Browsing by Subject "Ipilimumab"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A Multicenter Phase II Trial of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab in Unresectable or Metastatic Metaplastic Breast Cancer: Cohort 36 of Dual Anti-CTLA-4 and Anti-PD-1 Blockade in Rare Tumors (DART, SWOG S1609)
    (American Association for Cancer Research, 2022) Adams, Sylvia; Othus, Megan; Patel, Sandip Pravin; Miller, Kathy D.; Chugh, Rashmi; Schuetze, Scott M.; Chamberlin, Mary D.; Haley, Barbara J.; Storniolo, Anna Maria V.; Reddy, Mridula P.; Anderson, Scott A.; Zimmerman, Collin T.; O'Dea, Anne P.; Mirshahidi, Hamid R.; Ahnert, Jordi Rodon; Brescia, Frank J.; Hahn, Olwen; Raymond, Jane M.; Biggs, David D.; Connolly, Roisin M.; Sharon, Elad; Korde, Larissa A.; Gray, Robert J.; Mayerson, Edward; Plets, Melissa; Blanke, Charles D.; Chae, Young Kwang; Kurzrock, Razelle; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Purpose: Metaplastic breast cancer (MpBC) is a rare aggressive subtype that responds poorly to cytotoxics. Median survival is approximately 8 months for metastatic disease. We report results for advanced MpBC treated with ipilimumab + nivolumab, a cohort of S1609 for rare cancers (DART: NCT02834013). Patients and methods: Prospective, open-label, multicenter phase II (two-stage) trial of ipilimumab (1 mg/kg i.v. every 6 weeks) plus nivolumab (240 mg i.v. every 2 weeks) for advanced MpBC. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. Results: Overall, 17 evaluable patients enrolled. Median age was 60 years (26-85); median number of prior therapy lines was 2 (0-5). ORR was 18%; 3 of 17 patients achieved objective responses (1 complete, 2 partial responses; 2 spindle cell, 1 chondromyxoid histology), which are ongoing at 28+, 33+, and 34+ months, respectively. Median PFS and OS were 2 and 12 months, respectively. Altogether, 11 patients (65%) experienced adverse events (AE), including one grade 5 AE. Eight patients (47%) developed an immune-related AE (irAE), with adrenal insufficiency observed in all 3 responders. Responses occurred in tumors with low tumor mutational burden, low PD-L1, and absent tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. Conclusions: The ipilimumab and nivolumab combination showed no new safety signals and met its primary endpoint with 18% ORR in advanced, chemotherapy-refractory MpBC. All responses are ongoing at >2 to almost 3 years later. The effect of ipilimumab and nivolumab was associated with exceptional responses in a subset of patients versus no activity. This combination warrants further investigation in MpBC, with special attention to understanding mechanism of action, and carefully designed to weigh against the significant risks of irAEs.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Ipilimumab, Nivolumab and Brentuximab Vedotin in Patients with Relapsed Hodgkin Lymphoma: Phase 1 Results of a Multicenter Phase 1/2 Clinical Trial
    (Elsevier, 2020-09) Diefenbach, Catherine S.; Hong, Fangxin; Ambinder, Richard F.; Cohen, Jonathon B.; Robertson, Michael J.; David, Kevin A.; Advani, Ranjana H.; Fenske, Timothy S.; Barta, Stefan K.; Palmisiano, Neil D.; Svoboda, Jakub; Morgan, David S.; Karmali, Reem; Sharon, Elad; Streicher, Howard; Kahl, Brad S.; Ansell, Stephen M.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    Background: Recognising that the immune suppressive microenvironment promotes tumour growth in Hodgkin lymphoma, we hypothesised that activating immunity might augment the activity of targeted chemotherapy. We evaluated the safety and activity of combinations of brentuximab vedotin with nivolumab or ipilimumab, or both in patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. Methods: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 1/2 trial, patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma aged 18 years or older who had relapsed after at least one line of therapy, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or lower, and adequate organ and marrow function, with no pulmonary dysfunction were eligible for inclusion. Phase 1 primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose and dose limiting toxicities of brentuximab vedotin combined with ipilimumab (ipilimumab group), nivolumab (nivolumab group), or both (triplet therapy group) using a 3 + 3 dose escalation design with expansion cohorts. During the dose escalation phase, patients were enrolled sequentially into one of six cohorts: in the ipilimumab group fixed brentuximab vedotin 1·8 mg/kg with ipilimumab 1 mg/kg (cohort A) or 3 mg/kg (cohort B); in the nivolumab group fixed nivolumab 3 mg/kg with brentuximab vedotin 1·2 mg/kg (cohort D) or 1·8 mg/kg (cohort E); and in the triplet therapy group fixed nivolumab 3 mg/kg and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg with brentuximab vedotin 1·2 mg/kg (cohort G) or 1·8 mg/kg (cohort H). Additional patients were enrolled in the expansion phase at the same doses of cohorts B, E, and H. All drugs were given intravenously; brentuximab vedotin and nivolumab were given every 3 weeks, ipilimumab was given every 6 weeks in the ipilimumab group and every 12 weeks in the triplet therapy group. All eligible and treated patients were included in the analysis. This phase 1/2 study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01896999. The phase 2, randomised portion of the trial is still enrolling. Findings: Between March 7, 2014, and Dec 28, 2017, 64 patients were enrolled; two patients in the ipilimumab group and one patient in the nivolumab group were excluded due to ineligibility after enrolment and 61 were evaluable. A total of six dose limiting toxicities were reported in four patients, and the doses used in cohorts B, E, and H were established as maximum tolerated doses and patients were subsequently enrolled onto expansion cohorts (C, F, and I) with these schedules. There were ten (43%) grade 3-4 treatment related adverse events in the ipilimumab group, three (16%) in the nivolumab group, and 11 (50%) in the triplet therapy group including: eight (13%) of 64 patients reporting rash, and colitis, gastritis, pancreatitis and arthritis, and diabetic ketoacidosis each occurring in one (2%) patient. There were two (3%) treatment related deaths, one in the nivolumab group and one in the triplet therapy group. The overall response rate was 76% (95% CI 53-92) in the ipilimumab group, 89% (65-99) in the nivolumab group, and 82% (60-95) in the triplet therapy group, and the complete response rate was 57% (95% CI 34-78%) in the ipilimumab group, 61% (36-83%) in the nivolumab group, and 73% (50-89%) in the triplet therapy group. With a median follow-up of 2·6 years (IQR 1·8-2·9) in the ipilimumab group, 2·4 years (2·2-2·6) in the nivolumab group, and 1·7 years (1·6-1·9) in the triplet therapy group, median progression-free survival is 1·2 years (95% CI 1·7-not reached) in the ipilimumab group, but was not reached in the other two treatment groups. Median overall survival has not been reached in any of the groups. Interpretation: There are clear differences in activity and toxicity of the three combination regimens. The tolerability and preliminary activity for the two most active regimens, brentuximab vedotin with nivolumab and the triplet therapy, are being compared in a randomised phase 2 trial (NCT01896999).
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Local and distant brain control in melanoma and NSCLC brain metastases with concurrent radiosurgery and immune checkpoint inhibition
    (Springer, 2022-07) Le, Amy; Mohammadi, Homan; Mohammed, Toka; Burney, Heather; Zang, Yong; Frye, Douglas; Shiue, Kevin; Lautenschlaeger, Tim; Miller, James; Radiation Oncology, School of Medicine
    Introduction The treatment of brain metastases with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) in combination with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has become more common in recent years, but there is a lack of prospective data on cancer control outcomes when these therapies are administered concurrently. Methods Data were retrospectively reviewed for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and melanoma brain metastases treated with SRS at a single institution from May 2008 to January 2017. A parametric proportional hazard model is used to detect the effect of concurrent ICI within 30, 60, or 90 days of ICI administration on local control and distant in-brain control. Other patient and lesion characteristics are treated as covariates and adjusted in the regression. A frailty term is added in the baseline hazard to capture the within-patient correlation. Results We identified 144 patients with 477 total lesions, including 95 NSCLC patients (66.0%), and 49 (34.0%) melanoma patients. On multivariate analysis, concurrent SRS and ICI (SRS within 30 days of ICI administration) was not associated with local control but was associated with distant brain control. When controlling for prior treatment to lesion, number of lesions, and presence of extracranial metastases, patients receiving this combination had a statistically significant decrease in distant brain failure compared to patients that received non-concurrent ICI or no ICI (HR 0.15; 95% CI 0.05–0.47, p = 0.0011). Conclusion Concurrent ICI can enhance the efficacy of SRS. Prospective studies would allow for stronger evidence to support the impact of concurrent SRS and ICI on disease outcomes.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A rare case of thyroid storm
    (BMJ Publishing Group, 2016-04-18) McMillen, Brock; Dhillon, Manvinder Shelley; Yong-Yow, Sabrina; Family Medicine, School of Medicine
    Thyroid storm is a rare and life-threatening state of thyroid hormone excess. Rapid recognition of thyroid storm is key to decreasing the morbidity and mortality of this condition. Clinical manifestations of thyroid storm include unexplained weight loss, hyperactivity and irritability. The most common causes of thyrotoxicosis are Graves' disease, toxic multinodular goitre and toxic adenoma. We present a rare case of thyroid storm induced by dual nivolumab and ipilimumab immunotherapy in a patient receiving treatment for advanced melanoma. In this case, our patient was admitted for thyroid storm 1 month after initiating treatment with nivolumab and ipilimumab immunotherapy. The patient was treated with β-blockers, antithyroid medications and systemic steroids resulting in an improvement in thyroid function testing and symptoms.