Treatment-free survival outcomes from the phase II study of nivolumab and salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab in advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (HCRN GU16-260-Cohort A).

BACKGROUND: As part of a partitioned survival analysis, treatment-free survival (TFS) can characterize the overall survival time patients spend between the cessation of immunotherapy and the start of subsequent therapy; both with and without toxicity. Significant TFS was reported for the nivolumab/ipilimumab arms of the CheckMate 067 and 214 trials for patients with advanced melanoma or renal cell carcinoma (aRCC), respectively, where immunotherapy was often halted for toxicity rather than a predefined treatment endpoint. We therefore sought to assess TFS in the HCRN GU16-260 trial, which was designed to reduce toxicity and cap immunotherapy duration. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 128 patients with clear-cell aRCC treated with first-line nivolumab monotherapy for up to 2 years. Salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab for up to 1 year was provided to eligible patients with disease progression at any point or stable disease at 48 weeks (29% of patients). TFS was defined as the area between Kaplan-Meier curves for a time from registration to protocol therapy cessation and for a time from registration to subsequent systemic therapy initiation or death, estimated from 36-month mean times. The time on or off protocol treatment with grade 3+treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) was also captured. RESULTS: At 36 months from enrollment, 68.3% of patients were alive: 96.8% of International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) favorable-risk patients and 56.6% of those with intermediate/poor-risk, respectively. The 36-month mean time on protocol therapy was 11.5 months including 0.6 months with grade 3+TRAEs (16.0 months for favorable-risk patients and 9.6 months for intermediated/poor-risk patients). The 36-month mean TFS for the whole population was 9.4 months (12.9 months including 1.5 months with grade 3+TRAEs for favorable-risk and 8.0 months including 1.0 months with grade 3+TRAEs for intermediate/poor-risk). At 36 months, 65.6% of favorable-risk patients and 27.1% of intermediate/poor-risk patients were alive and subsequent systemic treatment-free. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab monotherapy with salvage nivolumab/ipilimumab in non-responders is an active treatment approach in treatment-naïve patients with aRCC and, similar to nivolumab/ipilimumab in CheckMate 214, results in substantial TFS and toxicity-free TFS. TFS was greatest in patients with favorable-risk disease, supporting the use of an immunotherapy-only regimen in this population.

Facial palsy after administration of immune checkpoint inhibitors: case report, literature review and clinical care management.

Neurological immune-related adverse events (irAEs) due to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are rare complications of immunotherapy, particularly dreadful for patients and clinical teams. Indeed, neurological irAEs are potentially severe and their diagnosis require prompt recognition and treatment. Additionally, the spectrum of neurological irAEs is broad, affecting either neuromuscular junction, peripheral or central nervous system. Here, we described the case of a 55-year man with metastatic melanoma, facing a brutal right peripheral cerebral palsy after his third ipilimumab/nivolumab infusion. After the case presentation, we reviewed the literature about this rare complication of immunotherapy, and described its diagnosis work-up and clinical management.

Successful treatment of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related periaortitis.

We report a 64-year-old patient with melanoma receiving ipilimumab and nivolumab therapy who presented with a periaortic soft tissue mass around the abdominal aorta on restaging fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging. Clinical, laboratory, and radiologic findings resulted in a diagnosis of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related periaortitis. Periaortitis is a rare disease presenting with fibro-inflammatory tissue around the aorta and may lead to serious complications. Immune checkpoint inhibitors were discontinued, and the patient was treated with glucocorticoids, leading to a complete resolution of the periaortitis. To our knowledge, this is only the third reported case of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related periaortitis.

Binimetinib in combination with nivolumab or nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients with previously treated microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer with RAS mutations in an open-label phase 1b/2 study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with previously treated RAS-mutated microsatellite-stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), a multicenter open-label phase 1b/2 trial was conducted to define the safety and efficacy of the MEK1/MEK2 inhibitor binimetinib in combination with the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) nivolumab (anti-PD-1) or nivolumab and another ICI, ipilimumab (anti-CTLA4). METHODS: In phase 1b, participants were randomly assigned to Arm 1A (binimetinib 45 mg twice daily [BID] plus nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks [Q4W]) or Arm 1B (binimetinib 45 mg BID plus nivolumab 480 mg Q4W and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 8 weeks [Q8W]) to determine the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of binimetinib. The MTD/RP2D was defined as the highest dosage combination that did not cause medically unacceptable dose-limiting toxicities in more than 35% of treated participants in Cycle 1. During phase 2, participants were randomly assigned to Arm 2A (binimetinib MTD/RP2D plus nivolumab) or Arm 2B (binimetinib MTD/RP2D plus nivolumab and ipilimumab) to assess the safety and clinical activity of these combinations. RESULTS: In phase 1b, 21 participants were randomized to Arm 1A or Arm 1B; during phase 2, 54 participants were randomized to Arm 2A or Arm 2B. The binimetinib MTD/RP2D was determined to be 45 mg BID. In phase 2, no participants receiving binimetinib plus nivolumab achieved a response. Of the 27 participants receiving binimetinib, nivolumab, and ipilimumab, the overall response rate was 7.4% (90% CI: 1.3, 21.5). Out of 75 participants overall, 74 (98.7%) reported treatment-related adverse events (AEs), of whom 17 (22.7%) reported treatment-related serious AEs. CONCLUSIONS: The RP2D binimetinib regimen had a safety profile similar to previous binimetinib studies or nivolumab and ipilimumab combination studies. There was a lack of clinical benefit with either drug combination. Therefore, these data do not support further development of binimetinib in combination with nivolumab or nivolumab and ipilimumab in RAS-mutated MSS mCRC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03271047 (09/01/2017).

Cost-effectiveness of treating advanced melanoma with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes based on an international randomized phase 3 clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: In a multicenter, open-label randomized phase 3 clinical trial conducted in the Netherlands and Denmark, treatment with ex vivo-expanded tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL-NKI/CCIT) from autologous melanoma tumor compared with ipilimumab improved progression-free survival in patients with unresectable stage IIIC-IV melanoma after failure of first-line or second-line treatment. Based on this trial, we conducted a cost-utility analysis. METHODS: A Markov decision model was constructed to estimate expected costs (expressed in 2021€) and outcomes (quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) of TIL-NKI/CCIT versus ipilimumab in the Netherlands. The Danish setting was assessed in a scenario analysis. A modified societal perspective was applied over a lifetime horizon. TIL-NKI/CCIT production costs were estimated via activity-based costing. Through sensitivity analyses, uncertainties and their impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were assessed. RESULTS: Mean total undiscounted lifetime benefits were 4.47 life years (LYs) and 3.52 QALYs for TIL-NKI/CCIT and 3.33 LYs and 2.46 QALYs for ipilimumab. Total lifetime undiscounted costs in the Netherlands were €347,168 for TIL-NKI/CCIT (including €67,547 for production costs) compared with €433,634 for ipilimumab. Undiscounted lifetime cost in the Danish scenario were €337,309 and €436,135, respectively. This resulted in a dominant situation for TIL-NKI/CCIT compared with ipilimumab in both countries, meaning incremental QALYs were gained at lower costs. Survival probabilities, and utility in progressive disease affected the ICER most. CONCLUSION: Based on the data of a randomized phase 3 trial, treatment with TIL-NKI/CCIT in patients with unresectable stage IIIC-IV melanoma is cost-effective and cost-saving, both in the current Dutch and Danish setting. These findings led to inclusion of TIL-NKI/CCIT as insured care and treatment guidelines. Publicly funded development of the TIL-NKI/CCIT cell therapy shows realistic promise to further explore development of effective personalized treatment while warranting economic sustainability of healthcare systems.

The association of hypophysitis with immune checkpoint inhibitors use: Gaining insight through the FDA pharmacovigilance database.

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) marked a revolutionary change in cancer treatment and opened new avenues for cancer therapy, but ICI can also trigger immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Here, we investigated the publicly available US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database to gain insight into the possible association between immune checkpoint inhibitors and hypophysitis. Data on adverse events (AEs) due to hypophysitisfor nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, and atezolizumab were collected from the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System from the first quarter of 2004 to the second quarter of 2021, and the signals for hypophysitis associated with the four drugs were examined using the reporting odds ratio (ROR) method. The number of reported hypophysitis events ≥ 3 and the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of the ROR > 1 were considered positive for hypophysitis signals. A total of 1252 AE reports of hypophysitis associated with nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, and atezolizumab were collected, including 419, 149, 643, and 41 cases, respectively. The RORs of hypophysitis were 289.58 (95% CI 258.49-324.40), 171.74 (95% CI 144.91-203.54), 2248.57 (95% CI 2025.31-2496.45), and 97.29 (95% CI 71.28-132.79), respectively. All four drugs were statistically correlated with the target AE, with the correlation being, in descending order, ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and atezolizumab. Nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, and atezolizumab have all been associated with hypophysitis, which can negatively impact quality of life, and early recognition and management of immune checkpoint inhibitor-related hypophysitis is critical.

Outcome of adjuvant immunotherapy in a real-world nation-wide cohort of patients with melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have demonstrated promising outcomes for adjuvant immunotherapy in patients with resected melanoma. Real-life data provide valuable insights to support patient guidance and treatment decisions. METHODS: Observational population-based study examining a national cohort of patients with resected stage III-IV melanoma referred for adjuvant therapy. Data were extracted from the Danish Metastatic Melanoma Database (DAMMED). RESULTS: Between November 2018 and January 2022, 785 patients received adjuvant anti-PD-1. The majority had stage III resected melanoma (87%), normal LDH levels (80%), and performance score 0 (87%). Patients were followed for a median of 25.6 months (95%CI 24-28). The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were not reached. The RFS was 78% (95%CI 75-81), 66% (63-70), and 59% (55-63); MSS was 97% (95-98), 93% (91-95), and 87% (84-90) at 1-, 2-, and 3-year; respectively. Less than half (42%) of the patients finalized planned therapy, 32% discontinued due to toxicity, and 19% due to melanoma recurrence. Patients discontinuing adjuvant treatment prematurely, without recurrence, had similar outcomes as patients finalizing therapy. In a multivariable analysis, ipilimumab plus nivolumab did not improve outcomes compared to ipilimumab monotherapy as a first-line metastatic treatment after adjuvant anti-PD-1. CONCLUSION: Survival outcomes in real-world patients with melanoma treated with adjuvant anti-PD-1 align with results from the randomized controlled trials. Patients discontinuing therapy prematurely, for other reasons than recurrence, had similar outcomes as patients finalizing planned treatment. First-line metastatic treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab post-adjuvant anti-PD-1 did not show improved outcomes compared to ipilimumab/anti-PD-1 monotherapy.

UV1 telomerase vaccine with ipilimumab and nivolumab as second line treatment for pleural mesothelioma - A phase II randomised trial.

PURPOSE: The NIPU-trial investigates the effect of adding the telomerase vaccine UV1 to treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab for patients with pleural mesothelioma (PM). METHODS: In this phase 2 open-label trial, patients with PM progressing after first-line chemotherapy were randomised to receive ipilimumab and nivolumab alone (arm B) or combined with UV1 (arm A). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) as determined by BICR. It was estimated that 69 PFS events were needed to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.60 with 80% power and a one-sided alpha level of 0.10. RESULTS: 118 patients were randomised. The median PFS determined by blinded independent central review (BICR) was 4.2 months (95%CI 2.9-9.8) in arm A and 4.7 months (95%CI 3.9-7.0) in arm B (HR 1.01, 80%CI 0.75-1.36 P = 0.979), after a median follow-up of 12.5 months (95%CI 9.7-15.6). The investigator-determined median PFS was 4.3 months (95%CI 3.0-6.8) in arm A and 2.9 months (95%CI 2.4-5.5) in arm B (HR 0.60, 80%CI 0.45-0.81 P = 0.025). Confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by BICR was 31% in arm A and 16% in arm B (odds ratio 2.44 80%CI 1.35-4.49 P = 0.056). After a median follow-up time of 17.3 months (95%CI 15.8-22.9), the OS was 15.4 months (95%CI 11.1-22.6) in arm A and 11.1 months (95%CI 8.8-18.1) in arm B, (HR 0.73, 80%CI 0.53-1.0, P = 0.197). CONCLUSION: The primary endpoint was not met. Predefined analyses of response rates are in favour of adding the vaccine.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus the EXTREME regimen in recurrent/metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

In the CheckMate 651 study, nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus EXTREME (cisplatin/carboplatin + cetuximab + fluorouracil) regimen was compared for effectiveness. It is not known whether these immunotherapy agents are cost-effective for recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck (R/M SCCHN). The purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab with EXTREME in the first-line setting from the standpoint of third-party payers in the United States. The projecting of costs and outcomes over 15 years was done using a three-state partitioned survival model discounted by 3% per year. Long-term extrapolation of CheckMate 651 was used to model progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). The incremental net health benefit (INHB), incremental net monetary benefit (INMB), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. The uncertainty and stability of the model were accounted for via one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. As compared with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, EXTREME was associated with an increase of 0.154 life-years and 0.076 QALYs, as well as a cost increase of $572 per patient. The corresponding ICERs were $7545/QALY along with the values of INMB and INHB were $113,267 and 0.076 QALYs, respectively, at a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY. The probability of nivolumab plus ipilimumab being cost-effective was > 99% in patients with combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 1, CPS 1-19, or CPS ≥ 20. Moreover, hazard ratio for OS and body weight were the most sensitive parameters for the model. According to sensitivity analyses, these results were generally robust. In overall populations with R/M SCCHN, the EXTREME regimen is cost-effective compared with nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Given a WTP threshold of $150,000 per QALY, the probability of the EXTREME regiment being cost-effective compared with nivolumab and ipilimumab, was 64%. Importantly, there was heterogeneity in the cost-effectiveness probabilities, based on primary sites and expression levels of PD-L1. Therefore, tailored treatment based on individual patient and clinical characteristics, remains important, and may impact the cost-effectiveness of the regimens under study.

Inhibition of IL-25/IL-17RA improves immune-related adverse events of checkpoint inhibitors and reveals antitumor activity.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have improved outcomes and extended patient survival in several tumor types. However, ICIs often induce immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that warrant therapy cessation, thereby limiting the overall effectiveness of this class of therapeutic agents. Currently, available therapies used to treat irAEs might also blunt the antitumor activity of the ICI themselves. Therefore, there is an urgent need to identify treatments that have the potential to be administered alongside ICI to optimize their use. METHODS: Using a translationally relevant murine model of anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 antibodies-induced irAEs, we compared the safety and efficacy of prednisolone, anti-IL-6, anti-TNFɑ, anti-IL-25 (IL-17E), and anti-IL-17RA (the receptor for IL-25) administration to prevent irAEs and to reduce tumor size. RESULTS: While all interventions were adequate to inhibit the onset of irAEs pneumonitis and hepatitis, treatment with anti-IL-25 or anti-IL-17RA antibodies also exerted additional antitumor activity. Mechanistically, IL-25/IL-17RA blockade reduced the number of organ-infiltrating lymphocytes. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that IL-25/IL-17RA may serve as an additional target when treating ICI-responsive tumors, allowing for better tumor control while suppressing immune-related toxicities.

Phase 1b study of intraperitoneal ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients with recurrent gynecologic malignancies with peritoneal carcinomatosis.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has shown poor response rates in recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Intraperitoneal (i.p.) ICB may result in enhanced T cell activation and anti-tumor immunity. METHODS: In this phase 1b study, registered at Clinical. TRIALS: gov (NCT03508570), initial cohorts received i.p. nivolumab monotherapy, and subsequent cohorts received combination i.p. nivolumab every 2 weeks and i.p. ipilimumab every 6 weeks, guided by a Bayesian design. The primary objective was determination of the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of the combination. Secondary outcomes included toxicity, objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). FINDINGS: The trial enrolled 23 patients: 18 with ovarian cancer, 2 with uterine cancer, and 3 with cervical cancer. Study evaluable patients (n = 16) received a median of 2 prior lines of therapy (range: 1-8). Partial response was observed in 2 patients (12.5%; 1 ovarian, 1 uterine), and complete response was observed in 1 patient (6.3%) with cervical cancer, for an ORR of 18.8% (95% confidence interval: 4.0%-45.6%). The median duration of response was 14.8 months (range: 4.1-20.8), with one complete response ongoing. Median PFS and OS were 2.7 months and not reached, respectively. Grade 3 or higher immune-related adverse events occurred in 2 (8.7%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: i.p. administration of dual ICB is safe and demonstrated durable responses in a subset of patients with advanced gynecologic malignancy. The RP2D is 3 mg/kg i.p. nivolumab every 2 weeks plus 1 mg/kg ipilimumab every 6 weeks. FUNDING: This work was funded by Bristol Myers Squibb (CA209-9C7), an MD Anderson Cancer Center Support Grant (CA016672), the Ovarian Cancer Moon Shots Program, the Emerson Collective Fund, and a T32 training grant (CA101642).

Melanoma-Modern Treatment for Metastatic Melanoma.

ABSTRACT: Traditional chemotherapy has been ineffective in the treatment of metastatic melanoma. Until the use of checkpoint inhibitors, patients had very limited survival. Since the original US Food and Drug Administration approval of ipilimumab over a decade ago, the armamentarium of immunotherapeutic agents has expanded to include programmed cell death protein 1 and lymphocyte activation gene 3 antibodies, requiring a nuanced approach to the selection of frontline treatments, managing patients through recurrence and progression, and determining length of therapy. Herein, we review the existing evidence supporting current standard immunotherapy regimens and discuss the clinical decision-making involved in treating patients with metastatic melanoma with checkpoint inhibitors.

Treatment of Stage III Resectable Melanoma-Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Approaches.

ABSTRACT: Patients with stage III resectable melanoma carry a high risk of melanoma recurrence that ranges from approximately 40% to 90% at 5 years following surgical management alone. Postoperative systemic adjuvant therapy targets residual micrometastatic disease that could be the source of future recurrence and death from melanoma. Randomized phase III adjuvant trials reported significant improvements in overall survival with high-dose interferon α in 2 of 3 studies (compared with observation and GMK ganglioside vaccine) and with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 ipilimumab at 10 mg/kg compared with placebo and ipilimumab 3 mg/kg compared with high-dose interferon α. In the modern era, more recent phase III trials demonstrated significant recurrence-free survival improvements with anti-programmed cell death protein 1, pembrolizumab, and BRAF-MEK inhibitor combination dabrafenib-trametinib (for BRAF mutant melanoma) versus placebo. Furthermore, anti-programmed cell death protein 1, nivolumab and pembrolizumab have both been shown to significantly improve recurrence-free survival as compared with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg. For melanoma patients with clinically or radiologically detectable locoregionally advanced disease, emerging data support an important role for preoperative systemic neoadjuvant therapy. Importantly, a recent cooperative group trial (S1801) reported superior event-free survival rates with neoadjuvant versus adjuvant therapy. Collectively, current data from neoadjuvant immunotherapy and targeted therapy trials support a future change in clinical practice in favor of neoadjuvant therapy for eligible melanoma patients.

Selective activation of IFNγ-ipilimumab enhances the therapeutic effect and safety of ipilimumab.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy is a highly promising strategy for clinical treatment of cancer. Among these inhibitors, ipilimumab stands out for its ability to induce cytotoxic T cell proliferation and activation by binding to CTLA-4. However, ipilimumab also gives rise to systemic immune-related adverse effects and tumor immune evasion, limiting its effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: We developed IFNγ-ipilimumab and confirmed that the addition of INF-γ does not alter the fundamental properties of ipilimumab. RESULTS: IFNγ-ipilimumab can be activated by matrix metalloproteinases, thereby promoting the IFNγ signaling pathway and enhancing the cytotoxicity of T cells. In vivo studies demonstrated that IFNγ-ipilimumab enhances the therapeutic effect of ipilimumab against colorectal cancer by increasing CD8+ and CD4+ lymphocyte infiltration into the tumor area and inducing MHC-I expression in tumor cells. Mice treated with IFNγ-ipilimumab showed higher survival rates and body weight, as well as lower CD4+ and CD8+ lymphocyte activation rates in the blood and reduced organ damage. CONCLUSION: IFNγ-ipilimumab improved the effectiveness of ipilimumab while reducing its side effects. It is likely that future immunotherapies would rely on such antibodies to activate local cancer cells or immune cells, thereby increasing the therapeutic effectiveness of cancer treatments and ensuring their safety.

Comparative efficacy and safety of anti-PD-1 therapies used in metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Objective: Systemic studies on anti-PD-1 therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) with microsatellite instability or mismatch repair defects are lacking. We aimed to summarize the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab, nivolumab, ipilimumab, and tislelizumab in mCRC. Methods: Network meta-analyses (NMAs) can provide comparative efficacy and safety data for clinical decision-making. In this NMA, eligible publications from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from 2016 to April 2023 were identified through a systematic literature review. Literature screening and data extraction were performed according to established criteria. The quality of the literature was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and statistical analysis was performed using Revman5.4 and R language. The main outcome indicators, DCR, ORR, PFS, and OS, were used to evaluate the effectiveness of the drugs, and the main outcome indicators AE and SAE were used to evaluate the safety of each program. Results: Fifteen studies with a sample size of 798 patients were included. In terms of effectiveness, the disease control rate DCR of PD-1 inhibitors was 0.727[95% CI:0.654-0.794]; objective response rate ORR was 0.448[95% CI:0.382-0.514]; and the 1-year progression-free survival rate was 0.551[95% CI:0.458-0.642]. The 1-year overall survival rate was 0.790[95% CI:0.705-0.865]. The adverse events associated with anti-PD-1 were 0.567[95% CI:0.344-0.778] in terms of safety. The total incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse events was 0.241[95% CI:0.174-0.313]. In the subgroup analysis results, the incidence of DCR in the nivolumab + ipilimumab group was 0.826[95% CI:0.780-0.869], the ORR was 0.512[95% CI:0.377-0.647], and the PFS was 0.668[95% CI:0.516-0.804]. The incidence of AE was 0.319 [95% CI:0.039-0.700] and SAE was 0.294 [95% CI:0.171-0.433]... (AU)

Plain language summary of the CheckMate 76K study results: nivolumab given after stage 2B/2C melanoma is removed by surgery.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: In this article, we summarize results from the ongoing phase 3 CheckMate 76K clinical study published online in Nature Medicine in October 2023. The study goal was to learn whether nivolumab works as an adjuvant therapy (that is, helps to keep cancer from coming back when it is given after surgery) for stage 2 melanoma (skin cancer) that has not spread to other parts of the body. Nivolumab is an immunotherapy that activates a person's immune system so it can destroy cancer cells. In melanoma, staging describes the severity of the cancer. Melanoma staging ranges from 0 (very thin and confined to the upper layer of the skin) to 4 (spread to distant parts of the body), with earlier stages removed by surgery. The people in this study had stage 2 melanoma that had not spread to the lymph nodes or other organs in the body. HOW WAS THE STUDY DESIGNED?: People 12 years and older with stage 2 melanoma that had not spread and had been removed by surgery were included in CheckMate 76K. People were randomly assigned to receive either nivolumab (526 patients) or placebo (264 patients). A placebo resembles the test medicine but does not contain any active medicines. The researchers assessed whether people who received nivolumab lived longer without their cancer returning and/or spreading to other parts of their bodies (compared with placebo) and if nivolumab was well tolerated. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Researchers found that people who received nivolumab were 58% less likely to have their cancer return and 53% less likely of having their cancer spread to distant parts of their body, compared with placebo. These reductions in risk with nivolumab were seen in different subgroups of people with a range of characteristics, and regardless of how deep the melanoma had gone into the skin. People taking nivolumab had more side effects than those taking placebo, but most were mild to moderate and manageable. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: Results from CheckMate 76K support the benefit of using nivolumab as a treatment option for people with stage 2 melanoma post-surgery.

Interaction between NSCLC Cells, CD8+ T-Cells and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Potentiates Coagulation and Promotes Metabolic Remodeling-New Cues on CAT-VTE.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are frequent cancer-related complications associated with high mortality; thus, this urges the identification of predictive markers. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) used in cancer immunotherapy allow T-cell activation against cancer cells. Retrospective studies showed increased VTE following ICI administration in some patients. Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients are at high risk of thrombosis and thus, the adoption of immunotherapy, as a first-line treatment, seems to be associated with coagulation-fibrinolysis derangement. METHODS: We pharmacologically modulated NSCLC cell lines in co-culture with CD8+ T-cells (TCD8+) and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), isolated from healthy blood donors. The effects of ICIs Nivolumab and Ipilimumab on NSCLC cell death were assessed by annexin V and propidium iodide (PI) flow cytometry analysis. The potential procoagulant properties were analyzed by in vitro clotting assays and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs). The metabolic remodeling induced by the ICIs was explored by 1H nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. RESULTS: Flow cytometry analysis showed that TCD8+ and ICIs increase cell death in H292 and PC-9 cells but not in A549 cells. Conditioned media from NSCLC cells exposed to TCD8+ and ICI induced in vitro platelet aggregation. In A549, Podoplanin (PDPN) levels increased with Nivolumab. In H292, ICIs increased PDPN levels in the absence of TCD8+. In PC-9, Ipilimumab decreased PDPN levels, this effect being rescued by TCD8+. MDSCs did not interfere with the effect of TCD8+ in the production of TF or PDPN in any NSCLC cell lines. The exometabolome showed a metabolic remodeling in NSCLC cells upon exposure to TCD8+ and ICIs. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides some insights into the interplay of immune cells, ICIs and cancer cells influencing the coagulation status. ICIs are important promoters of coagulation, benefiting from TCD8+ mediation. The exometabolome analysis highlighted the relevance of acetate, pyruvate, glycine, glutamine, valine, leucine and isoleucine as biomarkers. Further investigation is needed to validate this finding in a cohort of NSCLC patients.

Nivolumab monotherapy or combination with ipilimumab with or without cobimetinib in previously treated patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (CheckMate 032).

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest cancer types and represents a major unmet medical need. CheckMate 032 investigated safety and efficacy of nivolumab monotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab with/without cobimetinib in advanced/metastatic solid tumors, including pancreatic cancer. METHODS: In the original pancreatic cancer cohort, previously treated patients (≥1 prior regimen) with advanced/metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were assigned to nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (monotherapy arm) or nivolumab 1 mg/kg and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg or 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (combination arm). A subsequent modified pancreatic cohort (one or two prior regimens) received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks, and cobimetinib 60 mg orally once daily for 21 days on and 7 days off (triplet arm). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), PFS rate, overall survival (OS), OS rate, safety, and tolerability. Additionally, ORR, PFS, and duration of response were assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) in the triplet arm. RESULTS: 18 patients received nivolumab monotherapy, 21 received nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and 30 received nivolumab plus ipilimumab plus cobimetinib. In the triplet arm, partial responses were observed in two patients per investigator (ORR 6.7% (95% CI 0.8% to 22.1%)) and in three patients per BICR (ORR 10% (95% CI 2.1% to 26.5%)); no responses were observed in the other arms. Median (95% CI) PFS per investigator was 1.4 (1.3 to 2.0), 1.4 (1.2 to 2.7), and 3.0 (1.5 to 4.1) months for the monotherapy, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, and triplet arms, respectively. Median (95% CI) OS was 5.1 (2.0 to 9.0) months, 4.0 (1.9 to 5.6) months, and 6.2 (3.9 to 11.4) months, respectively. Most treatment-related adverse events were grade 2 or less. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab with or without ipilimumab did not elicit objective responses in previously treated patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, although three confirmed partial responses and manageable safety were observed with cobimetinib-containing triplet therapy. The small sample size and differences in baseline disease-specific characteristics between arms limit interpretation of these results.

Perimyocarditis Associated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.

Patient prognoses have been significantly enhanced by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), altering the standard of care in cancer treatment. These novel antibodies have become a mainstay of care for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) patients. Several types of adverse events related to ICIs have been identified and documented as a result of the launch of these innovative medicines. We present here a 74-year-old female patient with a stage IV lung adenocarcinoma, treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, who developed perimyocarditis two weeks after receiving the third cycle of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. The patient was diagnosed using troponin levels, computed tomography (CT) angiography, and echocardiography. After hospitalization, her cardiac condition was successfully resolved with corticosteroids, colchicine, and symptomatic treatment. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the rarest cases to be reported of perimyocarditis as a toxicity of immunotherapy in a patient treated for adenocarcinoma of the lung.