Network


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

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Michael Smylie is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Michael Smylie.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2015

Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab or monotherapy in untreated Melanoma

Abstr Act; James Larkin; V. Chiarion Sileni; Rene Gonzalez; Dirk Schadendorf; Reinhard Dummer; Michael Smylie; Piotr Rutkowski; Andrew F. Hill; John Wagstaff; Michele Maio; Kenneth F. Grossmann; Mario Sznol; B. Dréno; Lars Bastholt; Arvin Yang; C. Horak; F. S. Hodi; Jedd D. Wolchok

BACKGROUND Nivolumab (a programmed death 1 [PD-1] checkpoint inhibitor) and ipilimumab (a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 [CTLA-4] checkpoint inhibitor) have been shown to have complementary activity in metastatic melanoma. In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study, nivolumab alone or nivolumab plus ipilimumab was compared with ipilimumab alone in patients with metastatic melanoma. METHODS We assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, 945 previously untreated patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma to nivolumab alone, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, or ipilimumab alone. Progression-free survival and overall survival were coprimary end points. Results regarding progression-free survival are presented here. RESULTS 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.).


Lancet Oncology | 2010

Ipilimumab monotherapy in patients with pretreated advanced melanoma: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 2, dose-ranging study

Jedd D. Wolchok; Bart Neyns; Gerald P. Linette; Sylvie Négrier; Jose Lutzky; L. Thomas; William Waterfield; Dirk Schadendorf; Michael Smylie; Troy Guthrie; Jean-Jacques Grob; Jason Chesney; Kevin M. Chin; Kun Chen; Axel Hoos; Steven O'Day; Celeste Lebbe

BACKGROUND Ipilimumab is a human monoclonal antibody that blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 and has shown promising activity in advanced melanoma. We aimed to ascertain the antitumour efficacy of ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS We undertook a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial in 66 centres from 12 countries. 217 patients with previously treated stage III (unresectable) or stage IV melanoma were randomly assigned a fixed dose of ipilimumab of either 10 mg/kg (n=73), 3 mg/kg (n=72), or 0.3 mg/kg (n=72) every 3 weeks for four cycles (induction) followed by maintenance therapy every 3 months. Randomisation was done with a permuted block procedure, stratified on the basis of type of previous treatment. The primary endpoint was best overall response rate (the proportion of patients with a complete or partial response, according to modified WHO criteria). Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat, whereas safety analyses included patients who received at least one dose of ipilimumab. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00289640. FINDINGS The best overall response rate was 11.1% (95% CI 4.9-20.7) for 10 mg/kg, 4.2% (0.9-11.7) for 3 mg/kg, and 0% (0.0-4.9) for 0.3 mg/kg (p=0.0015; trend test). Immune-related adverse events of any grade arose in 50 of 71, 46 of 71, and 19 of 72 patients at doses of 10 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, and 0.3 mg/kg, respectively; the most common grade 3-4 adverse events were gastrointestinal immune-related events (11 in the 10 mg/kg group, two in the 3 mg/kg group, none in the 0.3 mg/kg group) and diarrhoea (ten in the 10 mg/kg group, one in the 3 mg/kg group, none in the 0.3 mg/kg group). INTERPRETATION Ipilimumab elicited a dose-dependent effect on efficacy and safety measures in pretreated patients with advanced melanoma, lending support to further studies at a dose of 10 mg/kg. FUNDING Bristol-Myers Squibb.


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2013

Phase III Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Tremelimumab With Standard-of-Care Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Melanoma

Antoni Ribas; Richard F. Kefford; Margaret A. Marshall; Cornelis J. A. Punt; John B. A. G. Haanen; Maribel Marmol; Claus Garbe; Helen Gogas; Jacob Schachter; Gerald P. Linette; Paul Lorigan; Kari Kendra; Michele Maio; Uwe Trefzer; Michael Smylie; Grant A. McArthur; Brigitte Dreno; Paul Nathan; Jacek Mackiewicz; John M. Kirkwood; Jesus Gomez-Navarro; Bo Huang; Dmitri Pavlov; Axel Hauschild

PURPOSE In phase I/II trials, the cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4-blocking monoclonal antibody tremelimumab induced durable responses in a subset of patients with advanced melanoma. This phase III study evaluated overall survival (OS) and other safety and efficacy end points in patients with advanced melanoma treated with tremelimumab or standard-of-care chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with treatment-naive, unresectable stage IIIc or IV melanoma were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to tremelimumab (15 mg/kg once every 90 days) or physicians choice of standard-of-care chemotherapy (temozolomide or dacarbazine). RESULTS In all, 655 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned. The test statistic crossed the prespecified futility boundary at second interim analysis after 340 deaths, but survival follow-up continued. At final analysis with 534 events, median OS by intent to treat was 12.6 months (95% CI, 10.8 to 14.3) for tremelimumab and 10.7 months (95% CI, 9.36 to 11.96) for chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.88; P = .127). Objective response rates were similar in the two arms: 10.7% in the tremelimumab arm and 9.8% in the chemotherapy arm. However, response duration (measured from date of random assignment) was significantly longer after tremelimumab (35.8 v 13.7 months; P = .0011). Diarrhea, pruritus, and rash were the most common treatment-related adverse events in the tremelimumab arm; 7.4% had endocrine toxicities. Seven deaths in the tremelimumab arm and one in the chemotherapy arm were considered treatment related by either investigators or sponsor. CONCLUSION This study failed to demonstrate a statistically significant survival advantage of treatment with tremelimumab over standard-of-care chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma.


Lancet Oncology | 2015

Adjuvant ipilimumab versus placebo after complete resection of high-risk stage III melanoma (EORTC 18071): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial

Alexander M.M. Eggermont; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Jean Jacques Grob; Reinhard Dummer; Jedd D. Wolchok; Henrik Schmidt; Omid Hamid; Caroline Robert; Paolo Antonio Ascierto; Jon Richards; Celeste Lebbe; Virginia Ferraresi; Michael Smylie; Jeffrey S. Weber; Michele Maio; Cyril Konto; Axel Hoos; Veerle de Pril; Ravichandra Karra Gurunath; Gaetan de Schaetzen; Stefan Suciu; Alessandro Testori

BACKGROUND Ipilimumab is an approved treatment for patients with advanced melanoma. We aimed to assess ipilimumab as adjuvant therapy for patients with completely resected stage III melanoma at high risk of recurrence. METHODS We did a double-blind, phase 3 trial in patients with stage III cutaneous melanoma (excluding lymph node metastasis ≤1 mm or in-transit metastasis) with adequate resection of lymph nodes (ie, the primary cutaneous melanoma must have been completely excised with adequate surgical margins) who had not received previous systemic therapy for melanoma from 91 hospitals located in 19 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), centrally by an interactive voice response system, to receive intravenous infusions of 10 mg/kg ipilimumab or placebo every 3 weeks for four doses, then every 3 months for up to 3 years. Using a minimisation technique, randomisation was stratified by disease stage and geographical region. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival, assessed by an independent review committee, and analysed by intention to treat. Enrollment is complete but the study is ongoing for follow-up for analysis of secondary endpoints. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2007-001974-10, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00636168. FINDINGS Between July 10, 2008, and Aug 1, 2011, 951 patients were randomly assigned to ipilimumab (n=475) or placebo (n=476), all of whom were included in the intention-to-treat analyses. At a median follow-up of 2·74 years (IQR 2·28-3·22), there were 528 recurrence-free survival events (234 in the ipilimumab group vs 294 in the placebo group). Median recurrence-free survival was 26·1 months (95% CI 19·3-39·3) in the ipilimumab group versus 17·1 months (95% CI 13·4-21·6) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·75; 95% CI 0·64-0·90; p=0·0013); 3-year recurrence-free survival was 46·5% (95% CI 41·5-51·3) in the ipilimumab group versus 34·8% (30·1-39·5) in the placebo group. The most common grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events in the ipilimumab group were gastrointestinal (75 [16%] vs four [<1%] in the placebo group), hepatic (50 [11%] vs one [<1%]), and endocrine (40 [8%] vs none). Adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment in 245 (52%) of 471 patients who started ipilimumab (182 [39%] during the initial treatment period of four doses). Five patients (1%) died due to drug-related adverse events. Five (1%) participants died because of drug-related adverse events in the ipilimumab group; three patients died because of colitis (two with gastrointestinal perforation), one patient because of myocarditis, and one patient because of multiorgan failure with Guillain-Barré syndrome. INTERPRETATION Adjuvant ipilimumab significantly improved recurrence-free survival for patients with completely resected high-risk stage III melanoma. The adverse event profile was consistent with that observed in advanced melanoma, but at higher incidences in particular for endocrinopathies. The risk-benefit ratio of adjuvant ipilimumab at this dose and schedule requires additional assessment based on distant metastasis-free survival and overall survival endpoints to define its definitive value. FUNDING Bristol-Myers Squibb.


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.)


Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2007

Phase II Study of Vandetanib or Placebo in Small-Cell Lung Cancer Patients After Complete or Partial Response to Induction Chemotherapy With or Without Radiation Therapy: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Study BR.20

Andrew Arnold; Lesley Seymour; Michael Smylie; Keyue Ding; Yee Ung; Brian Findlay; Christopher W. Lee; Marina S. Djurfeldt; Marlo Whitehead; Peter R. Ellis; Glenwood D. Goss; Adrien Chan; Jacinta Meharchand; Yasmin Alam; Richard Gregg; Charles Butts; Peter Langmuir; Frances A. Shepherd

PURPOSE This double-blind randomized phase II trial examined whether vandetanib, an inhibitor of vascular endothelial and epidermal growth factor receptors, could prolong progression-free survival in responding patients with small-cell lung cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients with complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) to combination chemotherapy (+/- thoracic or prophylactic cranial radiation) received oral vandetanib 300 mg/d or matched placebo. With 100 patients and 77 events, the study had 80% power to detect an improvement in median progression-free survival from 4 to 6.5 months (one-sided, 10%-level test). RESULTS Between May 2003 and March 2006, 107 patients were accrued; 46 had limited disease and 61 extensive disease. There were fewer patients with a performance status of 0 (n = 11 v 20), and fewer had CR to initial therapy (n = 4 v 8) in the vandetanib arm. Vandetanib patients had more toxicity and required more dose modifications for gastrointestinal toxicity and rash. Asymptomatic Corrected QT interval (QTC) prolongation was observed in eight vandetanib patients. Median progression-free survival for vandetanib and placebo was 2.7 and 2.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.01; 80% CI, 0.75 to 1.36; one-sided P = .51). Overall survival for vandetanib was 10.6 versus 11.9 months for placebo (HR, 1.43; 80% CI, 1.00 to 2.05; one-sided P = 0.9). In planned subgroup analyses, a significant interaction was noted (P = .01): limited-stage vandetanib patients had longer overall survival (HR, 0.45; one-sided P = .07) and extensive-stage vandetanib patients shorter survival compared with placebo (HR, 2.27; one-sided P = .996). CONCLUSION Vandetanib failed to demonstrate efficacy as maintenance therapy for small-cell lung cancer.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2017

Adjuvant Nivolumab versus Ipilimumab in Resected Stage III or IV Melanoma

Jeffrey S. Weber; Mario Mandalà; Michele Del Vecchio; Helen Gogas; Ana Arance; C. Lance Cowey; Stéphane Dalle; Michael Schenker; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Iván Márquez-Rodas; Jean-Jacques Grob; Marcus O. Butler; Mark R. Middleton; Michele Maio; Victoria Atkinson; Paola Queirolo; Rene Gonzalez; Ragini R. Kudchadkar; Michael Smylie; Nicolas Meyer; Laurent Mortier; Michael B. Atkins; Shailender Bhatia; Celeste Lebbe; Piotr Rutkowski; Kenji Yokota; Naoya Yamazaki; Tae M. Kim; Veerle de Pril; J Sabater

BACKGROUND Nivolumab and ipilimumab are immune checkpoint inhibitors that have been approved for the treatment of advanced melanoma. In the United States, ipilimumab has also been approved as adjuvant therapy for melanoma on the basis of recurrence‐free and overall survival rates that were higher than those with placebo in a phase 3 trial. We wanted to determine the efficacy of nivolumab versus ipilimumab for adjuvant therapy in patients with resected advanced melanoma. METHODS In this randomized, double‐blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 906 patients (≥15 years of age) who were undergoing complete resection of stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV melanoma to receive an intravenous infusion of either nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks (453 patients) or ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses and then every 12 weeks (453 patients). The patients were treated for a period of up to 1 year or until disease recurrence, a report of unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. The primary end point was recurrence‐free survival in the intention‐to‐treat population. RESULTS At a minimum follow‐up of 18 months, the 12‐month rate of recurrence‐free survival was 70.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 66.1 to 74.5) in the nivolumab group and 60.8% (95% CI, 56.0 to 65.2) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.65; 97.56% CI, 0.51 to 0.83; P<0.001). Treatment‐related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 14.4% of the patients in the nivolumab group and in 45.9% of those in the ipilimumab group; treatment was discontinued because of any adverse event in 9.7% and 42.6% of the patients, respectively. Two deaths (0.4%) related to toxic effects were reported in the ipilimumab group more than 100 days after treatment. CONCLUSIONS Among patients undergoing resection of stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV melanoma, adjuvant therapy with nivolumab resulted in significantly longer recurrence‐free survival and a lower rate of grade 3 or 4 adverse events than adjuvant therapy with ipilimumab. (Funded by Bristol‐Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 238 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02388906; Eudra‐CT number, 2014‐002351‐26.)


Investigational New Drugs | 2005

Phase II Study of Perifosine in Previously Untreated Patients with Metastatic Melanoma

D. Scott Ernst; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; Nancy Wainman; Mary Davis; Reinhard Lohmann; Tara Baetz; Karl Belanger; Michael Smylie

SummaryPurpose: To assess the response rate and toxicity of the alkylphosphocholine analogue, perifosine, in patients with metastatic or recurrent malignant melanoma.Patients and Methods: Patients had histologically proven, unidimensionally measurable disease which was incurable by standard therapy. Prior adjuvant immunotherapy was allowed but patients had not received prior chemotherapy. Perisfosine was given orally as a loading dose of 900 mg on day 1 followed by a maintenance dose of 150 mg po on days 2–21 in a 28 day cycle. The loading dose was 300 mg on day 1 of all subsequent cycles. Tumour response was assessed every 2 cycles.Results: 18 patients were accrued over 7 mos. No objective responses occurred in the 14 evaluable patients. Three patients (21%) achieved stable disease after 2 cycles and 11 had progression. Seventeen patients were evaluable for toxicity. Grade 3 or 4 non-hematologic toxicities included: diarrhea (12%), arthralgia (12%), nausea (6%), headache (6%), and fatigue (6%). No grade 3 or 4 hematological or biochemical toxicity were observed. Seventy-seven percent of patients received ≥90% of planned cycle 1 dose intensity and 58% received ≥90% of planned dose for cycle 2+. Four patients required dose reductions; treatment was delayed in 5 patients; and 5 patients missed doses because of toxicity.Conclusions: Perifosine can be safely administered when given as an initial loading dose followed by daily maintenance therapy over 28 days. Gastrointestinal toxicity is common but generally of low grade. Hematological toxicity is minimal. No objective responses were observed. No further development of single-agent perifosine is recommended in malignant melanoma.


Clinical Cancer Research | 2010

Randomized phase II multicenter trial of two schedules of lapatinib as first- or second-line monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

Helen J. Ross; George R. Blumenschein; Joseph Aisner; Nevena Damjanov; Afshin Dowlati; Jennifer Garst; James R. Rigas; Michael Smylie; Habib Hassani; Kimberly E. Allen; Lance Leopold; Tal Zaks; Frances A. Shepherd

Purpose: This randomized phase II study was initially designed to test the activity of two dose schedules of lapatinib (GW572016H), an oral, reversible, dual tyrosine kinase inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human EGFR-2 (HER2/neu; HER2), in chemotherapy-naive patients with non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); it was later amended to target patients with bronchioloalveolar carcinoma or no smoking history. Experimental Design: Patients with good performance status and recurrent or metastatic NSCLC were randomized to lapatinib (orally, 1,500 mg once daily or 500 mg twice daily) until progression or intolerance. Patients could have had a maximum of one prior systemic therapy (chemotherapy or biological therapy) for NSCLC. Safety and activity were assessed every 4 and 8 weeks, respectively. Tumors were analyzed for EGFR and HER2 mutations and/or amplifications. Results: Of 75 patients in the nontargeted population, 1 (1.3%) had partial response and 16 (21%) had stable disease of ≥24 weeks. No complete or partial responses were observed in 56 patients in the targeted population; 14 (25%) had stable disease of ≥24 weeks. No responses were seen in three patients with EGFR mutations and five with EGFR gene amplification. No mutations in HER2 were found. One of two patients with HER2 amplification had a 51% decrease in tumor size; however, this response was unconfirmed. The most common adverse events were grade 1 or 2 diarrhea, rash, fatigue, nausea, and anorexia. Adverse events were similar across dosing regimens. Conclusions: Lapatinib was well tolerated, with no notable difference in toxicity between treatment groups. Lapatinib monotherapy did not induce a significant number of tumor regressions in NSCLC. Further studies may be warranted to determine whether lapatinib is active in combination with other agents in the treatment of NSCLC. Clin Cancer Res; 16(6); 1938–49


Lancet Oncology | 2017

Ipilimumab 10 mg/kg versus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma: A randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial

Paolo Antonio Ascierto; Michele Del Vecchio; Caroline Robert; Andrzej Mackiewicz; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Ana Arance; Celeste Lebbe; Lars Bastholt; Omid Hamid; Piotr Rutkowski; Catriona M. McNeil; Claus Garbe; Carmen Loquai; B. Dréno; Luc Thomas; Jean Jacques Grob; Gabriella Liszkay; Marta Nyakas; Ralf Gutzmer; Joanna Pikiel; F. Grange; Christoph Hoeller; Virginia Ferraresi; Michael Smylie; Dirk Schadendorf; Laurent Mortier; Inge Marie Svane; Delphine Hennicken; Anila Qureshi; Michele Maio

BACKGROUND A phase 2 trial suggested increased overall survival and increased incidence of treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg compared with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in patients with advanced melanoma. We report a phase 3 trial comparing the benefit-risk profile of ipilimumab 10 mg/kg versus 3 mg/kg. METHODS This randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial was done in 87 centres in 21 countries worldwide. Patients with untreated or previously treated unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, without previous treatment with BRAF inhibitors or immune checkpoint inhibitors, were randomly assigned (1:1) with an interactive voice response system by the permuted block method using block size 4 to ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or 3 mg/kg, administered by intravenous infusion for 90 min every 3 weeks for four doses. Patients were stratified by metastasis stage, previous treatment for metastatic melanoma, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. The patients, investigators, and site staff were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population and safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is completed and was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01515189. FINDINGS Between Feb 29, and July 9, 2012, 727 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to ipilimumab 10 mg/kg (365 patients; 364 treated) or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (362 patients; all treated). Median follow-up was 14·5 months (IQR 4·6-42·3) for the ipilimumab 10 mg/kg group and 11·2 months (4·9-29·4) for the ipilimumab 3 mg/kg group. Median overall survival was 15·7 months (95% CI 11·6-17·8) for ipilimumab 10 mg/kg compared with 11·5 months (9·9-13·3) for ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (hazard ratio 0·84, 95% CI 0·70-0·99; p=0·04). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were diarrhoea (37 [10%] of 364 patients in the 10 mg/kg group vs 21 [6%] of 362 patients in the 3 mg/kg group), colitis (19 [5%] vs nine [2%]), increased alanine aminotransferase (12 [3%] vs two [1%]), and hypophysitis (ten [3%] vs seven [2%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 133 (37%) patients in the 10 mg/kg group and 66 (18%) patients in the 3 mg/kg group; four (1%) versus two (<1%) patients died from treatment-related adverse events. INTERPRETATION In patients with advanced melanoma, ipilimumab 10 mg/kg resulted in significantly longer overall survival than did ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, but with increased treatment-related adverse events. Although the treatment landscape for advanced melanoma has changed since this study was initiated, the clinical use of ipilimumab in refractory patients with unmet medical needs could warrant further assessment. FUNDING Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Collaboration


Dive into the Michael Smylie's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jedd D. Wolchok

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Rene Gonzalez

University of Colorado Denver

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Wilson Roa

Cross Cancer Institute

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Dirk Schadendorf

University of Duisburg-Essen

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Anil A. Joy

Cross Cancer Institute

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Don Yee

Cross Cancer Institute

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge