4.7 Article

CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 Blockade: New Immunotherapeutic Modalities with Durable Clinical Benefit in Melanoma Patients

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 19, 期 19, 页码 5300-5309

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0143

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  2. Merck
  3. Roche

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Immune checkpoint blockade with monoclonal antibodies directed at the inhibitory immune receptors CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1 has emerged as a successful treatment approach for patients with advanced melanoma. Ipilimumab is the first agent associated with a documented improved overall survival benefit in this patient population. A striking attribute of CTLA-4 blockade is the durability of objective responses, leading to speculation of a possible cure for some patients. Many tumor responses achieved with PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibition were durable in the phase I trials and were seen in a higher proportion of patients with melanoma than typically observed with ipilimumab. Biomarker development to identify the subset of patients with melanoma who will achieve durable clinical benefit with checkpoint blockade is critical; tumor PD-L1 expression has been promising in early studies. The contrast between unprecedented response rates but limited durability of responses achieved with BRAF and MEK inhibition in BRAF(V600)-mutated melanoma and the impressive durability but relatively low rate of response achieved with immune checkpoint blockade is striking. Preclinical data on potential synergies between CTLA-4/PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition and MAPK-targeted therapy is emerging, and combined immune checkpoint blockade and MAPK inhibition are being explored in clinical trials. Other promising approaches to increase the number of patients with melanoma who benefit from durable responses with immune checkpoint blockade include concurrent or sequenced CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition and combination with other immunotherapeutic strategies. (C) 2013 AACR.

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