4.7 Article

Talimogene Laherparepvec in Combination With Ipilimumab in Previously Untreated, Unresectable Stage IIIB-IV Melanoma

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 34, 期 22, 页码 2619-U109

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.67.1529

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Amgen

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Combining immunotherapeutic agents with different mechanisms of action may enhance efficacy. We describe the safety and efficacy of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC; an oncolytic virus) in combination with ipilimumab (a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 checkpoint inhibitor) in patients with advanced melanoma. Methods In this open-label, multicenter, phase Ib trial of T-VEC in combination with ipilimumab, T-VEC was administered intratumorally in week 1 (10(6) plaque-forming units/mL), then in week 4 and every 2 weeks thereafter (10(8) plaque-forming units/mL). Ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) was administered intravenously every 3 weeks for four infusions, beginning in week 6. The primary end point was incidence of dose-limiting toxicities. Secondary end points were objective response rate by immunerelated response criteria and safety. Results Median duration of treatment with T-VEC was 13.3 weeks (range, 2.0 to 95.4 weeks). Median follow-up time for survival analysis was 20.0 months (1.0 to 25.4 months). Nineteen patients were included in the safety analysis. No dose-limiting toxicities occurred, and no new safety signals were detected. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were seen in 26.3% of patients; 15.8% had AEs attributed to T-VEC, and 21.1% had AEs attributed to ipilimumab. The objective response rate was 50%, and 44% of patients had a durable response lasting >= 6 months. Eighteen-month progression-free survival was 50%; 18-month overall survival was 67%. Conclusion T-VEC with ipilimumab had a tolerable safety profile, and the combination appeared to have greater efficacy than either T-VEC or ipilimumab monotherapy. (C) 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

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