Dataset Information

Single Institution Experience of Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg with Sargramostim (GM-CSF) in Metastatic Melanoma.

ABSTRACT: Ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg with sargramostim (GM-CSF; GM), improved overall survival (OS) and safety of patients with advanced melanoma over ipilimumab in a randomized phase II trial. The FDA-approved dose of ipilimumab of 3 mg/kg has not been assessed with GM (IPI-GM). Consecutive patients treated with IPI-GM at a single institution were reviewed. Treatment included ipilimumab every 3 weeks × 4 and GM, 250-?g s.c. injection days 1 to 14 of each ipilimumab cycle. Efficacy, clinical characteristics, toxicities, and blinded radiology review of tumor burden were evaluated. Thirty-two patients were identified with 25 (78%) having immune-related response criteria (irRC) measurable disease and 41% with central nervous system metastases. A total of 88.6% of GM doses were administered. Response rate by irRC and disease control rate at 12 weeks were 20% and 44%, respectively (median follow-up 37 weeks). Immune-related adverse events (irAE) were observed in 10 (31.3%) patients, with 3 (9.4%) grade 3 events. Patients with grade 3 irAEs had prior autoimmunity, advanced age, and poor performance status. The median OS from first dose of ipilimumab was 41 weeks. Ipi-GM treatment is feasible and in this poor-risk advanced melanoma population, efficacy appeared similar but safety appeared improved relative to historical ipilimumab alone.

SUBMITTER: Luke JJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4561189 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Single Institution Experience of Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg with Sargramostim (GM-CSF) in Metastatic Melanoma.

Luke Jason J JJ Donahue Hilary H Nishino Mizuki M Giobbie-Hurder Anita A Davis Meredith M Bailey Nancy N Ott Patrick A PA Hodi F Stephen FS

Cancer immunology research 20150505 9

Ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg with sargramostim (GM-CSF; GM), improved overall survival (OS) and safety of patients with advanced melanoma over ipilimumab in a randomized phase II trial. The FDA-approved dose of ipilimumab of 3 mg/kg has not been assessed with GM (IPI-GM). Consecutive patients treated with IPI-GM at a single institution were reviewed. Treatment included ipilimumab every 3 weeks × 4 and GM, 250-μg s.c. injection days 1 to 14 of each ipilimumab cycle. Efficacy, clinical characteristics, to ...[more]

PMID: 25943535

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceCytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) blockade with ipilimumab prolongs survival in patients with metastatic melanoma. CTLA-4 blockade and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF)-secreting tumor vaccine combinations demonstrate therapeutic synergy in preclinical models. A key unanswered question is whether systemic GM-CSF (sargramostim) enhances CTLA-4 blockade.ObjectiveTo compare the effect of ipilimumab plus sargramostim vs ipilimumab alone on overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic melanoma.Design, setting, and participantsThe Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) conducted a US-based phase 2 randomized clinical trial from December 28, 2010, until July 28, 2011, of patients (N = 245) with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, at least 1 prior therapy, no central nervous system metastases, and ECOG performance status of 0 or 1.InterventionsPatients were randomized to receive ipilimumab, 10 mg/kg, intravenously on day 1 plus sargramostim, 250 μg subcutaneously, on days 1 to 14 of a 21-day cycle (n = 123) vs ipilimumab alone (n = 122). Ipilimumab treatment included induction for 4 cycles followed by maintenance every fourth cycle.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary end point: comparison of length of OS. Secondary end point: progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, safety, and tolerability.ResultsMedian follow-up was 13.3 months (range, 0.03-19.9). Median OS as of December 2012 for ipilimumab plus sargramostim was 17.5 months (95% CI, 14.9-not reached) vs 12.7 months (95% CI, 10.0-not reached) for ipilimumab. The 1-year survival rate for ipilimumab plus sargramostim was 68.9% (95% CI, 60.6%-85.5%) compared to 52.9% (95% CI, 43.6%-62.2%) for ipilimumab alone (stratified log-rank 1-sided P = .01; mortality hazard ratio 0.64 [1-sided 90% repeated CI, not applicable-0.90]). A planned interim analysis was conducted at 69.8% of expected events (104 observed with 149 expected deaths). Planned interim analysis using the O'Brien-Fleming boundary was crossed for improvement in OS. There was no difference in PFS. Median PFS for ipilimumab plus sargramostim was 3.1 months (95% CI, 2.9-4.6) vs 3.1 months (95% CI, 2.9-4.0) for ipilimumab alone. Grade 3 to 5 adverse events occurred in 44.9% (95% CI; 35.8%-54.4%) of patients in the ipilimumab plus sargramostim group vs 58.3% (95% CI, 49.0%-67.2%) of patients in the ipilimumab-alone group (2-sided P = .04).Conclusion and relevanceAmong patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, treatment with ipilimumab plus sargramostim vs ipilimumab alone resulted in longer OS and lower toxicity, but no difference in PFS. These findings require confirmation in larger studies with longer follow-up.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01134614.

Project description:PurposeCheckMate 032 is an open-label, multicohort study that includes patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) treated with nivolumab 3 mg/kg monotherapy every 2 weeks (NIVO3), nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed by nivolumab monotherapy 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (NIVO3+IPI1), or nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed by nivolumab monotherapy 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (NIVO1+IPI3). We report on the expanded NIVO1+IPI3 cohort and extended follow-up for the NIVO3 and NIVO3+IPI1 cohorts.MethodsPatients with platinum-pretreated mUC were enrolled in this phase I/II multicenter study to receive NIVO3, NIVO3+IPI1, or NIVO1+IPI3 until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, including duration of response.ResultsSeventy-eight patients were treated with NIVO3 (minimum follow-up, 37.7 months), 104 with NIVO3+IPI1 (minimum follow-up, 38.8 months), and 92 with NIVO1+IPI3 (minimum follow-up, 7.9 months). Objective response rate was 25.6%, 26.9%, and 38.0% in the NIVO3, NIVO3+IPI1, and NIVO1+IPI3 arms, respectively. Median duration of response was more than 22 months in all arms. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 21 (26.9%), 32 (30.8%), and 36 (39.1%) patients treated with NIVO3, NIVO3+IPI1, and NIVO1+IPI3, respectively. Grade 5 treatment-related pneumonitis occurred in one patient each in the NIVO3 and NIVO3+IPI1 arms.ConclusionWith longer follow-up, NIVO3 demonstrated sustained antitumor activity alone and in combination with ipilimumab. NIVO1+IPI3 provided the greatest antitumor activity of all regimens, with a manageable safety profile. This result not only supports additional study of NIVO1+IPI3 in mUC, but demonstrates the potential benefit of immunotherapy combinations in this disease.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Neoadjuvant immunotherapy utilizing novel combinations has the potential to transform the standard of care for locally/regionally advanced melanoma. We hypothesized that neoadjuvant ipilimumab in combination with high dose IFN?2b (HDI) is safe and associated with durable pathologic complete responses (pCR). METHODS:Patients with locally/regionally advanced melanoma were randomized to ipilimumab 3 or 10 mg/kg ×?4 doses bracketing definitive surgery, then every 12 weeks ×?4. HDI was given concurrently. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the combination with ipilimumab 3 or 10 mg/kg. The impact on T-cell fraction and clonality were investigated in tumor and blood. RESULTS:Thirty patients (age 37-76), 15 each at 3 and 10 mg/kg, 18 male and 12 female were treated. Considering immune related adverse events (irAEs) of interest, more grade 3/4 irAEs were seen with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg versus 3 mg/kg (p?=?0.042). Among 28 evaluable patients, 11 relapsed, of whom 5 died. Median follow-up for 17 patients who have not relapsed was 32 months. The radiologic preoperative response rate was 36% (95% CI, 21-54); 4 patients at ipilimumab 3 mg/kg and 6 at 10 mg/kg and 2 (at 10 mg/kg) later relapsed. The pCR was 32% (95% CI, 18-51); 5 patients at ipilimumab 3 mg/kg and 4 at 10 mg/kg and one (at 3 mg/kg) had a late relapse. In patients with pCR, T-cell fraction was significantly higher when measured in primary melanoma tumors (p?=?0.033). Higher tumor T-cell clonality in primary tumor and more so following neoadjuvant therapy was significantly associated with improved relapse free survival. CONCLUSIONS:Neoadjuvant ipilimumab-HDI was relatively safe and exhibited promising tumor response rates with an associated measurable impact on T-cell fraction and clonality. Most pCRs were durable supporting the value of pCR as a primary endpoint in neoadjuvant immunotherapy trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01608594 . Registered 31 May 2012.

Project description:IntroductionInflammatory markers have long been observed in the brain, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and plasma of Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients, suggesting that inflammation contributes to AD and might be a therapeutic target. However, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug trials in AD and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) failed to show benefit. Our previous work seeking to understand why people with the inflammatory disease rheumatoid arthritis are protected from AD found that short-term treatment of transgenic AD mice with the pro-inflammatory cytokine granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) led to an increase in activated microglia, a 50% reduction in amyloid load, an increase in synaptic area, and improvement in spatial memory to normal. These results called into question the consensus view that inflammation is solely detrimental in AD. Here, we tested our hypothesis that modulation of the innate immune system might similarly be used to treat AD in humans by investigating the ability of GM-CSF/sargramostim to safely ameliorate AD symptoms/pathology.MethodsA randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in mild-to-moderate AD participants (NCT01409915). Treatments (20 participants/group) occurred 5 days/week for 3 weeks plus two follow-up (FU) visits (FU1 at 45 days and FU2 at 90 days) with neurological, neuropsychological, blood biomarker, and imaging assessments.ResultsSargramostim treatment expectedly changed innate immune system markers, with no drug-related serious adverse events or amyloid-related imaging abnormalities. At end of treatment (EOT), the Mini-Mental State Examination score of the sargramostim group increased compared to baseline (P = .0074) and compared to placebo (P = .0370); the treatment effect persisted at FU1 (P = .0272). Plasma markers of amyloid beta (Aβ40 [decreased in AD]) increased 10% (P = .0105); plasma markers of neurodegeneration (total tau and UCH-L1) decreased 24% (P = .0174) and 42% (P = .0019), respectively, after sargramostim treatment compared to placebo.DiscussionThe innate immune system is a viable target for therapeutic intervention in AD. An extended treatment trial testing the long-term safety and efficacy of GM-CSF/sargramostim in AD is warranted.

Project description:BackgroundSargramostim [recombinant human granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (rhu GM-CSF)] was approved by US FDA in 1991 to accelerate bone marrow recovery in diverse settings of bone marrow failure and is designated on the list of FDA Essential Medicines, Medical Countermeasures, and Critical Inputs. Other important biological activities including accelerating tissue repair and modulating host immunity to infection and cancer via the innate and adaptive immune systems are reported in pre-clinical models but incompletely studied in humans.ObjectiveAssess safety and efficacy of sargramostim in cancer and other diverse experimental and clinical settings.Methods and resultsWe systematically reviewed PubMed, Cochrane and TRIP databases for clinical data on sargramostim in cancer. In a variety of settings, sargramostim after exposure to bone marrow-suppressing agents accelerated hematologic recovery resulting in fewer infections, less therapy-related toxicity and sometimes improved survival. As an immune modulator, sargramostim also enhanced anti-cancer responses in solid cancers when combined with conventional therapies, for example with immune checkpoint inhibitors and monoclonal antibodies.ConclusionsSargramostim accelerates hematologic recovery in diverse clinical settings and enhances anti-cancer responses with a favorable safety profile. Uses other than in hematologic recovery are less-well studied; more data are needed on immune-enhancing benefits. We envision significantly expanded use of sargramostim in varied immune settings. Sargramostim has the potential to reverse the immune suppression associated with sepsis, trauma, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and COVID-19. Further, sargramostim therapy has been promising in the adjuvant setting with vaccines and for anti-microbial-resistant infections and treating autoimmune pulmonary alveolar proteinosis and gastrointestinal, peripheral arterial and neuro-inflammatory diseases. It also may be useful as an adjuvant in anti-cancer immunotherapy.

Dataset Information

Single Institution Experience of Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg with Sargramostim (GM-CSF) in Metastatic Melanoma.

Publications

Single Institution Experience of Ipilimumab 3 mg/kg with Sargramostim (GM-CSF) in Metastatic Melanoma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets