Author
Jhangir G. Irani
Other affiliations: Novartis
Bio: Jhangir G. Irani is an academic researcher from GlaxoSmithKline. The author has contributed to research in topics: Trametinib & Dabrafenib. The author has an hindex of 5, co-authored 6 publications receiving 2323 citations. Previous affiliations of Jhangir G. Irani include Novartis.
Topics: Trametinib, Dabrafenib, Cobimetinib, Hazard ratio, MEK inhibitor
Papers
More filters
University of Sydney1, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens2, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust3, University of Tübingen4, University of Duisburg-Essen5, University of Kiel6, Aix-Marseille University7, University of Paris8, University of Barcelona9, Netherlands Cancer Institute10, Karolinska Institutet11, Heidelberg University12, Mount Vernon Hospital13, Institut Gustave Roussy14, University of California, Los Angeles15, GlaxoSmithKline16, Harvard University17
TL;DR: A combination of dabraenib and trametinib, as compared with dabrafenib alone, improved the rate of progression-free survival in previously untreated patients who had metastatic melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations.
Abstract: BACKGROUND Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition, as compared with BRAF inhibition alone, delays the emergence of resistance and reduces toxic effects in patients who have melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations. METHODS In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 423 previously untreated patients who had unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma with a BRAF V600E or V600K mutation to receive a combination of dabrafenib (150 mg orally twice daily) and trametinib (2 mg orally once daily) or dabrafenib and placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, response rate, response duration, and safety. A preplanned interim overall survival analysis was conducted. RESULTS The median progression-free survival was 9.3 months in the dabrafenib–trametinib group and 8.8 months in the dabrafenib-only group (hazard ratio for progression or death in the dabrafenib–trametinib group, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57 to 0.99; P = 0.03). The overall response rate was 67% in the dabrafenib–trametinib group and 51% in the dabrafenib-only group (P = 0.002). At 6 months, the interim overall survival rate was 93% with dabrafenib–trametinib and 85% with dabrafenib alone (hazard ratio for death, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.94; P = 0.02). However, a specified efficacy-stopping boundary (two-sided P = 0.00028) was not crossed. Rates of adverse events were similar in the two groups, although more dose modifications occurred in the dabrafenib–trametinib group. The rate of cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma was lower in the dabrafenib–trametinib group than in the dabrafenib-only group (2% vs. 9%), whereas pyrexia occurred in more patients (51% vs. 28%) and was more often severe (grade 3, 6% vs. 2%) in the dabrafenib–trametinib group. CONCLUSIONS A combination of dabrafenib and trametinib, as compared with dabrafenib alone, improved the rate of progression-free survival in previously untreated patients who had metastatic melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; Clinical Trials.gov number, NCT01584648.)
1,501 citations
University of Sydney1, Mater Health Services2, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens3, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust4, University of Tübingen5, University of Kiel6, Aix-Marseille University7, Paris Diderot University8, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital9, Netherlands Cancer Institute10, Karolinska University Hospital11, Heidelberg University12, German Cancer Research Center13, Northwood University14, Institut Gustave Roussy15, University of Paris-Sud16, University of California, Los Angeles17, Novartis18, Merck & Co.19, Harvard University20
TL;DR: The improvement in overall survival establishes the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib as the standard targeted treatment for BRAF Val600 mutation-positive melanoma.
1,099 citations
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib provides better preservation of HRQoL and pain improvements versus dabraenib monotherapy while also delaying progression.
73 citations
TL;DR: This Phase III study was conducted to confirm the superiority of D+T over D in pts with BRAFV600E/K mutant MM, and the primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), PFS and reduced frequency of cuSCC.
Abstract: 9011^ Background: As monotherapies, the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib (D) and the MEK inhibitor trametinib (T) demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) v chemotherapy in pts with BRAFV600 ...
64 citations
TL;DR: The phase III study of dabrafenib + trametinib compared with D + placebo demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) for D+T compared withD+P, and did not cross the pre-planned stopping boundary for efficacy.
Abstract: 102 Background: This phase III study (NCT01584648) of dabrafenib (D) + trametinib (T) compared with D + placebo (P) demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) for D+T compared with D+P (...
7 citations
Cited by
More filters
The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust1, European Institute of Oncology2, University of Colorado Denver3, Aix-Marseille University4, Baylor University5, University of Michigan6, University of Zurich7, Cross Cancer Institute8, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre9, Netherlands Cancer Institute10, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón11, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center12, Huntsman Cancer Institute13, Yale University14, University of Melbourne15, University of Sydney16, Cornell University17, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research18, University of Utah19, Yale Cancer Center20, Odense University Hospital21, Bristol-Myers Squibb22, Harvard University23
TL;DR: Among previously untreated patients with metastatic melanoma, nivolumab alone or combined with ipilimumab resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than ipILimumab alone, and in patients with PD-L1-negative tumors, the combination of PD-1 and CTLA-4 blockade was more effective than either agent alone.
Abstract: The median progression-free survival was 11.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.9 to 16.7) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, as compared with 2.9 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 3.4) with ipilimumab (hazard ratio for death or disease progression, 0.42; 99.5% CI, 0.31 to 0.57; P<0.001), and 6.9 months (95% CI, 4.3 to 9.5) with nivolumab (hazard ratio for the comparison with ipilimumab, 0.57; 99.5% CI, 0.43 to 0.76; P<0.001). In patients with tumors positive for the PD-1 ligand (PD-L1), the median progression-free survival was 14.0 months in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and in the nivolumab group, but in patients with PD-L1–negative tumors, progression-free survival was longer with the combination therapy than with nivolumab alone (11.2 months [95% CI, 8.0 to not reached] vs. 5.3 months [95% CI, 2.8 to 7.1]). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 16.3% of the patients in the nivolumab group, 55.0% of those in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group, and 27.3% of those in the ipilimumab group. CONCLUSIONS Among previously untreated patients with metastatic melanoma, nivolumab alone or combined with ipilimumab resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than ipilimumab alone. In patients with PD-L1–negative tumors, the combination of PD-1 and CTLA-4 blockade was more effective than either agent alone. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 067 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01844505.)
6,318 citations
TL;DR: Nivolumab was associated with significant improvements in overall survival and progression-free survival, as compared with dacarbazine, among previously untreated patients who had metastatic melanoma without a BRAF mutation.
Abstract: Nivolumab was associated with higher rates of objective response than chemotherapy in a phase 3 study involving patients with ipilimumab-refractory metastatic melanoma. The use of nivolumab in previously untreated patients with advanced melanoma has not been tested in a phase 3 controlled study. METHODS We randomly assigned 418 previously untreated patients who had metastatic melanoma without a BRAF mutation to receive nivolumab (at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks and dacarbazine-matched placebo every 3 weeks) or dacarbazine (at a dose of 1000 mg per square meter of body-surface area every 3 weeks and nivolumab-matched placebo every 2 weeks). The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS At 1 year, the overall rate of survival was 72.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 65.5 to 78.9) in the nivolumab group, as compared with 42.1% (95% CI, 33.0 to 50.9) in the dacarbazine group (hazard ratio for death, 0.42; 99.79% CI, 0.25 to 0.73; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 5.1 months in the nivolumab group versus 2.2 months in the dacarbazine group (hazard ratio for death or progression of disease, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.56; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 40.0% (95% CI, 33.3 to 47.0) in the nivolumab group versus 13.9% (95% CI, 9.5 to 19.4) in the dacarbazine group (odds ratio, 4.06; P<0.001). The survival benefit with nivolumab versus dacarbazine was observed across prespecified subgroups, including subgroups defined by status regarding the programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1). Common adverse events associated with nivolumab included fatigue, pruritus, and nausea. Drugrelated adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 11.7% of the patients treated with nivolumab and 17.6% of those treated with dacarbazine. CONCLUSIONS Nivolumab was associated with significant improvements in overall survival and progression-free survival, as compared with dacarbazine, among previously untreated patients who had metastatic melanoma without a BRAF mutation. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 066 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01721772.)
4,602 citations
TL;DR: The authors’ full names, academic de‐ grees, and affiliations are listed in the Ap‐ pendix.
Abstract: n engl j med 373;1 nejm.org july 2, 2015 23 The authors’ full names, academic de‐ grees, and affiliations are listed in the Ap‐ pendix. Address reprint requests to Dr. Hodi at Dana–Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave., Boston, MA 02215, or at stephen_hodi@ dfci . harvard . edu; or to Dr. Wolchok at the Department of Medi‐ cine and Ludwig Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave., Box 340, New York, NY 10065, or at wolchokj@ mskcc . org.
2,461 citations
Cornell University1, University of Louisville2, New York University3, University of Paris-Sud4, University of Utah5, Harvard University6, Washington University in St. Louis7, Greenville Health System8, University of New Mexico9, Cleveland Clinic10, Duke University11, Oregon Health & Science University12, Bristol-Myers Squibb13, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center14
TL;DR: 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.
Abstract: BackgroundIn 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. MethodsIn 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. ResultsAmong 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 ni...
2,370 citations
TL;DR: Dabrafenib plus trametinib, as compared with vemurafenib monotherapy, significantly improved overall survival in previously untreated patients with metastatic melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations, without increased overall toxicity.
Abstract: Background The BRAF inhibitors vemurafenib and dabrafenib have shown efficacy as monotherapies in patients with previously untreated metastatic melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations. Combining dabrafenib and the MEK inhibitor trametinib, as compared with dabrafenib alone, enhanced antitumor activity in this population of patients. Methods In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 704 patients with metastatic melanoma with a BRAF V600 mutation to receive either a combination of dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily) and trametinib (2 mg once daily) or vemurafenib (960 mg twice daily) orally as first-line therapy. The primary end point was overall survival. Results At the preplanned interim overall survival analysis, which was performed after 77% of the total number of expected events occurred, the overall survival rate at 12 months was 72% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67 to 77) in the combination-therapy group and 65% (95% CI, 59 to 70) in the vemurafenib group (hazard ratio for death in the combination-therapy group, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.89; P = 0.005). The prespecified interim stopping boundary was crossed, and the study was stopped for efficacy in July 2014. Median progression-free survival was 11.4 months in the combinationtherapy group and 7.3 months in the vemurafenib group (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.69; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 64% in the combinationtherapy group and 51% in the vemurafenib group (P<0.001). Rates of severe adverse events and study-drug discontinuations were similar in the two groups. Cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma and keratoacanthoma occurred in 1% of patients in the combination-therapy group and 18% of those in the vemurafenib group. Conclusions Dabrafenib plus trametinib, as compared with vemurafenib monotherapy, significantly improved overall survival in previously untreated patients with metastatic melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations, without increased overall toxicity. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01597908.)
2,144 citations