Suppr超能文献

伊匹木单抗单药治疗或伊匹木单抗联合抗PD-1治疗转移性黑色素瘤患者对抗PD-(L)1单药治疗耐药:一项多中心、回顾性队列研究。

Ipilimumab alone or ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 therapy in patients with metastatic melanoma resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study.

作者信息

Pires da Silva Ines, Ahmed Tasnia, Reijers Irene L M, Weppler Alison M, Betof Warner Allison, Patrinely James Randall, Serra-Bellver Patricio, Allayous Clara, Mangana Joanna, Nguyen Khang, Zimmer Lisa, Trojaniello Claudia, Stout Dan, Lyle Megan, Klein Oliver, Gerard Camille L, Michielin Olivier, Haydon Andrew, Ascierto Paolo A, Carlino Matteo S, Lebbe Celeste, Lorigan Paul, Johnson Douglas B, Sandhu Shahneen, Lo Serigne N, Blank Christian U, Menzies Alexander M, Long Georgina V

机构信息

Melanoma Institute Australia, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Westmead Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Blacktown Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Melanoma Institute Australia, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

出版信息

Lancet Oncol. 2021 Jun;22(6):836-847. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00097-8. Epub 2021 May 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Anti-PD-1 therapy (hereafter referred to as anti-PD-1) induces long-term disease control in approximately 30% of patients with metastatic melanoma; however, two-thirds of patients are resistant and will require further treatment. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (pembrolizumab or nivolumab) compared with ipilimumab monotherapy in patients who are resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 therapy (hereafter referred to as anti-PD-[L]1).

METHODS

This multicentre, retrospective, cohort study, was done at 15 melanoma centres in Australia, Europe, and the USA. We included adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic melanoma (unresectable stage III and IV), who were resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 (innate or acquired resistance) and who then received either ipilimumab monotherapy or ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (pembrolizumab or nivolumab), based on availability of therapies or clinical factors determined by the physician, or both. Tumour response was assessed as per standard of care (CT or PET-CT scans every 3 months). The study endpoints were objective response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety of ipilimumab compared with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1.

FINDINGS

We included 355 patients with metastatic melanoma, resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab), who had been treated with ipilimumab monotherapy (n=162 [46%]) or ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (n=193 [54%]) between Feb 1, 2011, and Feb 6, 2020. At a median follow-up of 22·1 months (IQR 9·5-30·9), the objective response rate was higher with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (60 [31%] of 193 patients) than with ipilimumab monotherapy (21 [13%] of 162 patients; p<0·0001). Overall survival was longer in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group (median overall survival 20·4 months [95% CI 12·7-34·8]) than with ipilimumab monotherapy (8·8 months [6·1-11·3]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·50, 95% CI 0·38-0·66; p<0·0001). Progression-free survival was also longer with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (median 3·0 months [95% CI 2·6-3·6]) than with ipilimumab (2·6 months [2·4-2·9]; HR 0·69, 95% CI 0·55-0·87; p=0·0019). Similar proportions of patients reported grade 3-5 adverse events in both groups (59 [31%] of 193 patients in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group vs 54 [33%] of 162 patients in the ipilimumab group). The most common grade 3-5 adverse events were diarrhoea or colitis (23 [12%] of 193 patients in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group vs 33 [20%] of 162 patients in the ipilimumab group) and increased alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase (24 [12%] vs 15 [9%]). One death occurred with ipilimumab 26 days after the last treatment: a colon perforation due to immune-related pancolitis.

INTERPRETATION

In patients who are resistant to anti-PD-(L)1, ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 seemed to yield higher efficacy than ipilimumab with a higher objective response rate, longer progression-free, and longer overall survival, with a similar rate of grade 3-5 toxicity. Ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 should be favoured over ipilimumab alone as a second-line immunotherapy for these patients with advanced melanoma.

FUNDING

None.

摘要

背景

抗程序性死亡蛋白1(PD-1)疗法(以下简称抗PD-1疗法)可使约30%的转移性黑色素瘤患者获得长期疾病控制;然而,三分之二的患者对此耐药,需要进一步治疗。我们旨在确定与抗PD-1单药治疗相比,伊匹单抗联合抗PD-1(帕博利珠单抗或纳武利尤单抗)在抗PD-(L)1疗法(以下简称抗PD-(L)1)耐药患者中的疗效和安全性。

方法

本多中心、回顾性队列研究在澳大利亚、欧洲和美国的15个黑色素瘤中心进行。我们纳入了年龄≥18岁、患有转移性黑色素瘤(不可切除的III期和IV期)、对抗PD-(L)1耐药(先天或后天耐药)的成年患者,这些患者随后根据治疗的可及性或医生确定的临床因素,或两者兼而有之,接受了伊匹单抗单药治疗或伊匹单抗联合抗PD-1(帕博利珠单抗或纳武利尤单抗)治疗。按照标准治疗方案(每3个月进行CT或PET-CT扫描)评估肿瘤反应。研究终点为客观缓解率、无进展生存期、总生存期以及伊匹单抗与伊匹单抗联合抗PD-1相比的安全性。

结果

我们纳入了355例对抗PD-(L)1(纳武利尤单抗、帕博利珠单抗或阿特珠单抗)耐药且在2011年2月1日至2020年2月6日期间接受了伊匹单抗单药治疗(n = 162 [46%])或伊匹单抗联合抗PD-1治疗(n = 193 [54%])的转移性黑色素瘤患者。在中位随访22.1个月(IQR 9.5 - 30.9)时,伊匹单抗联合抗PD-1组的客观缓解率(193例患者中的60例[31%])高于伊匹单抗单药治疗组(162例患者中的21例[13%];p<0.0001)。伊匹单抗联合抗PD-1组的总生存期更长(中位总生存期20.4个月[95%CI 12.7 - 34.8]),而伊匹单抗单药治疗组为8.8个月[6.1 - 11.3];风险比(HR)0.50,95%CI 0.38 - 0.66;p<0.0001)。伊匹单抗联合抗PD-1组的无进展生存期也更长(中位3.0个月[95%CI 2.6 - 3.6]),而伊匹单抗组为2.6个月[2.4 - 2.9];HR 0.69,95%CI 0.55 - 0.87;p = 0.0019)。两组报告3 - 5级不良事件的患者比例相似(伊匹单抗联合抗PD-1组193例患者中的59例[31%],伊匹单抗组162例患者中的54例[33%])。最常见的3 - 5级不良事件为腹泻或结肠炎(伊匹单抗联合抗PD-1组193例患者中的23例[12%],伊匹单抗组162例患者中的33例[20%])以及丙氨酸氨基转移酶或天冬氨酸氨基转移酶升高(24例[12%]对15例[9%])。在最后一次治疗后26天,伊匹单抗治疗出现1例死亡:因免疫相关全结肠炎导致的结肠穿孔。

解读

在抗PD-(L)1耐药的患者中,伊匹单抗联合抗PD-1似乎比伊匹单抗具有更高的疗效,客观缓解率更高、无进展生存期更长、总生存期更长,且3 - 5级毒性发生率相似。对于这些晚期黑色素瘤患者,伊匹单抗联合抗PD-1应优于伊匹单抗单药作为二线免疫治疗方案。

资助

无。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验