Background In a phase 1 dose-escalation study, combined inhibition of T-cell checkpoint pathways by nivolumab and ipilimumab demonstrated a high objective response rate, including complete responses in patients with advanced melanoma. Methods In this double-blind study, 142 treatment-naïve patients with metastatic melanoma were randomized 2:1 to receive ipilimumab 3 mg/kg combined with either nivolumab 1 mg/kg or placebo every 3 weeks for 4 doses, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg or placebo every 2 weeks until disease progression. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response in BRAF wild-type patients. Results Among BRAF wild-type patients, the confirmed objective response rate was 61.1% (44/72) in the nivolumab and ipilimumab combination group versus 10.8% (4/37) in the ipilimumab monotherapy group (P<0.001), with complete responses reported in 16 (22.2%) patients in the combination group; none in the ipilimumab group. Median duration of response was not reached with either treatment. Median progression-free survival was not reached for the combination versus 4.4 months for ipilimumab monotherapy (hazard ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.68; P<0.001). Similar results for response and progression-free survival were also observed in 33 BRAF mutation-positive patients. Grade 3–4 drug-related adverse events were reported in 54.3% of patients receiving the combination compared with 23.9% with ipilimumab monotherapy. Select adverse events of immunological etiology were consistent with phase 1 reports, and most resolved with immune-modulating medication. Conclusion Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab significantly improved objective response rate and progression-free survival compared with ipilimumab monotherapy in treatment-naïve patients with advanced melanoma, and had a manageable safety profile. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01927419)

No abstract

Summary Background Previously reported results of phase 2 and phase 3 trials showed a significant improvement in the rate of objective response and progression-free survival with nivolumab (anti-PD-1 antibody) plus ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4 antibody) vs ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma. To our knowledge, this is the first report of overall survival data from a randomised, controlled trial evaluating the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. Methods In this phase 2 trial (CheckMate 069), 142 patients aged ≥18 years with previously untreated, unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive an intravenous infusion of nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus placebo, every 3 weeks for 4 doses, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg or placebo, respectively, every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was done by an interactive voice response system with a permuted block schedule and stratification by BRAF mutation status. The primary endpoint (previously reported) was the rate of investigator-assessed objective response among patients with BRAF V600 wild-type melanoma. Overall survival was an exploratory endpoint. Efficacy analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population, where safety was evaluated in all treated patients. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01927419, and is ongoing but no longer enrolling patients. Findings Between September 16, 2013, and February 6, 2014, we screened 179 patients, randomly allocating 95 patients to nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 47 to ipilimumab (72 [76%] and 37 [79%] patients with BRAF V600 wild-type tumors, respectively). At a median follow-up of 24 months, overall survival rates in all randomized patients were 63·8% (95% CI 53·3–72·6) for nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs 53·6% (95% CI 38·1–66·8) for ipilimumab alone; median overall survival had not been reached in either group (hazard ratio 0·74, 95% CI 0·43–1·26; p=0.26). Grade 3–4 adverse events related to nivolumab plus ipilimumab were reported in 51 [54%] of 94 patients vs 9 [20%] of 46 patients related to ipilimumab alone. The most common treatment-related grade 3–4 adverse events in the combination group were colitis (12 [13%] of 94 patients) and increased alanine aminotransferase (10 [11%]), and for ipilimumab alone, were diarrhoea (five [11%] of 46 patients) and hypophysitis (two [4%]). Serious grade 3–4 adverse events related to nivolumab plus ipilimumab were reported in 34 [36%] of 94 patients vs 4 [9%] of 46 patients related to ipilimumab alone, which included colitis (10 [11%]) and diarrhoea (5 [5%]) in the combination group and diarrhoea (2 [4%]), colitis (1 [2%]), and hypophysitis (1[2%]) in the ipilimumab alone group. Interpretation While follow-up of the patients continues, the results of this analysis suggest that the combination of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab may lead to a h...

Purpose Until recently, limited options existed for patients with advanced melanoma who experienced disease progression while receiving treatment with ipilimumab. Here, we report the coprimary overall survival (OS) end point of CheckMate 037, which has previously shown that nivolumab resulted in more patients achieving an objective response compared with chemotherapy regimens in ipilimumab-refractory patients with advanced melanoma. Patients and Methods Patients were stratified by programmed death-ligand 1 expression, BRAF status, and best prior cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 therapy response, then randomly assigned 2:1 to nivolumab 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks or investigator's choice chemotherapy (ICC; dacarbazine 1,000 mg/m every 3 weeks or carboplatin area under the curve 6 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m every 3 weeks). Patients were treated until they experienced progression or unacceptable toxicity, with follow-up of approximately 2 years. Results Two hundred seventy-two patients were randomly assigned to nivolumab (99% treated) and 133 to ICC (77% treated). More nivolumab-treated patients had brain metastases (20% v 14%) and increased lactate dehydrogenase levels (52% v 38%) at baseline; 41% of patients treated with ICC versus 11% of patients treated with nivolumab received anti-programmed death 1 agents after randomly assigned therapy. Median OS was 16 months for nivolumab versus 14 months for ICC (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95.54% CI, 0.73 to 1.24); median progression-free survival was 3.1 months versus 3.7 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.0; 95.1% CI, 0.78 to 1.436). Overall response rate (27% v 10%) and median duration of response (32 months v 13 months) were notably higher for nivolumab versus ICC. Fewer grade 3 and 4 treatment-related adverse events were observed in patients on nivolumab (14% v 34%). Conclusion Nivolumab demonstrated higher, more durable responses but no difference in survival compared with ICC. OS should be interpreted with caution as it was likely impacted by an increased dropout rate before treatment, which led to crossover therapy in the ICC group, and by an increased proportion of patients in the nivolumab group with poor prognostic factors.

Purpose: Diarrhea (with or without colitis) is an immune-related adverse event (irAE) associated with ipilimumab. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, multinational phase II trial was conducted to determine whether prophylactic budesonide (Entocort EC), a nonabsorbed oral steroid, reduced the rate of grade ≥2 diarrhea in ipilimumab-treated patients with advanced melanoma. Experimental Design: Previously treated and treatment-naïve patients (N = 115) with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma received open-label ipilimumab (10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses) with daily blinded budesonide (group A) or placebo (group B) through week 16. The first scheduled tumor evaluation was at week 12; eligible patients received maintenance treatment starting at week 24. Diarrhea was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) 3.0. Patients kept a diary describing their bowel habits. Results: Budesonide did not affect the rate of grade ≥2 diarrhea, which occurred in 32.7% and 35.0% of patients in groups A and B, respectively. There were no bowel perforations or treatment-related deaths. Best overall response rates were 12.1% in group A and 15.8% in group B, with a median overall survival of 17.7 and 19.3 months, respectively. Within each group, the disease control rate was higher in patients with grade 3 to 4 irAEs than in patients with grade 0 to 2 irAEs, although many patients with grade 1 to 2 irAEs experienced clinical benefit. Novel patterns of response to ipilimumab were observed. Conclusions: Ipilimumab shows activity in advanced melanoma, with encouraging survival and manageable adverse events. Budesonide should not be used prophylactically for grade ≥2 diarrhea associated with ipilimumab therapy. (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15 (17):5591-8) Localized melanoma can be effectively treated by surgery (1), but new therapies for unresectable disease are urgently needed. Dacarbazine is the commonly used standard treatment for advanced melanoma (2, 3), but no systemic treatment has shown improved survival compared with dacarbazine in randomized clinical trials (4-7). Recent immunotherapy trials have shown median overall survival (OS) time of 11.4 months with highdose interleukin 2 (8) and 11.7 months for tremelimumab (9). A recent meta-analysis of 42 phase II trials done by the cooperative groups between 1975 and 2005 in patients with metastatic melanoma documented a median survival time of 6.2 months, with a 25.5% 1-year survival rate (10).Ipilimumab (Bristol-Myers Squibb and Medarex) is a fully human monoclonal antibody directed against CTL antigen-4 . CTLA-4 is a key negative regulator of the T-cell immune response, and preclinical animal studies have shown that blocking CTLA-4 enhances adaptive immune responses and induces tumor regression (16,17). In clinical trials,