Jason Chesney, J. Graham Brown Cancer Center, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY; Igor Puzanov, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo; Philip Friedlander, Mt Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY; Frances Collichio, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; Parminder Singh, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ; Mohammed M. Milhem, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, IA; John Glaspy, University of California Los Angeles School of Medicine; Omid Hamid, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles; Lisa Chen, Jenny J. Kim, and Jennifer Gansert, Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA; Merrick Ross, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Claus Garbe, University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen; Axel Hauschild, University of Kiel, Kiel, Germany; Theodore F. Logan, Indiana University Simon Cancer Center, Indianapolis, IN; Celeste Lebbé, Assistance Publique-Hôpital De Paris Dermatology and CIC Hôpital Saint Louis University Paris Diderot Sorbonne, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale U976, Paris, France; Robert H.I. Andtbacka, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; and Howard L. Kaufman, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Jun 10;36(17):1658-1667. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.73.7379. Epub 2017 Oct 5.
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 × 10 plaque-forming units/mL; after 3 weeks, ≤ 4 mL × 10 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.
目的 在一项 II 期研究中,我们评估了替莫唑胺联合 ipilimumab 与 ipilimumab 单药治疗晚期黑色素瘤患者的疗效。据我们所知,这是首次评估在检查点抑制剂基础上联合使用溶瘤病毒的随机试验。
方法 患有不可切除的 IIIB 期至 IV 期黑色素瘤的患者,BRAF 野生型患者最多接受一次既往治疗,BRAF 突变患者最多接受两次既往治疗,有可测量/可注射疾病,无症状性自身免疫或临床显著免疫抑制,按 1:1 随机分配接受替莫唑胺联合 ipilimumab 或 ipilimumab 单药治疗。替莫唑胺治疗于第 1 周开始(第 1 次剂量,≤4 mL×10 噬菌斑形成单位/mL;第 3 周后,每 2 周≤4 mL×10 噬菌斑形成单位/mL)。Ipilimumab(每 3 周 3 mg/kg;最多 4 剂)在 ipilimumab 单药组于第 1 周开始,在联合组于第 6 周开始。主要终点是根据免疫相关反应标准评估的研究者评估的客观缓解率。
结果 198 名患者随机分配至替莫唑胺联合 ipilimumab(n=98)或 ipilimumab 单药(n=100)组。联合组 38 例(39%)患者和 ipilimumab 组 18 例(18%)患者有客观缓解(优势比,2.9;95%CI,1.5 至 5.5;P=0.002)。反应不限于注射部位;联合组 52%的患者和 ipilimumab 组 23%的患者内脏病变减少。常见不良事件(AE)包括疲劳(联合组 59%,ipilimumab 组 42%)、寒战(联合组 53%,ipilimumab 组 3%)和腹泻(联合组 42%,ipilimumab 组 35%)。≥3 级不良事件发生率分别为 45%和 35%。联合组有 3 例患者发生致命不良事件;均与治疗无关。
结论 该研究达到了主要终点;替莫唑胺联合 ipilimumab 与 ipilimumab 单药相比,客观缓解率显著提高。这些数据表明,与 ipilimumab 相比,该联合方案具有更强的抗肿瘤活性,且无安全性担忧增加。