4.7 Article

Randomised, open-label, phase II study of gemcitabine with and without IMM-101 for advanced pancreatic cancer

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 115, 期 7, 页码 789-796

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2016.271

关键词

pancreatic cancer; Mycobacterium obuense; phase II; advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; immunotherapy; gemcitabine; IMM-101; immunomodulator

类别

资金

  1. Immodulon Therapeutics Ltd [2010-022757-42]
  2. National Institute for Health Research [NIHR-RP-011-053] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Immune Modulation and Gemcitabine Evaluation-1, a randomised, open-label, phase II, first-line, proof of concept study (NCT01303172), explored safety and tolerability of IMM-101 (heat-killed Mycobacterium obuense; NCTC 13365) with gemcitabine (GEM) in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Methods: Patients were randomised (2 : 1) to IMM-101 (10 mg ml(-1) intradermally) + GEM (1000 mg m(-2) intravenously; n = 75), or GEM alone (n = 35). Safety was assessed on frequency and incidence of adverse events (AEs). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR) were collected. Results: IMM-101 was well tolerated with a similar rate of AE and serious adverse event reporting in both groups after allowance for exposure. Median OS in the intent-to-treat population was 6.7 months for IMM-101 + GEM v 5.6 months for GEM; while not significant, the hazard ratio (HR) numerically favoured IMM-101 + GEM (HR, 0.68 (95% CI, 0.44-1.04, P = 0.074). In a pre-defined metastatic subgroup (84%), OS was significantly improved from 4.4 to 7.0 months in favour of IMM-101 + GEM (HR, 0.54, 95% CI 0.33-0.87, P = 0.01). Conclusions: IMM-101 with GEM was as safe and well tolerated as GEM alone, and there was a suggestion of a beneficial effect on survival in patients with metastatic disease. This warrants further evaluation in an adequately powered confirmatory study.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据