Wilson H. Miller

Ipilimumab plus dacarbazine for previously untreated metastatic melanoma

BACKGROUND Ipilimumab monotherapy (at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight), as compared with glycoprotein 100, improved overall survival in a phase 3 study involving patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma. We conducted a phase 3 study of ipilimumab (10 mg per kilogram) plus dacarbazine in patients with previously untreated metastatic melanoma. METHODS We randomly assigned 502 patients with previously untreated metastatic melanoma, in a 1:1 ratio, to ipilimumab (10 mg per kilogram) plus dacarbazine (850 mg per square meter of body-surface area) or dacarbazine (850 mg per square meter) plus placebo, given at weeks 1, 4, 7, and 10, followed by dacarbazine alone every 3 weeks through week 22. Patients with stable disease or an objective response and no dose-limiting toxic effects received ipilimumab or placebo every 12 weeks thereafter as maintenance therapy. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS Overall survival was significantly longer in the group receiving ipilimumab plus dacarbazine than in the group receiving dacarbazine plus placebo (11.2 months vs. 9.1 months, with higher survival rates in the ipilimumab-dacarbazine group at 1 year (47.3% vs. 36.3%), 2 years (28.5% vs. 17.9%), and 3 years (20.8% vs. 12.2%) (hazard ratio for death, 0.72; P<0.001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 56.3% of patients treated with ipilimumab plus dacarbazine, as compared with 27.5% treated with dacarbazine and placebo (P<0.001). No drug-related deaths or gastrointestinal perforations occurred in the ipilimumab-dacarbazine group. CONCLUSIONS Ipilimumab (at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram) in combination with dacarbazine, as compared with dacarbazine plus placebo, improved overall survival in patients with previously untreated metastatic melanoma. The types of adverse events were consistent with those seen in prior studies of ipilimumab; however, the rates of elevated liver-function values were higher and the rates of gastrointestinal events were lower than expected on the basis of prior studies. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00324155.).

Dabrafenib in BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma: A multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Dabrafenib, an inhibitor of mutated BRAF, has clinical activity with a manageable safety profile in studies of phase 1 and 2 in patients with BRAF(V600)-mutated metastatic melanoma. We studied the efficacy of dabrafenib in patients with BRAF(V600E)-mutated metastatic melanoma. METHODS We enrolled patients in this open-label phase 3 trial between Dec 23, 2010, and Sept 1, 2011. This report is based on a data cutoff date of Dec 19, 2011. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated, stage IV or unresectable stage III BRAF(V600E) mutation-positive melanoma were randomly assigned (3:1) to receive dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily, orally) or dacarbazine (1000 mg/m(2) intravenously every 3 weeks). Patients were stratified according to American Joint Committee on Cancer stage (unresectable III+IVM1a+IVM1b vs IVM1c). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival and was analysed by intention to treat; safety was assessed per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01227889. FINDINGS Of the 733 patients screened, 250 were randomly assigned to receive either dabrafenib (187 patients) or dacarbazine (63 patients). Median progression-free survival was 5·1 months for dabrafenib and 2·7 months for dacarbazine, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·30 (95% CI 0·18-0·51; p<0·0001). At data cutoff, 107 (57%) patients in the dabrafenib group and 14 (22%) in the dacarbazine group remained on randomised treatment. Treatment-related adverse events (grade 2 or higher) occurred in 100 (53%) of the 187 patients who received dabrafenib and in 26 (44%) of the 59 patients who received dacarbazine. The most common adverse events with dabrafenib were skin-related toxic effects, fever, fatigue, arthralgia, and headache. The most common adverse events with dacarbazine were nausea, vomiting, neutropenia, fatigue, and asthenia. Grade 3-4 adverse events were uncommon in both groups. INTERPRETATION Dabrafenib significantly improved progression-free survival compared with dacarbazine. FUNDING GlaxoSmithKline.

Differentiation therapy of acute promyelocytic leukemia with tretinoin (all-Trans-retinoic acid)

BACKGROUND AND METHODS Patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia have a characteristic (15;17) translocation, with a breakpoint on chromosome 17 in the region of the retinoic acid receptor-alpha (RAR-alpha). Since this receptor has been shown to be involved with growth and differentiation of myeloid cells in vitro, and since recent clinical studies have reported that tretinoin (all-trans-retinoic acid) induces complete remission in patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia we studied the effects of tretinoin on cellular maturation and molecular abnormalities in patients undergoing the induction of remission with this agent. RESULTS Eleven patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia were treated with tretinoin administered orally at a dose of 45 mg per square meter of body-surface area per day. Nine of the 11 patients entered complete remission. In two patients, complete remission was preceded by striking leukocytosis that then resolved despite continued drug treatment. Serial studies of cellular morphologic features, cell-surface immunophenotypic analysis, and fluorescence in situ hybridization with a chromosome 17 probe revealed that clinical response was associated with maturation of the leukemic clone. All patients who responded to treatment who were tested by Northern blot analysis had expression of aberrant RAR-alpha. As patients entered complete remission, the expression of the abnormal RAR-alpha message decreased markedly; however, it was still detectable in several patients after complete morphologic and cytogenetic remission had been achieved. CONCLUSIONS Tretinoin is a safe and highly effective agent for inducing complete remission in patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia. Clinical response to this agent is associated with leukemic-cell differentiation and is linked to the expression of an aberrant RAR-alpha nuclear receptor. Molecular detection of the aberrant receptor may serve as a useful marker for residual leukemia in patients with this disease.

Role of the histone deacetylase complex in acute promyelocytic leukaemia

Non-liganded retinoic acid receptors (RARs) repress transcription of target genes by recruiting the histone deacetylase complex through a class of silencing mediators termed SMRT or N-CoR,. Mutant forms of RARα, created by chromosomal translocations with either the PML (for promyelocytic leukaemia) or the PLZF (for promyelocytic leukaemia zinc finger), locus, are oncogenic and result in human acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APL). PML–RARα APL patients achieve complete remission following treatments with pharmacological doses of retinoic acids (RA); in contrast, PLZF–RARα patients respond very poorly, if at all. Here we report that the association of these two chimaeric receptors with the histone deacetylase (HDAC) complex helps to determine both the development of APL and the ability of patients to respond to retinoids. Consistent with these observations, inhibitors of histone deacetylase dramatically potentiate retinoid-induced differentiation of RA-sensitive, and restore retinoid responses of RA-resistant, APL cell lines. Our findings suggest that oncogenic RARs mediate leukaemogenesis through aberrant chromatin acetylation, and that pharmacological manipulation of nuclear receptor co-factors may be a useful approach in the treatment of human disease.

Nivolumab versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma who progressed after anti-CTLA-4 treatment (CheckMate 037): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor antibody, can result in durable responses in patients with melanoma who have progressed after ipilimumab and BRAF inhibitors. We assessed the efficacy and safety of nivolumab compared with investigators choice of chemotherapy (ICC) as a second-line or later-line treatment in patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS In this randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients at 90 sites in 14 countries. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, had unresectable or metastatic melanoma, and progressed after ipilimumab, or ipilimumab and a BRAF inhibitor if they were BRAF(V 600) mutation-positive. Participating investigators randomly assigned (with an interactive voice response system) patients 2:1 to receive an intravenous infusion of nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or ICC (dacarbazine 1000 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks or paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) combined with carboplatin area under the curve 6 every 3 weeks) until progression or unacceptable toxic effects. We stratified randomisation by BRAF mutation status, tumour expression of PD-L1, and previous best overall response to ipilimumab. We used permuted blocks (block size of six) within each stratum. Primary endpoints were the proportion of patients who had an objective response and overall survival. Treatment was given open-label, but those doing tumour assessments were masked to treatment assignment. We assessed objective responses per-protocol after 120 patients had been treated with nivolumab and had a minimum follow-up of 24 weeks, and safety in all patients who had had at least one dose of treatment. The trial is closed and this is the first interim analysis, reporting the objective response primary endpoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01721746. FINDINGS Between Dec 21, 2012, and Jan 10, 2014, we screened 631 patients, randomly allocating 272 patients to nivolumab and 133 to ICC. Confirmed objective responses were reported in 38 (31·7%, 95% CI 23·5-40·8) of the first 120 patients in the nivolumab group versus five (10·6%, 3·5-23·1) of 47 patients in the ICC group. Grade 3-4 adverse events related to nivolumab included increased lipase (three [1%] of 268 patients), increased alanine aminotransferase, anaemia, and fatigue (two [1%] each); for ICC, these included neutropenia (14 [14%] of 102), thrombocytopenia (six [6%]), and anaemia (five [5%]). We noted grade 3-4 drug-related serious adverse events in 12 (5%) nivolumab-treated patients and nine (9%) patients in the ICC group. No treatment-related deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION Nivolumab led to a greater proportion of patients achieving an objective response and fewer toxic effects than with alternative available chemotherapy regimens for patients with advanced melanoma that has progressed after ipilimumab or ipilimumab and a BRAF inhibitor. Nivolumab represents a new treatment option with clinically meaningful durable objective responses in a population of high unmet need. FUNDING Bristol-Myers Squibb.

A novel macromolecular structure is a target of the promyelocyte-retinoic acid receptor oncoprotein

Acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) is associated with a t(15;17) translocation that creates the promyelocyte-retinoic acid receptor alpha (PML-RAR alpha) fusion gene. Immunohistochemistry demonstrates that PML is a part of a novel macromolecular organelle (including at least three other nuclear proteins) referred to as PML oncogenic domains (PODs). In APL cells, the POD is disrupted into a microparticulate pattern as a consequence of the expression of the PML-RAR oncoprotein. RA treatment of APL cells triggers a reorganization of PML to generate normal-appearing PODs. We propose that PML-RAR is a dominant negative oncoprotein that exerts its putative leukomogenic effect by inhibiting assembly of the POD. According to this proposal, not only is the POD a novel structure, but it can be ascribed an imputed function such that its disruption leads to altered myeloid maturation; this may represent a novel oncogenic target.

Talimogene Laherparepvec Improves Durable Response Rate in Patients With Advanced Melanoma

PURPOSE Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is a herpes simplex virus type 1-derived oncolytic immunotherapy designed to selectively replicate within tumors and produce granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) to enhance systemic antitumor immune responses. T-VEC was compared with GM-CSF in patients with unresected stage IIIB to IV melanoma in a randomized open-label phase III trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with injectable melanoma that was not surgically resectable were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to intralesional T-VEC or subcutaneous GM-CSF. The primary end point was durable response rate (DRR; objective response lasting continuously ≥ 6 months) per independent assessment. Key secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and overall response rate. RESULTS Among 436 patients randomly assigned, DRR was significantly higher with T-VEC (16.3%; 95% CI, 12.1% to 20.5%) than GM-CSF (2.1%; 95% CI, 0% to 4.5%]; odds ratio, 8.9; P < .001). Overall response rate was also higher in the T-VEC arm (26.4%; 95% CI, 21.4% to 31.5% v 5.7%; 95% CI, 1.9% to 9.5%). Median OS was 23.3 months (95% CI, 19.5 to 29.6 months) with T-VEC and 18.9 months (95% CI, 16.0 to 23.7 months) with GM-CSF (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.00; P = .051). T-VEC efficacy was most pronounced in patients with stage IIIB, IIIC, or IVM1a disease and in patients with treatment-naive disease. The most common adverse events (AEs) with T-VEC were fatigue, chills, and pyrexia. The only grade 3 or 4 AE occurring in ≥ 2% of T-VEC-treated patients was cellulitis (2.1%). No fatal treatment-related AEs occurred. CONCLUSION T-VEC is the first oncolytic immunotherapy to demonstrate therapeutic benefit against melanoma in a phase III clinical trial. T-VEC was well tolerated and resulted in a higher DRR (P < .001) and longer median OS (P = .051), particularly in untreated patients or those with stage IIIB, IIIC, or IVM1a disease. T-VEC represents a novel potential therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma.

Irinotecan Plus Gemcitabine Results in No Survival Advantage Compared With Gemcitabine Monotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Despite Increased Tumor Response Rate

PURPOSE This phase III, randomized, open-label, multicenter study compared the overall survival associated with irinotecan plus gemcitabine (IRINOGEM) versus gemcitabine monotherapy (GEM) in patients with chemotherapy-naive, locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS IRINOGEM patients received starting doses of gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 and irinotecan 100 mg/m2 given weekly for 2 weeks every 3-week cycle. GEM patients received gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 weekly for 7 of 8 weeks (induction) and then weekly for 3 of 4 weeks. The primary end point of the trial was survival. Secondary end points included tumor response, time to tumor progression (TTP), changes in CA 19-9, and safety. RESULTS In each arm, 180 randomly assigned patients comprised the intent-to-treat population evaluated for efficacy; 173 IRINOGEM and 169 GEM patients were treated. Median survival times were 6.3 months for IRINOGEM (95% CI, 4.7 to 7.5 months) and 6.6 months for GEM (95% CI, 5.2 to 7.8 months; log-rank P =.789). Tumor response rates were 16.1% (95% CI, 11.1% to 22.3%) for IRINOGEM and 4.4% (95% CI, 1.9% to 8.6%) for GEM (chi2 P <.001). Median TTP was 3.5 months for IRINOGEM versus 3.0 months for GEM (log-rank P =.352). However, subset analyses in patients with locally advanced disease suggested a TTP advantage with IRINOGEM versus GEM (median, 7.7 v 3.9 months). CA 19-9 progression was positively correlated with tumor progression. The incidence of grade 3 diarrhea was higher in the IRINOGEM group but grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicities and quality-of-life outcomes were similar. CONCLUSION IRINOGEM safely improved the tumor response rate compared with GEM but did not alter overall survival.

Safety and efficacy results of the advanced renal cell carcinoma sorafenib expanded access program in North America

The Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma Sorafenib (ARCCS) program made sorafenib available to patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) before regulatory approval.

Phase 1 study of the oral isotype specific histone deacetylase inhibitor MGCD0103 in leukemia.

MGCD0103 is an isotype-selective inhibitor of histone deacetylases (HDACs) targeted to isoforms 1, 2, 3, and 11. In a phase 1 study in patients with leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), MGCD0103 was administered orally 3 times weekly without interruption. Twenty-nine patients with a median age of 62 years (range, 32-84 years) were enrolled at planned dose levels (20, 40, and 80 mg/m(2)). The majority of patients (76%) had acute myelogenous leukemia (AML). In all, 24 (83%) of 29 patients had received 1 or more prior chemotherapies (range, 0-5), and 18 (62%) of 29 patients had abnormal cytogenetics. The maximum tolerated dose was determined to be 60 mg/m(2), with dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of fatigue, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea observed at higher doses. Three patients achieved a complete bone marrow response (blasts <or= 5%). Pharmacokinetic analyses indicated absorption of MGCD0103 within 1 hour and an elimination half-life in plasma of 9 (+/- 2) hours. Exposure to MGCD0103 was proportional to dose up to 60 mg/m(2). Analysis of peripheral white cells demonstrated induction of histone acetylation and dose-dependent inhibition of HDAC enzyme activity. In summary, MGCD0103 was safe and had antileukemia activity that was mechanism based in patients with advanced leukemia.