Cargando…
Cutaneous head and neck melanoma in OPTiM, a randomized phase 3 trial of talimogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor for the treatment of unresected stage IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma
BACKGROUND: Cutaneous head and neck melanoma has poor outcomes and limited treatment options. In OPTiM, a phase 3 study in patients with unresectable stage IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma, intralesional administration of the oncolytic virus talimogene laherparepvec improved durable response rate (DRR; continu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5129499/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27407058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hed.24522 |
_version_ | 1782470597663522816 |
---|---|
author | Andtbacka, Robert H. I. Agarwala, Sanjiv S. Ollila, David W. Hallmeyer, Sigrun Milhem, Mohammed Amatruda, Thomas Nemunaitis, John J. Harrington, Kevin J. Chen, Lisa Shilkrut, Mark Ross, Merrick Kaufman, Howard L. |
author_facet | Andtbacka, Robert H. I. Agarwala, Sanjiv S. Ollila, David W. Hallmeyer, Sigrun Milhem, Mohammed Amatruda, Thomas Nemunaitis, John J. Harrington, Kevin J. Chen, Lisa Shilkrut, Mark Ross, Merrick Kaufman, Howard L. |
author_sort | Andtbacka, Robert H. I. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Cutaneous head and neck melanoma has poor outcomes and limited treatment options. In OPTiM, a phase 3 study in patients with unresectable stage IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma, intralesional administration of the oncolytic virus talimogene laherparepvec improved durable response rate (DRR; continuous response ≥6 months) compared with subcutaneous granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor (GM‐CSF). METHODS: Retrospective review of OPTiM identified patients with cutaneous head and neck melanoma given talimogene laherparepvec (n = 61) or GM‐CSF (n = 26). Outcomes were compared between talimogene laherparepvec and GM‐CSF treated patients with cutaneous head and neck melanoma. RESULTS: DRR was higher for talimogene laherparepvec–treated patients than for GM‐CSF treated patients (36.1% vs 3.8%; p = .001). A total of 29.5% of patients had a complete response with talimogene laherparepvec versus 0% with GM‐CSF. Among talimogene laherparepvec–treated patients with a response, the probability of still being in response after 12 months was 73%. Median overall survival (OS) was 25.2 months for GM‐CSF and had not been reached with talimogene laherparepvec. CONCLUSION: Treatment with talimogene laherparepvec was associated with improved response and survival compared with GM‐CSF in patients with cutaneous head and neck melanoma. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: 1752–1758, 2016 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5129499 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51294992016-11-30 Cutaneous head and neck melanoma in OPTiM, a randomized phase 3 trial of talimogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor for the treatment of unresected stage IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma Andtbacka, Robert H. I. Agarwala, Sanjiv S. Ollila, David W. Hallmeyer, Sigrun Milhem, Mohammed Amatruda, Thomas Nemunaitis, John J. Harrington, Kevin J. Chen, Lisa Shilkrut, Mark Ross, Merrick Kaufman, Howard L. Head Neck Original Articles BACKGROUND: Cutaneous head and neck melanoma has poor outcomes and limited treatment options. In OPTiM, a phase 3 study in patients with unresectable stage IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma, intralesional administration of the oncolytic virus talimogene laherparepvec improved durable response rate (DRR; continuous response ≥6 months) compared with subcutaneous granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor (GM‐CSF). METHODS: Retrospective review of OPTiM identified patients with cutaneous head and neck melanoma given talimogene laherparepvec (n = 61) or GM‐CSF (n = 26). Outcomes were compared between talimogene laherparepvec and GM‐CSF treated patients with cutaneous head and neck melanoma. RESULTS: DRR was higher for talimogene laherparepvec–treated patients than for GM‐CSF treated patients (36.1% vs 3.8%; p = .001). A total of 29.5% of patients had a complete response with talimogene laherparepvec versus 0% with GM‐CSF. Among talimogene laherparepvec–treated patients with a response, the probability of still being in response after 12 months was 73%. Median overall survival (OS) was 25.2 months for GM‐CSF and had not been reached with talimogene laherparepvec. CONCLUSION: Treatment with talimogene laherparepvec was associated with improved response and survival compared with GM‐CSF in patients with cutaneous head and neck melanoma. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 38: 1752–1758, 2016 John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-07-13 2016-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5129499/ /pubmed/27407058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hed.24522 Text en © 2016 The Authors Head & Neck Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Andtbacka, Robert H. I. Agarwala, Sanjiv S. Ollila, David W. Hallmeyer, Sigrun Milhem, Mohammed Amatruda, Thomas Nemunaitis, John J. Harrington, Kevin J. Chen, Lisa Shilkrut, Mark Ross, Merrick Kaufman, Howard L. Cutaneous head and neck melanoma in OPTiM, a randomized phase 3 trial of talimogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor for the treatment of unresected stage IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma |
title | Cutaneous head and neck melanoma in OPTiM, a randomized phase 3 trial of talimogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor for the treatment of unresected stage IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma |
title_full | Cutaneous head and neck melanoma in OPTiM, a randomized phase 3 trial of talimogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor for the treatment of unresected stage IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma |
title_fullStr | Cutaneous head and neck melanoma in OPTiM, a randomized phase 3 trial of talimogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor for the treatment of unresected stage IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma |
title_full_unstemmed | Cutaneous head and neck melanoma in OPTiM, a randomized phase 3 trial of talimogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor for the treatment of unresected stage IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma |
title_short | Cutaneous head and neck melanoma in OPTiM, a randomized phase 3 trial of talimogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor for the treatment of unresected stage IIIB/IIIC/IV melanoma |
title_sort | cutaneous head and neck melanoma in optim, a randomized phase 3 trial of talimogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte‐macrophage colony‐stimulating factor for the treatment of unresected stage iiib/iiic/iv melanoma |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5129499/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27407058 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hed.24522 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT andtbackaroberthi cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma AT agarwalasanjivs cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma AT olliladavidw cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma AT hallmeyersigrun cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma AT milhemmohammed cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma AT amatrudathomas cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma AT nemunaitisjohnj cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma AT harringtonkevinj cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma AT chenlisa cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma AT shilkrutmark cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma AT rossmerrick cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma AT kaufmanhowardl cutaneousheadandneckmelanomainoptimarandomizedphase3trialoftalimogenelaherparepvecversusgranulocytemacrophagecolonystimulatingfactorforthetreatmentofunresectedstageiiibiiicivmelanoma |