scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

Randomized, Open-Label Phase II Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Talimogene Laherparepvec in Combination With Ipilimumab Versus Ipilimumab Alone in Patients With Advanced, Unresectable Melanoma

TLDR
The study met its primary end point; the objective response rate was significantly higher with talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab versus ipilitationab alone, indicating that the combination has greater antitumor activity without additional safety concerns versus ipILimumab.
Abstract
Purpose We evaluated the combination of talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma in a phase II study. To our knowledge, this was the first randomized trial to evaluate addition of an oncolytic virus to a checkpoint inhibitor. Methods Patients with unresectable stages IIIB to IV melanoma, with no more than one prior therapy if BRAF wild-type, no more than two prior therapies if BRAF mutant, measurable/injectable disease, and without symptomatic autoimmunity or clinically significant immunosuppression were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab or ipilimumab alone. Talimogene laherparepvec treatment began in week 1 (first dose, ≤ 4 mL × 106 plaque-forming units/mL; after 3 weeks, ≤ 4 mL × 108 plaque-forming units/mL every 2 weeks). Ipilimumab (3 mg/kg every 3 weeks; up to four doses) began week 1 in the ipilimumab alone arm and week 6 in the combination arm. The primary end point was objective response rate evaluated by investigators per immune-related response criteria. Results One hundred ninety-eight patients were randomly assigned to talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab (n = 98), or ipilimumab alone (n = 100). Thirty-eight patients (39%) in the combination arm and 18 patients (18%) in the ipilimumab arm had an objective response (odds ratio, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.5 to 5.5; P = .002). Responses were not limited to injected lesions; visceral lesion decreases were observed in 52% of patients in the combination arm and 23% of patients in the ipilimumab arm. Frequently occurring adverse events (AEs) included fatigue (combination, 59%; ipilimumab alone, 42%), chills (combination, 53%; ipilimumab alone, 3%), and diarrhea (combination, 42%; ipilimumab alone, 35%). Incidence of grade ≥ 3 AEs was 45% and 35%, respectively. Three patients in the combination arm had fatal AEs; none were treatment related. Conclusion The study met its primary end point; the objective response rate was significantly higher with talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone. These data indicate that the combination has greater antitumor activity without additional safety concerns versus ipilimumab.

read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Approaches to treat immune hot, altered and cold tumours with combination immunotherapies

TL;DR: A panel of therapeutic strategies to use, combine and develop to treat hot, altered and cold tumours is provided and the impact of combination therapy on the immune response to convert an immune cold into a hot tumour will be discussed.
Journal ArticleDOI

Harnessing innate immunity in cancer therapy.

TL;DR: The authors review recent developments in understanding of the antitumour effects of the innate immune system and how this system could be harnessed in the clinic and opens up new possibilities for long-lasting, multilayered tumour control.
Journal ArticleDOI

Emerging Concepts for Immune Checkpoint Blockade-Based Combination Therapies

TL;DR: It is proposed that reducing tumor burden and increasing tumor immunogenicity are key factors to improve immunotherapy.
Journal ArticleDOI

Integrating oncolytic viruses in combination cancer immunotherapy

TL;DR: Oncolytic viruses can target multiple steps in the cancer–immunity cycle and can be engineered to express therapeutic genes and, as a result, can be usefully integrated in combination cancer immunotherapies.
Journal ArticleDOI

The future of cancer immunotherapy: microenvironment-targeting combinations.

TL;DR: Two categories of approaches to the design of novel drugs and combination therapies are described: the first involves direct modification of the tumor, while the second indirectly enhances immunogenicity through alteration of the microenvironment.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab or Monotherapy in Untreated Melanoma.

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.
Journal ArticleDOI

Oncology Meets Immunology: The Cancer-Immunity Cycle

TL;DR: Emerging clinical data suggest that cancer immunotherapy is likely to become a key part of the clinical management of cancer and may be more effective in combination with agents that target other steps of the cycle.
Related Papers (5)