Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Michael A. Postow is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Michael A. Postow.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2013

Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma

Jedd D. Wolchok; Harriet M. Kluger; Margaret K. Callahan; Michael A. Postow; Naiyer A. Rizvi; Alexander M. Lesokhin; Neil Howard Segal; Charlotte E. Ariyan; Ruth-Ann Gordon; Kathleen Reed; Matthew M. Burke; Anne Caldwell; Stephanie Anne Kronenberg; Blessing Agunwamba; Xiaoling Zhang; Israel Lowy; Hector David Inzunza; William Feely; Christine Horak; Quan Hong; Alan J. Korman; Jon M. Wigginton; Ashok Kumar Gupta; Mario Sznol

BACKGROUND In patients with melanoma, ipilimumab (an antibody against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 [CTLA-4]) prolongs overall survival, and nivolumab (an antibody against the programmed death 1 [PD-1] receptor) produced durable tumor regression in a phase 1 trial. On the basis of their distinct immunologic mechanisms of action and supportive preclinical data, we conducted a phase 1 trial of nivolumab combined with ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS We administered intravenous doses of nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients every 3 weeks for 4 doses, followed by nivolumab alone every 3 weeks for 4 doses (concurrent regimen). The combined treatment was subsequently administered every 12 weeks for up to 8 doses. In a sequenced regimen, patients previously treated with ipilimumab received nivolumab every 2 weeks for up to 48 doses. RESULTS A total of 53 patients received concurrent therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab, and 33 received sequenced treatment. The objective-response rate (according to modified World Health Organization criteria) for all patients in the concurrent-regimen group was 40%. Evidence of clinical activity (conventional, unconfirmed, or immune-related response or stable disease for ≥24 weeks) was observed in 65% of patients. At the maximum doses that were associated with an acceptable level of adverse events (nivolumab at a dose of 1 mg per kilogram of body weight and ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram), 53% of patients had an objective response, all with tumor reduction of 80% or more. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to therapy occurred in 53% of patients in the concurrent-regimen group but were qualitatively similar to previous experience with monotherapy and were generally reversible. Among patients in the sequenced-regimen group, 18% had grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to therapy and the objective-response rate was 20%. CONCLUSIONS Concurrent therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab had a manageable safety profile and provided clinical activity that appears to be distinct from that in published data on monotherapy, with rapid and deep tumor regression in a substantial proportion of patients. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01024231.).


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2014

Genetic Basis for Clinical Response to CTLA-4 Blockade in Melanoma

Alexandra Snyder; Vladimir Makarov; Taha Merghoub; Jianda Yuan; Jesse M. Zaretsky; Alexis Desrichard; Logan A. Walsh; Michael A. Postow; Phillip Wong; Teresa S. Ho; Travis J. Hollmann; Cameron Bruggeman; Kasthuri Kannan; Yanyun Li; Ceyhan Elipenahli; Cailian Liu; Christopher T. Harbison; Lisu Wang; Antoni Ribas; Jedd D. Wolchok; Timothy A. Chan

BACKGROUND Immune checkpoint inhibitors are effective cancer treatments, but molecular determinants of clinical benefit are unknown. Ipilimumab and tremelimumab are antibodies against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4). Anti-CTLA-4 treatment prolongs overall survival in patients with melanoma. CTLA-4 blockade activates T cells and enables them to destroy tumor cells. METHODS We obtained tumor tissue from patients with melanoma who were treated with ipilimumab or tremelimumab. Whole-exome sequencing was performed on tumors and matched blood samples. Somatic mutations and candidate neoantigens generated from these mutations were characterized. Neoantigen peptides were tested for the ability to activate lymphocytes from ipilimumab-treated patients. RESULTS Malignant melanoma exomes from 64 patients treated with CTLA-4 blockade were characterized with the use of massively parallel sequencing. A discovery set consisted of 11 patients who derived a long-term clinical benefit and 14 patients who derived a minimal benefit or no benefit. Mutational load was associated with the degree of clinical benefit (P=0.01) but alone was not sufficient to predict benefit. Using genomewide somatic neoepitope analysis and patient-specific HLA typing, we identified candidate tumor neoantigens for each patient. We elucidated a neoantigen landscape that is specifically present in tumors with a strong response to CTLA-4 blockade. We validated this signature in a second set of 39 patients with melanoma who were treated with anti-CTLA-4 antibodies. Predicted neoantigens activated T cells from the patients treated with ipilimumab. CONCLUSIONS These findings define a genetic basis for benefit from CTLA-4 blockade in melanoma and provide a rationale for examining exomes of patients for whom anti-CTLA-4 agents are being considered. (Funded by the Frederick Adler Fund and others.).


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2015

Nivolumab and Ipilimumab versus Ipilimumab in Untreated Melanoma

Michael A. Postow; Jason Chesney; Anna C. Pavlick; Caroline Robert; Kenneth F. Grossmann; David F. McDermott; Gerald P. Linette; Nicolas Meyer; Jeffrey K. Giguere; Sanjiv S. Agarwala; Montaser Shaheen; Marc S. Ernstoff; David R. Minor; April K. Salama; Matthew H. Taylor; Patrick A. Ott; Linda Rollin; Christine Horak; Paul Gagnier; Jedd D. Wolchok; F. Stephen Hodi

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.).


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2012

Immunologic Correlates of the Abscopal Effect in a Patient with Melanoma

Michael A. Postow; Margaret K. Callahan; Christopher A. Barker; Yoshiya Yamada; Jianda Yuan; Shigehisa Kitano; Zhenyu Mu; Teresa Rasalan; Matthew Adamow; Erika Ritter; Christine Sedrak; Achim A. Jungbluth; Ramon Chua; Arvin Yang; Ruth Ann Roman; Samuel Rosner; Brenna Benson; James P. Allison; Alexander M. Lesokhin; Sacha Gnjatic; Jedd D. Wolchok

The abscopal effect is a phenomenon in which local radiotherapy is associated with the regression of metastatic cancer at a distance from the irradiated site. The abscopal effect may be mediated by activation of the immune system. Ipilimumab is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits an immunologic checkpoint on T cells, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4). We report a case of the abscopal effect in a patient with melanoma treated with ipilimumab and radiotherapy. Temporal associations were noted: tumor shrinkage with antibody responses to the cancer-testis antigen NY-ESO-1, changes in peripheral-blood immune cells, and increases in antibody responses to other antigens after radiotherapy. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others.).


The Lancet | 2014

Anti-programmed-death-receptor-1 treatment with pembrolizumab in ipilimumab-refractory advanced melanoma: a randomised dose-comparison cohort of a phase 1 trial

Caroline Robert; Antoni Ribas; Jedd D. Wolchok; F. Stephen Hodi; Omid Hamid; Richard F. Kefford; Jeffrey S. Weber; Anthony M. Joshua; Wen-Jen Hwu; Tara C. Gangadhar; Amita Patnaik; Roxana Stefania Dronca; Hassane M. Zarour; Richard W. Joseph; Peter Boasberg; Bartosz Chmielowski; C. Mateus; Michael A. Postow; Kevin Gergich; Jeroen Elassaiss-Schaap; Xiaoyun Nicole Li; Robert Iannone; Scot Ebbinghaus; S. Peter Kang; Adil Daud

BACKGROUND The anti-programmed-death-receptor-1 (PD-1) antibody pembrolizumab has shown potent antitumour activity at different doses and schedules in patients with melanoma. We compared the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab at doses of 2 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks in patients with ipilimumab-refractory advanced melanoma. METHODS In an open-label, international, multicentre expansion cohort of a phase 1 trial, patients (aged ≥18 years) with advanced melanoma whose disease had progressed after at least two ipilimumab doses were randomly assigned with a computer-generated allocation schedule (1:1 final ratio) to intravenous pembrolizumab at 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) assessed with the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST, version 1.1) by independent central review. Analysis was done on the full-analysis set (all treated patients with measurable disease at baseline). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01295827. FINDINGS 173 patients received pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg (n=89) or 10 mg/kg (n=84). Median follow-up duration was 8 months. ORR was 26% at both doses--21 of 81 patients in the 2 mg/kg group and 20 of 76 in the 10 mg/kg group (difference 0%, 95% CI -14 to 13; p=0·96). Treatment was well tolerated, with similar safety profiles in the 2 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg groups and no drug-related deaths. The most common drug-related adverse events of any grade in the 2 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg groups were fatigue (29 [33%] vs 31 [37%]), pruritus (23 [26%] vs 16 [19%]), and rash (16 [18%] vs 15 [18%]). Grade 3 fatigue, reported in five (3%) patients in the 2 mg/kg pembrolizumab group, was the only drug-related grade 3 to 4 adverse event reported in more than one patient. INTERPRETATION The results suggest that pembrolizumab at a dose of 2 mg/kg or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks might be an effective treatment in patients for whom there are few effective treatment options. FUNDING Merck Sharp and Dohme.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2015

Immune Checkpoint Blockade in Cancer Therapy

Michael A. Postow; Margaret K. Callahan; Jedd D. Wolchok

Immunologic checkpoint blockade with antibodies that target cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and the programmed cell death protein 1 pathway (PD-1/PD-L1) have demonstrated promise in a variety of malignancies. Ipilimumab (CTLA-4) and pembrolizumab (PD-1) are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of advanced melanoma, and additional regulatory approvals are expected across the oncologic spectrum for a variety of other agents that target these pathways. Treatment with both CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade is associated with a unique pattern of adverse events called immune-related adverse events, and occasionally, unusual kinetics of tumor response are seen. Combination approaches involving CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade are being investigated to determine whether they enhance the efficacy of either approach alone. Principles learned during the development of CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 approaches will likely be used as new immunologic checkpoint blocking antibodies begin clinical investigation.


Annals of Oncology | 2015

Toxicities of the anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 immune checkpoint antibodies

J. Naidoo; David B. Page; Bob T. Li; L. C. Connell; Katja Schindler; M. E. Lacouture; Michael A. Postow; Jedd D. Wolchok

Immune checkpoint antibodies that augment the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 pathway have demonstrated antitumor activity across multiple malignancies, and gained recent regulatory approval as single-agent therapy for the treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma and nonsmall-cell lung cancer. Knowledge of toxicities associated with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade, as well as effective management algorithms for these toxicities, is pivotal in order to optimize clinical efficacy and safety. In this article, we review selected published and presented clinical studies investigating single-agent anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy and trials of combination approaches with other standard anticancer therapies, in multiple tumor types. We summarize the key adverse events reported in these studies and their management algorithms.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2017

Overall Survival with Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma

Jedd D. Wolchok; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Rene Gonzalez; Piotr Rutkowski; Jean-Jacques Grob; C. Lance Cowey; Christopher D. Lao; John Wagstaff; Dirk Schadendorf; Pier Francesco Ferrucci; Michael Smylie; Reinhard Dummer; Andrew F. Hill; David Hogg; John B. A. G. Haanen; Matteo S. Carlino; Oliver Bechter; Michele Maio; Iván Márquez-Rodas; Massimo Guidoboni; Grant A. McArthur; Celeste Lebbe; Paolo Antonio Ascierto; Jonathan Cebon; Jeffrey A. Sosman; Michael A. Postow; Margaret K. Callahan; Dana Walker; Linda Rollin; Rafia Bhore

BACKGROUND Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab resulted in longer progression‐free survival and a higher objective response rate than ipilimumab alone in a phase 3 trial involving patients with advanced melanoma. We now report 3‐year overall survival outcomes in this trial. METHODS We randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, patients with previously untreated advanced melanoma to receive nivolumab at a dose of 1 mg per kilogram of body weight plus ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks; nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks plus placebo; or ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses plus placebo, until progression, the occurrence of unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. Randomization was stratified according to programmed death ligand 1 (PD‐L1) status, BRAF mutation status, and metastasis stage. The two primary end points were progression‐free survival and overall survival in the nivolumab‐plus‐ipilimumab group and in the nivolumab group versus the ipilimumab group. RESULTS At a minimum follow‐up of 36 months, the median overall survival had not been reached in the nivolumab‐plus‐ipilimumab group and was 37.6 months in the nivolumab group, as compared with 19.9 months in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for death with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.55 [P<0.001]; hazard ratio for death with nivolumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.65 [P<0.001]). The overall survival rate at 3 years was 58% in the nivolumab‐plus‐ipilimumab group and 52% in the nivolumab group, as compared with 34% in the ipilimumab group. The safety profile was unchanged from the initial report. Treatment‐related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 59% of the patients in the nivolumab‐plus‐ipilimumab group, in 21% of those in the nivolumab group, and in 28% of those in the ipilimumab group. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with advanced melanoma, significantly longer overall survival occurred with combination therapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or with nivolumab alone than with ipilimumab alone. (Funded by Bristol‐Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 067 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01844505.)


Lancet Oncology | 2016

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

F. Stephen Hodi; Jason Chesney; Anna C. Pavlick; Caroline Robert; Kenneth F. Grossmann; David F. McDermott; Gerald P. Linette; Nicolas Meyer; Jeffrey K. Giguere; Sanjiv S. Agarwala; Montaser Shaheen; Marc S. Ernstoff; David R. Minor; April K. Salama; Matthew H. Taylor; Patrick A. Ott; Christine Horak; Paul Gagnier; Joel Jiang; Jedd D. Wolchok; Michael A. Postow

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.


Annual Review of Medicine | 2014

Immune Modulation in Cancer with Antibodies

David B. Page; Michael A. Postow; Margaret K. Callahan; James P. Allison; Jedd D. Wolchok

Ipilimumab is the prototypical immunomodulatory antibody, approved by the FDA in 2011 for advanced melanoma on the basis of survival benefit. Since that time, we have made significant strides in optimizing this therapy: we have characterized the spectrum of immune-related adverse events and learned how to mitigate them with treatment algorithms, discovered potential biomarkers of activity, and identified the potential synergy between checkpoint modulation and other therapeutic modalities. Recent phase I trials have established the efficacy and safety of next-generation checkpoint agents, including PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors, across multiple tumor types. Much work lies ahead in developing these next-generation checkpoint agents, testing them in combination, and determining how to integrate them into the treatment paradigms of various tumor types.

Collaboration


Dive into the Michael A. Postow's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jedd D. Wolchok

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Margaret K. Callahan

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Paul B. Chapman

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Katherine S. Panageas

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Alexander N. Shoushtari

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Richard D. Carvajal

Columbia University Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Parisa Momtaz

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Christopher A. Barker

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jianda Yuan

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Alexander M. Lesokhin

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge