A review of cancer immunotherapy toxicity.

Cancer immunotherapies, including checkpoint inhibitors and adoptive cell therapy, manipulate the immune system to recognize and attack cancer cells. These therapies have the potential to induce durable responses in multiple solid and hematologic malignancies and thus have transformed treatment algorithms for numerous tumor types. Cancer immunotherapies lead to unique toxicity profiles distinct from the toxicities of other cancer therapies, depending on their mechanism of action. These toxicities often require specific management, which can include steroids and immune-modulating therapy and for which consensus guidelines have been published. This review will focus on the toxicities of checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric antigen receptor T cells, including pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management.

Three-Year Overall Survival with Tebentafusp in Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Tebentafusp, a T-cell receptor-bispecific molecule that targets glycoprotein 100 and CD3, is approved for adult patients who are positive for HLA-A*02:01 and have unresectable or metastatic uveal melanoma. The primary analysis in the present phase 3 trial supported a long-term survival benefit associated with the drug. METHODS: We report the 3-year efficacy and safety results from our open-label, phase 3 trial in which HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive tebentafusp (tebentafusp group) or the investigator's choice of therapy with pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine (control group), with randomization stratified according to the lactate dehydrogenase level. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of 36 months, median overall survival was 21.6 months in the tebentafusp group and 16.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 0.87). The estimated percentage of patients surviving at 3 years was 27% in the tebentafusp group and 18% in the control group. The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade in the tebentafusp group were rash (83%), pyrexia (76%), pruritus (70%), and hypotension (38%). Most tebentafusp-related adverse events occurred early during treatment, and no new adverse events were observed with long-term administration. The percentage of patients who discontinued treatment because of adverse events continued to be low in both treatment groups (2% in the tebentafusp group and 5% in the control group). No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This 3-year analysis supported a continued long-term benefit of tebentafusp for overall survival among adult HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma. (Funded by Immunocore; IMCgp100-202 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03070392; EudraCT number, 2015-003153-18.).

Overall Survival Benefit with Tebentafusp in Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Uveal melanoma is a disease that is distinct from cutaneous melanoma, with a low tumor mutational burden and a 1-year overall survival of approximately 50% in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. Data showing a proven overall survival benefit with a systemic treatment are lacking. Tebentafusp is a bispecific protein consisting of an affinity-enhanced T-cell receptor fused to an anti-CD3 effector that can redirect T cells to target glycoprotein 100-positive cells. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned previously untreated HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with metastatic uveal melanoma in a 2:1 ratio to receive tebentafusp (tebentafusp group) or the investigator's choice of therapy with single-agent pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine (control group), stratified according to the lactate dehydrogenase level. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 378 patients were randomly assigned to either the tebentafusp group (252 patients) or the control group (126 patients). Overall survival at 1 year was 73% in the tebentafusp group and 59% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37 to 0.71; P<0.001) in the intention-to-treat population. Progression-free survival was also significantly higher in the tebentafusp group than in the control group (31% vs. 19% at 6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.94; P = 0.01). The most common treatment-related adverse events in the tebentafusp group were cytokine-mediated events (due to T-cell activation) and skin-related events (due to glycoprotein 100-positive melanocytes), including rash (83%), pyrexia (76%), and pruritus (69%). These adverse events decreased in incidence and severity after the first three or four doses and infrequently led to discontinuation of the trial treatment (2%). No treatment-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with tebentafusp resulted in longer overall survival than the control therapy among previously untreated patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. (Funded by Immunocore; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03070392; EudraCT number, 2015-003153-18.).

Multiple Options: How to Choose Therapy in Frontline Metastatic Melanoma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Given the rapid development of multiple targeted and immune therapies for patients with advanced melanoma, it can be challenging to select a therapy based on currently available data. This review aims to provide an overview of frontline options for metastatic melanoma, with practical guidance for selecting a treatment regimen. RECENT FINDINGS: Recently reported data from randomized trials suggests that the majority of patients with unresectable melanoma should receive a PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor as part of their first line therapy, irrespective of BRAF mutation status. Additional data also suggests that combination immunotherapies result in improved outcomes compared to single agent, albeit at the cost of increased toxicity, though to date no biomarker exists to help guide treatment selection. As the number therapeutic options continue to grow for patients with advanced melanoma, there is likely to be a continued focus on combination strategies. Defining the optimal treatment approach in order to maximize efficacy while minimizing toxicity remains an area of active investigation.

Multicenter Experience with Neoadjuvant Therapy in Melanoma Highlights Heterogeneity in Contemporary Practice.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility and impact of neoadjuvant therapy (NT) in patients who present with advanced melanoma amenable to surgical resection. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Given current effective systemic therapy for melanoma, the use of NT is being explored in patients with advanced melanoma with disease amenable to surgical resection. METHODS: Prospective data from 3 institutions was obtained in patients with clinically evident Stage III/IV melanoma who underwent NT. The primary objective was to compare recurrence-free survival between patients who had pathologic complete response (pCR) to those with persistent disease. RESULTS: NT was offered to 45 patients, with 43 patients initiating various NT regimens including PD-1 antagonist (PD-1) therapy (N = 16), PD-1 plus ipilimumab (N = 10), BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy (N = 14), a combination of those three (N = 1), and talimogene laherparepvec (TVEC) (N = 2). Thirty-two (74.1%) patients underwent surgery whereas 11 patients did not undergo surgery for these reasons: clinical CR (N = 7), progressive disease not amenable to resection (N = 3), and ongoing therapy (N = 1). 12 of 32 patients (37.5%) had pCR with these therapies: PD-1 (N = 4), PD-1 plus ipilimumab (N = 2), BRAF/MEK (N = 4), combination (N = 1), and TVEC (N = 1). At median follow-up of 16.4 months there was only 1 recurrence in the pCR group and patients with a pCR had significantly improved recurrence-free survival compared to patients without pCR (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Despite variability in NT regimens across institutions, NT for melanoma is feasible and associated with improved prognosis in patients who achieve a pCR. Maximizing rates of pCR could improve prognosis for patients with advanced melanoma.

Timing of Adjuvant Immunotherapy in Stage III Melanoma, Does it Matter?

BACKGROUND: The optimal time to initiate adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) following resection remains undefined. Herein, we investigated the impact of time to adjuvant ICI on survival in patients with stage III melanoma. METHODS: Patients with resected stage III melanoma receiving adjuvant immune therapy were identified within a multi-institutional retrospective cohort. Patients were stratified by time to adjuvant ICI: within 6 weeks, 6-12 weeks, and greater than 12 weeks from surgery. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was compared among time strata with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods in the multi-institutional cohort. RESULTS: Altogether, 626 patients were identified within the multi-institutional cohort: 39% of patients initiated adjuvant ICI within 6 weeks, 42.2% within 6-12 weeks, and 18.8% greater than 12 weeks from surgery. In a multivariate Cox model, adjusting for histology, nodal tumor burden, and pathologic stage, we found that increased time to adjuvant ICI was associated with improved RFS. Patients who initiated adjuvant ICI within 6 weeks of surgery had worse RFS. These findings were preserved in a conditional landmark analysis and separate subgroups of patients with (1) new melanoma diagnoses, (2) occult stage III disease, and (3) those receiving anti-PD-1 monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for patients with stage III melanoma are not compromised when adjuvant ICI is initiated beyond 6 weeks from resection. Additional work is needed to better understand the underlying mechanisms and implications of timing of adjuvant ICI on long-term outcomes.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Melanoma: Cutaneous, Version 2.2021.

Over the past few years, the NCCN Guidelines for Melanoma: Cutaneous have been expanded to include pathways for treatment of microscopic satellitosis (added in v2.2020), and the following Principles sections: Molecular Testing (added in v2.2019), Systemic Therapy Considerations (added in v2.2020), and Brain Metastases Management (added in v3.2020). The v1.2021 update included additional modifications of these sections and notable revisions to Principles of: Pathology, Surgical Margins for Wide Excision of Primary Melanoma, Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy, Completion/Therapeutic Lymph Node Dissection, and Radiation Therapy. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss the important changes to pathology and surgery recommendations, as well as additions to systemic therapy options for patients with advanced disease.

Mind the gap: Gendered publication trends in oncology.

BACKGROUND: Investigating scientific publication trends in the field of oncology may highlight opportunities for improved representation, mentorship, collaboration, and advancement for women. METHODS: We conducted a bibliometric analysis of Annals of Surgical Oncology; Cancer; International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics (IJROBP); JAMA Oncology; and Journal of Clinical Oncology in 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2017. Full name and degree credentials per author role (ie, first or senior author), article type, publication year, and citation metrics were collected. First names were used to identify author gender. RESULTS: Across 9189 articles, female representation rose between 1990 and 2017 (first authors: 17.7% in 1990, 36.6% in 2017; senior authors: 11.7% in 1990, 28.5% in 2017). For the 50 most cited articles per year, women comprised a smaller percent of first (26.5%) and senior (19.9%) authors. The average citation count was higher for male first (44.8 per article) and senior (47.1) authors compared to female first (39.7) and senior (44.1) authors. With male senior authors, the first author was more likely male (71.4% male; 25.0% female); with female senior authors, first authors were 50.2% male and 47.6% female. IJROBP had the lowest total female representation among first (25.1%) and senior (16.7%) authors. Women had more MDs with Masters degrees, whereas men held more MDs only and more MDs with PhDs. CONCLUSION: Despite positive trends, substantial gendered differences in oncology publications persist. Fostering more women in oncology research will benefit female representation at many levels of academia and improve productivity, collaboration, and recruitment, especially in technical fields such as radiation and surgical oncology.

Current multidisciplinary management of brain metastases.

Brain metastasis (BM), the most common adult brain tumor, develops in 20% to 40% of patients with late-stage cancer and traditionally are associated with a poor prognosis. The management of patients with BM has become increasingly complex because of new and emerging systemic therapies and advancements in radiation oncology and neurosurgery. Current therapies include stereotactic radiosurgery, whole-brain radiation therapy, surgical resection, laser-interstitial thermal therapy, systemic cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted agents, and immune-checkpoint inhibitors. Determining the optimal treatment for a specific patient has become increasingly individualized, emphasizing the need for multidisciplinary discussions of patients with BM. Recognizing and addressing the sequelae of BMs and their treatment while maintaining quality of life and neurocognition is especially important because survival for patients with BMs has improved. The authors present current and emerging treatment options for patients with BM and suggest approaches for managing sequelae and disease recurrence.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Uveal Melanoma, Version 1.2019.

The NCCN Guidelines for Uveal Melanoma include recommendations for staging, treatment, and follow-up of patients diagnosed with uveal melanoma of the choroid or ciliary body. In addition, because distinguishing between uveal melanoma and benign uveal nevi is in some cases difficult, these guidelines also contain recommendations for workup of patients with suspicious pigmented uveal lesions, to clarify the tests needed to distinguish between those who should have further workup and treatment for uveal melanoma versus those with uncertain diagnosis and low risk who should to be followed and later reevaluated. These NCCN Guidelines Insights describe recommendations for treatment of newly diagnosed nonmetastatic uveal melanoma in patients who have already undergone a complete workup.

A phase 2 study of glembatumumab vedotin, an antibody-drug conjugate targeting glycoprotein NMB, in patients with advanced melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Glembatumumab vedotin is an antibody-drug conjugate that produced preliminary clinical activity against advanced melanoma in a phase 1 dose-escalation trial. The objective of the current study was to investigate further the antitumor activity of glembatumumab vedotin at the recommended phase 2 dose in heavily pretreated patients with melanoma. METHODS: This single-arm, phase 2 study enrolled patients with stage IV melanoma who were refractory to checkpoint inhibition and to B-raf proto-oncogene, serine/threonine kinase (BRAF)/mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibition (in the presence of a BRAF valine mutation at codon 600). Patients received 1.9 mg/kg glembatumumab vedotin intravenously every 3 weeks until they developed disease progression or intolerance. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), which was determined according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response, overall survival (OS), safety, and clinical efficacy versus tumor glycoprotein NMB (gpNMB) expression. Tumor expression of gpNMB was assessed using immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: In total, 62 patients received treatment. The ORR was 11% and the median response duration was 6.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1 months to not reached). The median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 2.6-5.5 months), and the median OS was 9.0 months (95% CI, 6.1-11.7 months). For patients who developed rash during the first cycle versus those who did not, the ORR was 21% versus 7%, respectively, and there was an overall improvement in PFS (hazard ratio, 0.43; P = .013) and OS (hazard ratio, 0.43; P = .017). The most frequent adverse events were alopecia, neuropathy, rash, fatigue, and neutropenia. With one exception, all evaluable tumors were positive for gpNMB, and 46 of 59 tumors (76%) had 100% gpNMB-positive epithelial cells. CONCLUSIONS: Glembatumumab vedotin had modest activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced melanoma who were refractory to checkpoint inhibitors and MEK/BRAF inhibition. Treatment-related rash may be associated with response.

Cutaneous Melanoma, Version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Cutaneous melanoma have been significantly revised over the past few years in response to emerging data on immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies and BRAF-targeted therapy. This article summarizes the data and rationale supporting extensive changes to the recommendations for systemic therapy as adjuvant treatment of resected disease and as treatment of unresectable or distant metastatic disease.

Clinical and laboratory features of autoimmune hemolytic anemia associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPis) are a novel class of immunotherapeutic agents that have revolutionized the treatment of cancer; however, these drugs can also cause a unique spectrum of autoimmune toxicity. Autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) is a rare, but often severe, complication of ICPis. We identified 14 patients from nine institutions across the United States who developed ICPi-AIHA. The median interval from ICPi initiation to development of AIHA was 55 days (interquartile range [IQR], 22-110 days). Results from the direct antiglobulin test (DAT) were available for 13 of 14 patients: 8 patients (62%) had a positive DAT and 5 (38%) had a negative DAT. The median pretreatment and nadir hemoglobin concentrations were 11.8 g/dL (IQR, 10.2-12.9 g/dL) and 6.3 g/dL (IQR, 6.1-8.0 g/dL), respectively. Four patients (29%) had a preexisting lymphoproliferative disorder, and two (14%) had a positive DAT prior to initiation of ICPi therapy. All patients were treated with glucocorticoids, with three requiring additional immunosuppressive therapy. Complete and partial recoveries of hemoglobin were achieved in 12 (86%) and 2 (14%) patients, respectively. Seven patients (50%) were rechallenged with ICPis, and one (14%) developed recurrent AIHA. Clinical and laboratory features of ICPi-AIHA were similar in DAT positive and negative patients. ICPi-AIHA shares many clinical features with primary AIHA; however, a unique aspect of ICPi-AIHA is a high incidence of DAT negativity. Glucocorticoids are an effective first-line treatment in the majority of patients with ICPi-AIHA, and most patients who are rechallenged with an ICPi do not appear to develop recurrence of AIHA.

The Emerging Role of Surgery for Patients With Advanced Melanoma Treated With Immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has improved survival for patients with metastatic melanoma. The types of disease-response patterns to ICI therapy can be more complex relative to traditional chemotherapy and include mixed responses, pseudoprogression, and oligoprogression. The potential benefit of surgery after incomplete response to ICI therapy has not been explored. The purpose of this study was to explore outcomes of surgery after ICI therapy in patients with metastatic melanoma. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted at two centers and included patients with melanoma who underwent surgery after treatment with monotherapy or combination therapy with anti-programmed cell death protein (PD) 1 and/or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein (CTLA)-4 checkpoint blockade. RESULTS: Of 25 patients, nine received anti-CTLA-4 therapy, eight received anti-PD-1 therapy, and eight received both anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 therapies before surgery. Five patients were treated in the adjuvant setting and developed new lesions, whereas 20 patients were treated for metastatic disease and underwent surgery for persistent disease on imaging after ICI therapy. Twenty-five patients underwent 30 operations without complications. Twenty-seven of 30 masses were confirmed to be melanoma on pathology, one was a desmoid tumor and two were necrosis. At a median follow-up of 14.2 months, 2 patients died, 8 were alive with a known disease, and 15 continued to have no further evidence of disease. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery was well tolerated in this cohort of patients receiving ICI therapy for melanoma. Surgery may benefit select patients with an oligoprogressive disease after ICI therapy. After a mixed response, surgery remains the only definitive method to render some patients free of disease.

Updates in adjuvant systemic therapy for melanoma.

There has been a rapid increase in adjuvant therapies approved for treatment following surgical resection of stages III/IV melanoma. We review current indications for adjuvant therapy, which currently includes a heterogenous group of stages III and IV patients with melanoma. We describe several pivotal clinical trials of systemic immune therapies, targeted immune therapies, and adjuvant vaccine strategies. Finally, we discuss the evidence for selecting the most appropriate treatment regimen(s) for the individual patient.

Nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab in untreated melanoma.

BACKGROUND: In a phase 1 dose-escalation study, combined inhibition of T-cell checkpoint pathways by nivolumab and ipilimumab was associated with a high rate of objective response, including complete responses, among patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this double-blind study involving 142 patients with metastatic melanoma who had not previously received treatment, we randomly assigned patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram of body weight) combined with either nivolumab (1 mg per kilogram) or placebo once every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) or placebo every 2 weeks until the occurrence of disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary end point was the rate of investigator-assessed, confirmed objective response among patients with BRAF V600 wild-type tumors. RESULTS: Among patients with BRAF wild-type tumors, the rate of confirmed objective response was 61% (44 of 72 patients) in the group that received both ipilimumab and nivolumab (combination group) versus 11% (4 of 37 patients) in the group that received ipilimumab and placebo (ipilimumab-monotherapy group) (P<0.001), with complete responses reported in 16 patients (22%) in the combination group and no patients in the ipilimumab-monotherapy group. The median duration of response was not reached in either group. The median progression-free survival was not reached with the combination therapy and was 4.4 months with ipilimumab monotherapy (hazard ratio associated with combination therapy as compared with ipilimumab monotherapy for disease progression or death, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.23 to 0.68; P<0.001). Similar results for response rate and progression-free survival were observed in 33 patients with BRAF mutation-positive tumors. Drug-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported in 54% of the patients who received the combination therapy as compared with 24% of the patients who received ipilimumab monotherapy. Select adverse events with potential immunologic causes were consistent with those in a phase 1 study, and most of these events resolved with immune-modulating medication. CONCLUSIONS: The objective-response rate and the progression-free survival among patients with advanced melanoma who had not previously received treatment were significantly greater with nivolumab combined with ipilimumab than with ipilimumab monotherapy. Combination therapy had an acceptable safety profile. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01927419.).

New NCCN Guidelines for Uveal Melanoma and Treatment of Recurrent or Progressive Distant Metastatic Melanoma.

The NCCN Guidelines Panel for Melanoma debuted new guidelines for uveal melanoma at the NCCN 23rd Annual Conference. Although uveal melanoma and cutaneous melanoma share the same name, they do have different characteristics and treatments. The NCCN Guidelines describe how tumor size guides therapeutic options, which for most tumors is radiotherapy. Predictors of melanoma-related mortality include advanced age, larger tumor size, and histopathologic and molecular features. The NCCN Guidelines for Cutaneous Melanoma have not changed notably, but adjuvant therapy with immunotherapies is now recommended. The best second-line treatment in the metastatic setting remains unclear.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Recurrent Melanoma: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is routinely performed for primary cutaneous melanomas; however, limited data exist for SLNB after locally recurrent (LR) or in-transit (IT) melanoma. METHODS: Data from three centers performing SLNB for LR/IT melanoma (1997 to the present) were reviewed, with the aim of assessing (1) success rate; (2) SLNB positivity; and (3) prognostic value of SLNB in this population. RESULTS: The study cohort included 107 patients. Management of the primary melanoma included prior SLNB for 56 patients (52%), of whom 10 (18%) were positive and 12 had complete lymph node dissections (CLNDs). In the present study, SLNB was performed for IT disease (48/107, 45%) or LR melanoma (59/107, 55%). A sentinel lymph node (SLN) was removed in 96% (103/107) of cases. Nodes were not removed for four patients due to lymphoscintigraphy failures (2) or nodes not found during surgery (2). SLNB was positive in 41 patients (40%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 31.5-50.5), of whom 35 (88%) had CLND, with 13 (37%) having positive nonsentinel nodes. Median time to disease progression after LR/IT metastasis was 1.4 years (95% CI 0.75-2.0) for patients with a positive SLNB, and 5.9 years (95% CI 1.7-10.2) in SLNB-negative patients (p = 0.18). There was a trend towards improved overall survival for patients with a negative SLNB (p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: SLNB can be successful in patients with LR/IT melanoma, even if prior SLNB was performed. In this population, the rates of SLNB positivity and nonsentinel node metastases were 40% and 37%, respectively. SLNB may guide management and prognosis after LR/IT disease.

Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma: 2-year overall survival outcomes in a multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Results from phase 2 and 3 trials in patients with advanced melanoma have shown significant improvements in the proportion of patients achieving an objective response and prolonged progression-free survival with the combination of nivolumab (an anti-PD-1 antibody) plus ipilimumab (an anti-CTLA-4 antibody) compared with ipilimumab alone. We report 2-year overall survival data from a randomised controlled trial assessing this treatment in previously untreated advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial (CheckMate 069) we recruited patients from 19 specialist cancer centres in two countries (France and the USA). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with previously untreated, unresectable stage III or IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive an intravenous infusion of nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus placebo, every 3 weeks for four doses. Subsequently, patients assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, whereas patients allocated to ipilimumab alone received placebo every 2 weeks during this phase. Randomisation was done via an interactive voice response system with a permuted block schedule (block size of six) and stratification by BRAF mutation status. The study funder, patients, investigators, and study site staff were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint, which has been reported previously, was the proportion of patients with BRAFV600 wild-type melanoma achieving an investigator-assessed objective response. Overall survival was an exploratory endpoint and is reported in this Article. Efficacy analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population, whereas safety was assessed in all treated patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01927419, and is ongoing but no longer enrolling patients. FINDINGS: Between Sept 16, 2013, and Feb 6, 2014, we screened 179 patients and enrolled 142, randomly assigning 95 patients to nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 47 to ipilimumab alone. In each treatment group, one patient no longer met the study criteria following randomisation and thus did not receive study drug. At a median follow-up of 24·5 months (IQR 9·1-25·7), 2-year overall survival was 63·8% (95% CI 53·3-72·6) for those assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 53·6% (95% CI 38·1-66·8) for those assigned to ipilimumab alone; median overall survival had not been reached in either group (hazard ratio 0·74, 95% CI 0·43-1·26; p=0·26). Treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 51 (54%) of 94 patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared with nine (20%) of 46 patients who received ipilimumab alone. The most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were colitis (12 [13%] of 94 patients) and increased alanine aminotransferase (ten [11%]) in the combination group and diarrhoea (five [11%] of 46 patients) and hypophysitis (two [4%]) in the ipilimumab alone group. Serious grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 34 (36%) of 94 patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab (including colitis in ten [11%] of 94 patients, and diarrhoea in five [5%]) compared with four (9%) of 46 patients who received ipilimumab alone (including diarrhoea in two [4%] of 46 patients, colitis in one [2%], and hypophysitis in one [2%]). No new types of treatment-related adverse events or treatment-related deaths occurred in this updated analysis. INTERPRETATION: Although follow-up of the patients in this study is ongoing, the results of this analysis suggest that the combination of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab might lead to improved outcomes compared with first-line ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma. The results suggest encouraging survival outcomes with immunotherapy in this population of patients. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.