Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab for advanced melanoma: final overall survival results of a multicentre, randomised, open-label phase 3 study (KEYNOTE-006)
Sheba Medical Center1, University of California, Los Angeles2, Royal North Shore Hospital3, Aix-Marseille University4, university of lille5, University of California, San Francisco6, University of Sydney7, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital8, Hebrew University of Jerusalem9, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust10, University of Manchester11, Netherlands Cancer Institute12, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre13, Merck & Co.14, University of Paris-Sud15
TL;DR: The final protocol-specified survival analysis as mentioned in this paper showed that pembrolizumab continued to provide superior overall survival versus ipilimumab, with no difference between the two dosing schedules.
About: This article is published in The Lancet.The article was published on 2017-10-21. It has received 904 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Pembrolizumab & Ipilimumab.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: This guide to cancer immunotherapy provides a comprehensive historical and biological perspective regarding the advent and clinical implementation of cancer immunotherapeutics, with an emphasis on the fundamental importance of T lymphocyte regulation.
Abstract: The T lymphocyte, especially its capacity for antigen-directed cytotoxicity, has become a central focus for engaging the immune system in the fight against cancer. Basic science discoveries elucidating the molecular and cellular biology of the T cell have led to new strategies in this fight, including checkpoint blockade, adoptive cellular therapy and cancer vaccinology. This area of immunological research has been highly active for the past 50 years and is now enjoying unprecedented bench-to-bedside clinical success. Here, we provide a comprehensive historical and biological perspective regarding the advent and clinical implementation of cancer immunotherapeutics, with an emphasis on the fundamental importance of T lymphocyte regulation. We highlight clinical trials that demonstrate therapeutic efficacy and toxicities associated with each class of drug. Finally, we summarize emerging therapies and emphasize the yet to be elucidated questions and future promise within the field of cancer immunotherapy.
1,695 citations
TL;DR: A better understanding of how these variables cooperate to affect tumour–host interactions is needed to optimize the implementation of precision immunotherapy.
Abstract: Checkpoint inhibitor-based immunotherapies that target cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA4) or the programmed cell death 1 (PD1) pathway have achieved impressive success in the treatment of different cancer types. Yet, only a subset of patients derive clinical benefit. It is thus critical to understand the determinants driving response, resistance and adverse effects. In this Review, we discuss recent work demonstrating that immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy is affected by a combination of factors involving tumour genomics, host germline genetics, PD1 ligand 1 (PDL1) levels and other features of the tumour microenvironment, as well as the gut microbiome. We focus on recently identified molecular and cellular determinants of response. A better understanding of how these variables cooperate to affect tumour-host interactions is needed to optimize the implementation of precision immunotherapy.
1,452 citations
Harvard University1, University of Colorado Boulder2, Aix-Marseille University3, Curie Institute4, Texas Oncology5, University of Michigan6, Swansea University7, European Institute of Oncology8, Cross Cancer Institute9, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre10, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón11, Bristol-Myers Squibb12, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust13, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center14, Cornell University15
TL;DR: The results presented in this report reflect the 4-year update of the ongoing study with a database lock date of May 10, 2018.
Abstract: Summary Background Previously reported results from the phase 3 CheckMate 067 trial showed a significant improvement in objective responses, progression-free survival, and overall survival with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone compared with ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma. The aim of this report is to provide 4-year updated efficacy and safety data from this study. Methods In this phase 3 trial, eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with previously untreated, unresectable, stage III or stage IV melanoma, known BRAFV600 mutation status, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive intravenous nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus placebo, or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses plus placebo. Randomisation was done via an interactive voice response system with a permuted block schedule (block size of six) and stratification by PD-L1 status, BRAF mutation status, and metastasis stage. The patients, investigators, study site staff, and study funder were masked to the study drug administered. The co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival. Efficacy analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population, whereas safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The results presented in this report reflect the 4-year update of the ongoing study with a database lock date of May 10, 2018. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01844505. Findings Between July 3, 2013, and March 31, 2014, 945 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=314), nivolumab (n=316), or ipilimumab (n=315). Median follow-up was 46·9 months (IQR 10·9–51·8) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 36·0 months (10·5–51·4) in the nivolumab group, and 18·6 months (7·6–49·5) in the ipilimumab group. At a minimum follow-up of 48 months from the date that the final patient was enrolled and randomised, median overall survival was not reached (95% CI 38·2–not reached) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 36·9 months (28·3–not reached) in the nivolumab group, and 19·9 months (16·9–24·6) in the ipilimumab group. The hazard ratio for death for the combination versus ipilimumab was 0·54 (95% CI 0·44–0·67; p Interpretation The results of this analysis at 4 years of follow-up show that a durable, sustained survival benefit can be achieved with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma. Funding Bristol-Myers Squibb.
938 citations
TL;DR: The clinical success of these FDA-approved immune checkpoint inhibitors is highlighted, current challenges and future strategies that must be considered going forward are discussed to maximize the efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade therapy for cancer.
778 citations
University of Paris-Sud1, University of California, Los Angeles2, Sheba Medical Center3, University of Barcelona4, Aix-Marseille University5, university of lille6, University of California, San Francisco7, University of Sydney8, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital9, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust10, University of Manchester11, Netherlands Cancer Institute12, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre13, Merck & Co.14, Royal North Shore Hospital15
TL;DR: Pembrolizumab improved progression-free survival and overall survival versus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma and is now a standard of care in the first-line setting, however, the optimal duration of anti-PD-1 administration is unknown.
Abstract: Summary Background Pembrolizumab improved progression-free survival and overall survival versus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma and is now a standard of care in the first-line setting. However, the optimal duration of anti-PD-1 administration is unknown. We present results from 5 years of follow-up of patients in KEYNOTE-006. Methods KEYNOTE-006 was an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study done at 87 academic institutions, hospitals, and cancer centres in 16 countries. Patients aged at least 18 years with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, ipilimumab-naive histologically confirmed advanced melanoma with known BRAFV600 status and up to one previous systemic therapy were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to intravenous pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks or every 3 weeks or four doses of intravenous ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Treatments were assigned using a centralised, computer-generated allocation schedule with blocked randomisation within strata. Exploratory combination of data from the two pembrolizumab dosing regimen groups was not protocol-specified. Pembrolizumab treatment continued for up to 24 months. Eligible patients who discontinued pembrolizumab with stable disease or better after receiving at least 24 months of pembrolizumab or discontinued with complete response after at least 6 months of pembrolizumab and then progressed could receive an additional 17 cycles of pembrolizumab. Co-primary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival. Efficacy was analysed in all randomly assigned patients, and safety was analysed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. Exploratory assessment of efficacy and safety at 5 years' follow-up was not specified in the protocol. Data cutoff for this analysis was Dec 3, 2018. Recruitment is closed; the study is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01866319. Findings Between Sept 18, 2013, and March 3, 2014, 834 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab (every 2 weeks, n=279; every 3 weeks, n=277), or ipilimumab (n=278). After a median follow-up of 57·7 months (IQR 56·7–59·2) in surviving patients, median overall survival was 32·7 months (95% CI 24·5–41·6) in the combined pembrolizumab groups and 15·9 months (13·3–22·0) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·73, 95% CI 0·61–0·88, p=0·00049). Median progression-free survival was 8·4 months (95% CI 6·6–11·3) in the combined pembrolizumab groups versus 3·4 months (2·9–4·2) in the ipilimumab group (HR 0·57, 95% CI 0·48–0·67, p Interpretation Pembrolizumab continued to show superiority over ipilimumab after almost 5 years of follow-up. These results provide further support for use of pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma. Funding Merck Sharp & Dohme.
709 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: The analysis of censored failure times is considered in this paper, where the hazard function is taken to be a function of the explanatory variables and unknown regression coefficients multiplied by an arbitrary and unknown function of time.
Abstract: The analysis of censored failure times is considered. It is assumed that on each individual arc available values of one or more explanatory variables. The hazard function (age-specific failure rate) is taken to be a function of the explanatory variables and unknown regression coefficients multiplied by an arbitrary and unknown function of time. A conditional likelihood is obtained, leading to inferences about the unknown regression coefficients. Some generalizations are outlined.
28,264 citations
Harvard University1, Vanderbilt University2, Netherlands Cancer Institute3, University of Colorado Denver4, Institut Gustave Roussy5, University of Duisburg-Essen6, University of Mannheim7, University of Utah8, VU University Amsterdam9, Mount Sinai Hospital10, Washington University in St. Louis11, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust12, University of Paris13, Technische Universität München14, Loyola University Chicago15, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center16, University of South Florida17, Medarex18, Bristol-Myers Squibb19
TL;DR: Ipilimumab, with or without a gp100 peptide vaccine, as compared with gp100 alone, improved overall survival in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma.
Abstract: Background An improvement in overall survival among patients with metastatic melanoma has been an elusive goal. In this phase 3 study, ipilimumab — which blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen 4 to potentiate an antitumor T-cell response — administered with or without a glycoprotein 100 (gp100) peptide vaccine was compared with gp100 alone in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma. Methods A total of 676 HLA-A*0201–positive patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, whose disease had progressed while they were receiving therapy for metastatic disease, were randomly assigned, in a 3:1:1 ratio, to receive ipilimumab plus gp100 (403 patients), ipilimumab alone (137), or gp100 alone (136). Ipilimumab, at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight, was administered with or without gp100 every 3 weeks for up to four treatments (induction). Eligible patients could receive reinduction therapy. The primary end point was overall survival. Results The median overall survival was 10.0 months among patients receiving ipilimumab plus gp100, as compared with 6.4 months among patients receiving gp100 alone (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; P<0.001). The median overall survival with ipilimumab alone was 10.1 months (hazard ratio for death in the comparison with gp100 alone, 0.66; P = 0.003). No difference in overall survival was detected between the ipilimumab groups (hazard ratio with ipilimumab plus gp100, 1.04; P = 0.76). Grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 10 to 15% of patients treated with ipilimumab and in 3% treated with gp100 alone. There were 14 deaths related to the study drugs (2.1%), and 7 were associated with immune-related adverse events. Conclusions Ipilimumab, with or without a gp100 peptide vaccine, as compared with gp100 alone, improved overall survival in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma. Adverse events can be severe, long-lasting, or both, but most are reversible with appropriate treatment. (Funded by Medarex and Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00094653.)
13,081 citations
TL;DR: Preliminary clinical findings with blockers of additional immune-checkpoint proteins, such as programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1), indicate broad and diverse opportunities to enhance antitumour immunity with the potential to produce durable clinical responses.
Abstract: Immune checkpoints refer to the plethora of inhibitory pathways that are crucial to maintaining self-tolerance. Tumour cells induce immune checkpoints to evade immunosurveillance. This Review discusses the progress in targeting immune checkpoints, the considerations for combinatorial therapy and the potential for additional immune-checkpoint targets.
10,602 citations
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: The anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival and had less high-grade toxicity than did ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma.
Abstract: Background The immune checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab is the standard-of-care treatment for patients with advanced melanoma. Pembrolizumab inhibits the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint and has antitumor activity in patients with advanced melanoma. Methods In this randomized, controlled, phase 3 study, we assigned 834 patients with advanced melanoma in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive pembrolizumab (at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight) every 2 weeks or every 3 weeks or four doses of ipilimumab (at 3 mg per kilogram) every 3 weeks. Primary end points were progressionfree and overall survival. Results The estimated 6-month progression-free-survival rates were 47.3% for pembrolizumab every 2 weeks, 46.4% for pembrolizumab every 3 weeks, and 26.5% for ipilimumab (hazard ratio for disease progression, 0.58; P<0.001 for both pembrolizumab regimens versus ipilimumab; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 0.46 to 0.72 and 0.47 to 0.72, respectively). Estimated 12-month survival rates were 74.1%, 68.4%, and 58.2%, respectively (hazard ratio for death for pembrolizumab every 2 weeks, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.83; P = 0.0005; hazard ratio for pembrolizumab every 3 weeks, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.90; P = 0.0036). The response rate was improved with pembrolizumab administered every 2 weeks (33.7%) and every 3 weeks (32.9%), as compared with ipilimumab (11.9%) (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Responses were ongoing in 89.4%, 96.7%, and 87.9% of patients, respectively, after a median follow-up of 7.9 months. Efficacy was similar in the two pembrolizumab groups. Rates of treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 to 5 severity were lower in the pembrolizumab groups (13.3% and 10.1%) than in the ipilimumab group (19.9%). Conclusions The anti–PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival and had less high-grade toxicity than did ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme; KEYNOTE-006 ClinicalTrials .gov number, NCT01866319.)
4,612 citations