antigen (CTLA-4) pathways have demonstrated considerable clinical efficacy and gained regulatory approval as single-agent or combination therapy for the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, aRCC, advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, urothelial cancer and Hodgkin lymphoma. In aRCC, the PD-1 inhibitor nivolumab was approved in both the United States and Europe for the treatment of patients who have received prior therapy, based on improved overall survival compared with the mTOR inhibitor everolimus. Other checkpoint inhibitors, including the CTLA-4 inhibitor ipilimumab in combination with several agents, and the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab, are in various stages of clinical development in patients with aRCC. In this review, current evidence related to the clinical use of checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of patients with aRCC is discussed, including information on the frequency and management of unconventional responses and the management of immune-related adverse events. In addition, perspectives on the future use of checkpoint inhibitors are discussed, including the potential value of treatment beyond progression, the potential use in earlier lines of care or in combination with other agents, and the identification of biomarkers to guide patient selection and enable individualization of therapy.

PD-L1 expression in nonclear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression in nonclear-cell RCC (non-ccRCC) and its association with clinical outcomes are unknown. METHODS: Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) specimens were obtained from 101 patients with non-ccRCC. PD-L1 expression was evaluated by immunohistochemistry in both tumor cell membrane and tumor-infiltrating mononuclear cells (TIMC). PD-L1 tumor positivity was defined as ≥5% tumor cell membrane staining. For PD-L1 expression in TIMC, a combined score based on the extent of infiltrate and percentage of positive cells was used. Baseline clinico-pathological characteristics and outcome data [time to recurrence (TTR) and overall survival (OS)] were correlated with PD-L1 staining. RESULTS: Among 101 patients, 11 (10.9%) were considered PD-L1+ in tumor cells: 2/36 (5.6%) of chromophobe RCC, 5/50 (10%) of papillary RCC, 3/10 (30%) of Xp11.2 translocation RCC and 1/5 (20%) of collecting duct carcinoma. PD-L1 positivity (PD-L1+) in tumor cells was significantly associated with higher stage (P = 0.01) and grade (P = 0.03), as well as shorter OS (P < 0.001). On the other hand, PD-L1 positivity by TIMC was observed in 57 (56.4%) patients: 13/36 (36.1%) of chromophobe RCC, 30/50 (60%) of papillary RCC, 9/10 (90%) of Xp11.2 translocation RCC and 5/5 (100%) of collecting duct carcinoma. A trend toward shorter OS was observed in patients with PD-L1+ in TIMC (P = 0.08). PD-L1+ in both tumor cell membrane and TIMC cells were associated with shorter TTR (P = 0.02 and P = 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSION: In non-ccRCC, patients with PD-L1+ tumors appear to have worse clinical outcomes, although only PD-L1 positivity in tumor cells is associated with higher tumor stage and grade.

Cox-2 inhibition enhances the activity of sunitinib in human renal cell carcinoma xenografts.

BACKGROUND: Sunitinib (Su), a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGFR, is effective at producing tumour response in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (cRCC), but resistance to therapy is inevitable. As COX-2 is a known mediator of tumour growth, we explored the potential benefit of COX-2 inhibition in combination with VEGFR inhibition in attempts at delaying tumour progression on Su. METHODS: COX-2 expression was compared with areas of hypoxia in tumours that progressed on Su vs untreated tumours. Mice bearing human cRCC xenografts were treated with Su and the COX-2 inhibitor, celecoxib, and the effects on tumour growth were assessed. Sequential vs concurrent regimens were compared. RESULTS: COX-2 expression was increased in cRCC xenografts in areas of tumour hypoxia. The combination of Su and celecoxib achieved longer times to tumour progression compared to treatment with either agent alone or to untreated control animals in four models. This effect was seen with concurrent but not with sequential therapy. CONCLUSION: COX-2 inhibition can extend the effectiveness of VEGFR inhibition. This effect is dependent on the timing of therapy. Clinical trials combining Su and COX-2 inhibitors should be considered as a means delaying time to progression on sunitinib in patients with metastatic cRCC.

Extended follow-up from JAVELIN Renal 101: subgroup analysis of avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib by the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk group in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We report updated data for avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma from the third interim analysis of the phase III JAVELIN Renal 101 trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and duration of response per investigator assessment (RECIST version 1.1) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated in the overall population and in International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups; safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Overall, median OS [95% confidence interval (CI)] was not reached [42.2 months-not estimable (NE)] with avelumab plus axitinib versus 37.8 months (31.4-NE) with sunitinib [hazard ratio (HR) 0.79, 95% CI 0.643-0.969; one-sided P = 0.0116], and median PFS (95% CI) was 13.9 months (11.1-16.6 months) versus 8.5 months (8.2-9.7 months), respectively (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.568-0.785; one-sided P < 0.0001). In patients with IMDC favorable-, intermediate-, poor-, or intermediate plus poor-risk disease, respectively, HRs (95% CI) for OS with avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib were 0.66 (0.356-1.223), 0.84 (0.649-1.084), 0.60 (0.399-0.912), and 0.79 (0.636-0.983), and HRs (95% CIs) for PFS were 0.71 (0.490-1.016), 0.71 (0.578-0.866), 0.45 (0.304-0.678), and 0.66 (0.550-0.787), respectively. ORRs, complete response rates, and durations of response favored avelumab plus axitinib overall and across all risk groups. In the avelumab plus axitinib arm, 81.1% had a grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), and incidences of TEAEs and immune-related AEs were highest <6 months after randomization. CONCLUSIONS: Avelumab plus axitinib continues to show improved efficacy versus sunitinib and a tolerable safety profile overall and across IMDC risk groups. The OS trend favors avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib, but data remain immature; follow-up is ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT02684006; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02684006.

Increased mobilisation of circulating endothelial progenitors in von Hippel-Lindau disease and renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Circulating endothelial cells (CECs) are a candidate biomarker for monitoring angiogenesis in cancer. Circulating endothelial cell subsets are mobilised by angiogenic mediators. Because of the highly angiogenic phenotype of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), we sought to assess the potential of CECs as a marker of RCC in patients with von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) disease and those with sporadic RCC. METHODS: We performed multicolour flow cytometry to enumerate CECs in patients with RCC, patients with VHL disease with and without RCC, and normal subjects. Two subsets of CECs were evaluated: mature CECs (mCECs) and circulating endothelial progenitors (CEPs). RESULTS: In patients with VHL disease and RCC and those with sporadic RCC (N=10), CEPs and the CEP:mCEC ratio were higher than in normal subjects (N=17) (median CEPs: 0.97 vs 0.19 cells µl(-1), respectively, P<0.01; median CEP:mCEC: 0.92 vs 0.58, respectively, P=0.04). However, in patients with VHL without RCC, CECs were not increased. In paired pre- and post-nephrectomy RCC patient samples (N=20), CEPs decreased after surgery (median difference 0.02 cells µl(-1), -0.06 to 1.2; P=0.05). CONCLUSION: Circulating endothelial progenitors were elevated in RCC, but not in patients with VHL without RCC. Circulating endothelial progenitor enumeration merits further investigation as a monitoring strategy for patients with VHL.

A matching-adjusted indirect comparison of combination nivolumab plus ipilimumab with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors for the treatment of BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma☆.

BACKGROUND: Approved first-line treatments for patients with BRAF V600-mutant advanced melanoma include nivolumab (a programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor) plus ipilimumab (a cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 inhibitor; NIVO+IPI) and the BRAF/MEK inhibitors dabrafenib plus trametinib (DAB+TRAM), encorafenib plus binimetinib (ENCO+BINI), and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib (VEM+COBI). Results from prospective randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing these treatments have not yet been reported. This analysis evaluated the relative efficacy and safety of NIVO+IPI versus DAB+TRAM, ENCO+BINI, and VEM+COBI in patients with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma using a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review identified RCTs for DAB+TRAM, ENCO+BINI, and VEM+COBI in patients with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma. Individual patient-level data for NIVO+IPI were derived from the phase III CheckMate 067 trial (BRAF-mutant cohort) and restricted to match the inclusion/exclusion criteria of the comparator trials. Treatment effects for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards and time-varying hazard ratio (HR) models. Safety outcomes (grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events) with NIVO+IPI and the comparators were compared. RESULTS: In the Cox proportional hazards analysis, NIVO+IPI showed improved OS compared with DAB+TRAM (HR = 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-0.73), ENCO+BINI (HR = 0.60; CI, 0.42-0.85), and VEM+COBI (HR = 0.50; CI, 0.36-0.70) for the overall study period. In the time-varying analysis, NIVO+IPI was associated with significant improvements in OS and PFS compared with the BRAF/MEK inhibitors 12 months after treatment initiation. There were no significant differences between NIVO+IPI and BRAF/MEK inhibitor treatment from 0 to 12 months. Safety outcomes favored DAB+TRAM over NIVO+IPI, whereas NIVO+IPI was comparable to VEM+COBI. CONCLUSION: Results of this MAIC demonstrated durable OS and PFS benefits for patients with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma treated with NIVO+IPI compared with BRAF/MEK inhibitors, with the greatest benefits noted after 12 months.

Phase 2 trial of sunitinib and gemcitabine in patients with sarcomatoid and/or poor-risk metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Michaelson MD, McKay RR, Werner L, Atkins MB, Van Allen EM, Olivier KM, Song J, Signoretti S, McDermott DF, Choueiri TK.Cancer. 2015 Oct 1;121(19):3435-43. [Epub 2015 Jun 8]. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29503.

BACKGROUND: Sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is associated with an aggressive biology and a poor prognosis. Poor-risk RCC is defined by clinical prognostic factors and demonstrates similarly aggressive behavior. No standard treatment exists for patients with sarcomatoid RCC, and treatment options for patients with poor-risk disease are of limited benefit. The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy of antiangiogenic therapy in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy in clinically aggressive RCC. METHODS: This was a phase 2, single-arm trial of sunitinib and gemcitabine in patients with sarcomatoid or poor-risk RCC. The primary end point was the objective response rate (ORR). Secondary end points included the time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), safety, and biomarker correlatives. RESULTS: Overall, 39 patients had sarcomatoid RCC, and 33 had poor-risk RCC. The ORR was 26% for patients with sarcomatoid RCC and 24% for patients with poor-risk RCC. The median TTP and OS for patients with sarcomatoid RCC were 5 and 10 months, respectively. For patients with poor-risk disease, the median TTP and OS were 5.5 and 15 months, respectively. Patients whose tumors had>10% sarcomatoid histology had a higher clinical benefit rate (ORR plus stable disease) than those with≤10% sarcomatoid histology (P = 0.04). The most common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events included neutropenia (n = 20), anemia (n = 10), and fatigue (n = 7). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that antiangiogenic therapy and cytotoxic chemotherapy are an active and well-tolerated combination for patients with aggressive RCC. The combination may be more efficacious than either therapy alone and is currently under further investigation.

High-dose recombinant interleukin-2 alone: a regimen with limited activity in the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Sixteen patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma were treated with high-dose bolus recombinant interleukin-2 (rIL-2) alone at a dose and schedule identical to those that produced a 35% response rate among 72 patients in a trial reported by the Surgery Branch, National Cancer Institute (NCI), Bethesda, Md, in which rIL-2 plus lymphokine-activated killer (LAK) cells was used for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma. Patients received two 5-day cycles of 100,000 Cetus U/kg (600,000 IU/kg) of rIL-2 infused intravenously over 15 minutes every 8 hours; each treatment cycle was separated by 1 week. No objective responses were seen. The toxicity of rIL-2 given alone at these high doses was similar to that noted with high-dose rIL-2-LAK cell therapy. The lack of responses seen in this trial also differed from the 21% response rate observed by the NCI Surgery Branch, using rIL-2 alone at an identical schedule and dose in 56 patients with renal cell carcinoma. Only minor differences in such recognized prognostic variables as performance status, tumor burden, and rIL-2 dose intensity were noted between this study and other trials reported by the NCI Surgery Branch and by the IL-2-LAK Working Group. Our analysis indicates that, because of the smaller number of patients in our trial, not enough subjects were included with the ideal characteristics to attain the 21% response rate seen in the NCI study. However, the precise nature of these characteristics remains unclear.

Interaction of an alpha-melanocyte-stimulating hormone-diphtheria toxin fusion protein with melanotropin receptors in human melanoma metastases.

A hybrid toxin targeted to melanotropin receptors and selectively cytotoxic to melanoma cell lines in vitro has recently been developed. The toxin, a recombinant fusion protein (designated DAB389-MSH), contains the peptide sequences of alpha-melanocyte-stimulating hormone (alpha-MSH) and the catalytic (cytotoxic; Fragment A) and lipophilic (part of Fragment B) domains of diphtheria toxin. In the present study, binding of DAB389-MSH to melanotropin receptors in biopsy specimens of human and mouse melanoma metastases was assessed by measuring its ability to inhibit binding of a radiolabeled, superpotent analogue of alpha-MSH (125I-[Nle4,D-Phe7]-alpha-MSH; 125I-NDP-MSH) and comparing its potency in this system with those of the established ligands NDP-MSH and alpha-MSH. Radioligand binding to tissue sections in vitro was localized and quantified by autoradiography and image analysis. DAB389-MSH inhibited binding of 125I-NDP-MSH to experimental murine B16-F1C23 melanoma metastasis tissue and to melanoma metastases of three patients. In both mouse and human melanoma tissues, concentration-response relationships for DAB389-MSH-mediated inhibition of 125I-NDP-MSH binding were parallel, and its maximal effects were comparable in magnitude, to those of NDP-MSH and alpha-MSH. Half-maximal peptide concentrations for inhibition of 125I-NDP-MSH binding to mouse melanoma tissue sections were: NDP-MSH, 0.63 nM; alpha-MSH, 3.14 nM; and DAB389-MSH, 10.1 nM. In human melanoma tissues, the respective half-maximal peptide concentrations for inhibition of 125I-NDP-MSH binding to mouse melanoma tissue sections were: NDP-MSH, 1.80 nM; alpha-MSH, 2.43 nM; and DAB389-MSH, 11.9 nM. Taken together, these results suggest that NDP-MSH, alpha-MSH, and DAB389-MSH bind to a common melanotropin receptor in human metastatic melanoma cells. Since previous work has shown that melanotropin receptors are detectable in melanoma metastases of about 80% of human patients, malignant melanoma cells of many patients may be susceptible to killing by the melanotropin receptor-targeted cytotoxin DAB389-MSH.

Economic analysis of adjuvant interferon alfa-2b in high-risk melanoma based on projections from Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 1684.

PURPOSE: Interferon alfa-2b (IFN) in a randomized clinical trial (E1684) prolonged relapse-free and total survival in high-risk resected melanoma. However, the costs and toxicities of IFN are barriers to its widespread use. This study was undertaken to analyze the projected costs and long-term benefits of IFN by combining prospectively collected data on IFN actual dosage, time of recurrence, and survival with secondary data on long-term melanoma recurrence risks to project the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant IFN compared with observation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hypothetical cohorts of 50-year-old melanoma patients whose mean IFN dosage and clinical results were directly taken from E1684 were included in the study. Melanoma recurrence risks beyond 5 years were derived from international databases. Melanoma recurrence care costs and quality-of-life adjustments, when considered, were based on expert consensus. End points were incremental costs, life-years gained, and cost per life-year gained with and without quality-of-life adjustments. RESULTS: The IFN cohort was projected to have an increased (undiscounted) survival of 0.52 years at 7 years and 1.90 years over a lifetime. The projected incremental cost (in 1996 United States dollars) per life-year gained in the IFN cohort ranged from $13,700 after 35 years to $32,600 at 7 years, the median follow-up of E1684. Using assigned quality-of-life values for IFN and recurrence, the lifetime cost per quality adjusted life-year increased to $15,200. Even if treatment costs for recurrence were excluded, the lifetime incremental cost per life-year gained was $21,600. CONCLUSION: The cost and toxicity of IFN must be balanced against its projected benefits in high-risk melanoma. The derived cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios for IFN were comparable to other cancer interventions for which cost-effectiveness analysis has been performed.

Phase III trial of dacarbazine versus dacarbazine with interferon alpha-2b versus dacarbazine with tamoxifen versus dacarbazine with interferon alpha-2b and tamoxifen in patients with metastatic malignant melanoma: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the response rate, time to treatment failure (TTF), overall survival, and toxicity in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with dacarbazine alone, dacarbazine plus interferon (IFN), dacarbazine plus tamoxifen (TMX), or dacarbazine plus IFN plus TMX. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred seventy-one patients (258 were eligible) were randomized in a 2 x 2 factorial design to receive one of the above treatments. The trial was designed to detect a 50% improvement in survival with 83% power. RESULTS: Nine complete (CRs) and 18 partial responses (PRs) were observed in the patients who received treatments that contained IFN compared with four CRs and 18 PRs in the patients who received treatments that did not contain IFN. Five CRs and 20 PRs occurred in patients treated with TMX compared with eight CRs and 16 PRs in those treated without TMX. Response differences were nonsignificant. The overall median TTF was 2.6 months, and the overall median survival was 8.9 months. There was no significant difference in TTF or survival among any of the different treatments. Poor performance status (PS), hepatic metastases, and weight loss were significant adverse prognostic factors. Twenty-three patients had a TTF greater than 20 months, and these durable responses were evenly distributed among the treatment arms. Significantly more severe and life-threatening toxic events occurred with treatments that contained IFN. CONCLUSION: Neither IFN, TMX, nor the combination significantly improved the response rate, TTF, or survival when added to dacarbazine, but IFN significantly increased toxicity.

Interleukin-2 and high-dose cisplatin in patients with metastatic melanoma: a pilot study.

In this pilot study of metastatic melanoma, interleukin-2 (IL-2) and cisplatin (CDDP) chemotherapy were combined using an alternating schedule designed to explore potential synergism between these modalities. Bolus IL-2 was given at a dose of 600,000 IU/kg intravenously (IV) every 8 hours, days 1 to 5 and 15 to 19, followed by high-dose CDDP administered by two different regimens: (A) 135 to 150 mg/m2 IV bolus over 30 minutes with the chemoprotectant WR-2721 910 mg/m2 or (B) 50 mg/m2 IV over 2 hours every day for 3 days. The trial design allowed an assessment of response to each phase of therapy. Among 27 assessable patients, there were 10 (37%) overall responses, including three (11%) complete responses (CRs) with durations of 9, 16, and 30+ months. Tumor regression was noted in seven patients (partial response [PR], four; minor response [MR], three; response rate [RR], four of 27 [15%]) after IL-2 administration and in 14 patients (PR, 12; MR, two; RR, 12 of 27 [44%]) after CDDP treatment, demonstrating noncrossresistance between the components of the regimen. Major PRs (greater than 90% reduction of tumor burden) or CRs were only seen in patients responding to IL-2. Toxicity during IL-2 therapy was typical for high-dose IL-2 protocols and was reversible. Among the first 20 patients treated with CDDP regimen A, there were eight episodes of grade IV nephrotoxicity (creatinine level greater than 5.0 mg/dL), including three of six patients treated with an initial CDDP dose of 135 mg/m2. This side effect was more frequent among patients with liver metastasis (P less than .05, Fisher's exact test). No significant nephrotoxicity was noted in seven patients treated on regimen B. Although ototoxicity was frequent, minimal bone marrow and neurologic toxicity was noted. There were no treatment-related deaths. This combination showed at least additive activity against melanoma, and the more protracted CDDP schedule was well tolerated. This regimen may serve as a model for future combined immunotherapy and chemotherapy trials in metastatic melanoma.

Phase I evaluation of recombinant interleukin-2 in patients with advanced malignant disease.

Seventeen patients with refractory malignant tumors were treated with recombinant human interleukin-2 (IL-2) administered by weekly bolus intravenous (IV) injection in a phase I dose escalation trial. Patients received 10,000 to 1,000,000 U/m2 per injection over a course of 3 to 33 weeks. Toxicity was dose related and consisted primarily of fever, chills, nausea, and vomiting. Hypotension was observed at doses of 500,000 U/m2 or higher and in one instance was sufficiently severe to require pressors. No tumor regression was seen and all patients eventually developed progressive disease. Blood levels of cortisol, ACTH, prolactin, and growth hormone as well as the acute phase reactant C-reactive protein (CRP) increased after the administration of IL-2 in most patients. Serum IL-2 levels in excess of 250 U/mL were detected five minutes after an IV injection of 1,000,000 U/m2, after which the levels declined with a half-life of approximately 25 minutes. No alteration in lymphocyte surface phenotype or enhancement in natural cell-mediated cytotoxicity against natural killer (NK)-sensitive and resistant tumor cell lines was observed when these parameters were measured weekly just before the IL-2 injections. However, a dramatic but transient decline in circulating lymphocytes and NK activity was noted within hours of receiving IL-2. This effect was independent of fever and was not abrogated by pretreatment with ibuprofen or metyrapone. The majority of patients developed serum IgG antibodies of IL-2 detectable with a sensitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and a nitrocellulose dot blot assay. The development of anti-IL-2 antibodies was not associated with symptoms suggestive of serum sickness, reductions in serum complement levels, or deterioration in lymphocyte tumoricidal activity. This investigation provides insight into the in vivo actions of this potent biological response modifier and will assist in the design of future studies with IL-2 administered alone or in conjunction with other treatment modalities.

Patient preferences for adjuvant interferon alfa-2b treatment.

PURPOSE: Although trials of adjuvant interferon alfa-2b (IFN alpha-2b) in high-risk melanoma patients suggest improvement in disease-free survival, it is unclear whether treatment offers improvement in overall survival. Widespread use of adjuvant IFN alpha-2b has been tempered by its significant toxicity. To quantify the trade-offs between IFN alpha-2b toxicity and survival, we assessed patient utilities for health states associated with IFN therapy. Utilities are measures of preference for a particular health state on a scale of 0 (death) to 1 (perfect health). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We assessed utilities for health states associated with adjuvant IFN among 107 low-risk melanoma patients using the standard gamble technique. Health states described four IFN alpha-2b toxicity scenarios and the following three posttreatment outcomes: disease-free health and melanoma recurrence (with or without IFN alpha-2b) leading to cancer death. We also asked patients the improvement in 5-year disease-free survival they would require to tolerate IFN. RESULTS: Utilities for melanoma recurrence with or without IFN alpha-2b were significantly lower than utilities for all IFN alpha-2b toxicities but were not significantly different from each other. At least half of the patients were willing to tolerate mild-moderate and severe IFN alpha-2b toxicity for 4% and 10% improvements, respectively, in 5-year disease-free survival. CONCLUSION: On average, patients rate quality of life with melanoma recurrence much lower than even severe IFN alpha-2b toxicity. These results suggest that recurrence-free survival is highly valued by patients. The utilities measured in our study can be applied directly to quality-of-life determinations in clinical trials of adjuvant IFN alpha-2b to measure the net benefit of therapy.

High-dose interferon alfa-2b does not diminish antibody response to GM2 vaccination in patients with resected melanoma: results of the Multicenter Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Phase II Trial E2696.

PURPOSE: High-dose interferon alfa-2b (IFNalpha2b) is the only established adjuvant therapy of resectable high-risk melanoma. GM2-KLH/QS-21 (GMK) is a chemically defined vaccine that is one of the best developed of a range of vaccine candidates for melanoma. A single-institution phase III trial conducted at Memorial Hospital served as the impetus for an intergroup adjuvant E1694/S9512/C509801 trial, which recently completed enrollment of 880 patients. To build on the apparent benefit of IFNalpha2b in resectable high-risk American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage IIB or III melanoma, this phase II study was designed to evaluate the combination of GMK and IFNalpha2b. The E2696 trial was undertaken to evaluate the toxicity and other effects of the established adjuvant high-dose IFNalpha2b regimen in relation to immune responses to GMK and to evaluate the potential clinical and immunologic effects of the combined therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This trial enrolled 107 patients with resectable high- or very high-risk melanoma (AJCC stages IIB, III, and IV). RESULTS: The results demonstrate that IFNalpha2b does not significantly inhibit immunoglobulin M or G serologic responses to the vaccine and that the combination of high-dose IFNalpha2b and GMK is well tolerated in this patient population. CONCLUSION: Cox analysis of the results of the combination with IFNalpha2b show improvement in the relapse-free survival of patients with very high-risk melanoma (including those with resectable M1 disease).

Phase I evaluation of thrice-daily intravenous bolus interleukin-4 in patients with refractory malignancy.

PURPOSE: A phase I dose-escalation trial of recombinant human interleukin-4 (IL-4) was performed to determine its toxicity, biologic activity, and potential antineoplastic effects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten patients with refractory malignancies received IL-4 by bolus intravenous injection every 8 hours on days 1 to 5 and 15 to 19 (maximum, 28 doses) of a 31-day study period. Three patients received 10 micrograms/kg per dose and seven received 15 micrograms/kg per dose of IL-4. RESULTS: Toxic symptoms noted at the second dose level included nasal congestion, diarrhea, nausea and vomiting, fatigue, anorexia, headache, dyspnea, and capillary leak syndrome (median weight gain, 6.1%; range, 3.4% to 11.7%). Fever or sustained hypotension sufficient to require pressors did not occur. Decreases in lymphocyte count and serum bicarbonate, sodium, albumin, fibrinogen and immunoglobulin (Ig) levels, and increases in hematocrit, prothrombin time/partial thromboplastin time (PT/PTT), soluble CD23, and, occasionally, serum creatinine and transaminases occurred. All side effects resolved by day 31. Phenotypic analysis of peripheral-blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) showed a decrease in the percentage of circulating CD16 and CD14(+) cells. Plasma tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and IL-1 beta levels were unaffected, whereas serum C-reactive protein (CRP) concentrations increased slightly and plasma IL-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1RA) levels increased markedly. No tumor responses were observed. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that 10 micrograms/kg per dose of IL-4 is the maximum-tolerated dose for this schedule, although 15 micrograms/kg per dose can be tolerated if more intensive, but still non-intensive care unit level care is provided. The results of this study should aid in the design of future phase II trials that involve IL-4 alone or phase I studies that combine IL-4 with other cytokines such as IL-2.

Randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial of high-dose interleukin-2 in combination with a soluble p75 tumor necrosis factor receptor immunoglobulin G chimera in patients with advanced melanoma and renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was performed to compare the toxicity and biologic effects of treatment with high-dose intravenous (IV) bolus interleukin-2 (IL-2) plus the recombinant human soluble p75 tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor immunoglobulin G (IgG) chimera (rhuTNFR:Fc) with high-dose IL-2 alone in patients with advanced melanoma and renal cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty patients with advanced melanoma or renal cell carcinoma were randomized to receive IL-2 (Chiron, Emeryville, CA) 600,000 IU/kg every 8 hours on days 1 to 5 and 15 to 19 (maximum, 28 doses) combined with placebo or the rhuTNFR:Fc fusion protein (Immunex, Seattle, WA) 10 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15 and 5 mg/m2 on days 3, 5, 17, and 19. The impact of rhuTNFR:Fc on IL-2 toxicity and biologic effects was evaluated. RESULTS: No clinically significant difference in toxicity was observed in the two treatment arms. The adjusted median number of IL-2 doses administered during cycle 1 was 24.5 (range, seven to 28) and 21.5 (range, five to 27) for the placebo and rhuTNFR:Fc arms, respectively (P = .544). IL-2-induced TNF bioactivity, neutrophil chemotactic defect, and serum IL-6, IL-8, and IL-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1RA) induction were suppressed by rhuTNFR:Fc. Two of nine assessable patients (22%) on IL-2/placebo and three of 10 patients (30%) on IL-2/rhuTNFR:Fc responded. CONCLUSION: Despite evidence of in vitro neutralization of TNF functional activity and partial inhibition of other secondary biologic effects of IL-2, rhuTNFR:Fc does not reduce the clinical toxicity associated with high-dose IL-2 therapy. These results suggest that the toxicity and antitumor effects of IL-2 treatment are independent of circulating TNF.

Randomized phase III trial of treatment with high-dose interleukin-2 either alone or in combination with interferon alfa-2a in patients with advanced melanoma.

PURPOSE: To compare the response rate, survival, and toxicity of treatment with high-dose intravenous (IV) bolus interleukin-2 (IL-2) plus interferon alfa-2a (IFN-alpha) with high-dose IL-2 alone in patients with advanced melanoma in a randomized phase III trial design. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty-five patients with advanced melanoma were randomly assigned to receive IL-2 6 X 10(6) U/m2 per dose every 8 hours as tolerated for a maximum of 14 doses on days 1 through 5 and 15 through 19, or IL-2 4.5 X 10(6) U/m2 per dose, plus IFN-alpha 3 X 10(6) U/m2 using an identical schedule. A planned interim analysis was performed after 85 patients were entered, which forms the basis for this report. RESULTS: Partial response (PR) occurred in two of 44 patients (5%; 95% confidence interval, 1% to 15%) receiving IL-2 alone, compared with four of 41 patients (10%; 95% confidence interval, 3% to 23%) receiving IL-2/IFN-alpha (P = .30). There were no complete responses (CRs). The median duration of response was 11.5 months (range, 2.0 to 15.7+). There was no significant difference in the median survival duration for patients receiving IL-2 alone (10.2 months) compared with patients receiving IL-2/IFN-alpha (9.7 months). The median and mean number of doses of IL-2 were equivalent in both groups, as was toxicity. There were three treatment-related deaths, two in the IL-2-alone arm and one in the IL-2/IFN-alpha arm. The trial was terminated after the first interim analysis based on predefined early-stopping rules, which included termination if the response rate in the IL-2/IFN-alpha arm was less than 25%. CONCLUSION: Using the preparation, dose, and schedule of IL-2 in our trial, IFN-alpha failed to enhance significantly the response rate to high-dose IL-2 in the treatment of patients with advanced melanoma.