Cargando…
Efficacy and safety of anti-PD1 monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma
BACKGROUND: Patients with V600BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma have higher rates of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with first-line anti-PD1 (PD1]+anti-CTLA-4 (IPI) versus PD1. Whether this is also true after BRAF/MEKi therapy is unknown. We aimed to determine the efficacy a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9263926/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35798536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2022-004610 |
_version_ | 1784742858258907136 |
---|---|
author | Pires da Silva, Ines Zakria, Danny Ahmed, Tasnia Trojanello, Claudia Dimitriou, Florentia Allayous, Clara Gerard, Camille Zimmer, Lisa Lo, Serigne Michielin, Olivier Lebbe, Celeste Mangana, Johanna Ascierto, Paolo Antonio Johnson, Douglas B Carlino, Matteo Menzies, Alexander Long, Georgina |
author_facet | Pires da Silva, Ines Zakria, Danny Ahmed, Tasnia Trojanello, Claudia Dimitriou, Florentia Allayous, Clara Gerard, Camille Zimmer, Lisa Lo, Serigne Michielin, Olivier Lebbe, Celeste Mangana, Johanna Ascierto, Paolo Antonio Johnson, Douglas B Carlino, Matteo Menzies, Alexander Long, Georgina |
author_sort | Pires da Silva, Ines |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Patients with V600BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma have higher rates of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with first-line anti-PD1 (PD1]+anti-CTLA-4 (IPI) versus PD1. Whether this is also true after BRAF/MEKi therapy is unknown. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of PD1 versus IPI +PD1 after BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi). METHODS: Patients with V600BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF/MEKi who had subsequent PD1 versus IPI+PD1 at eight centers were included. The endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), PFS, OS and safety in each group. RESULTS: Of 200 patients with V600E (75%) or non-V600E (25%) mutant metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF/MEKi (median time of treatment 7.6 months; treatment cessation due to progressive disease in 77%), 115 (57.5%) had subsequent PD1 and 85 (42.5%) had IPI+PD1. Differences in patient characteristics between PD1 and IPI+PD1 groups included, age (med. 63 vs 54 years), time between BRAF/MEKi and PD1±IPI (16 vs 4 days), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) of ≥1 (62% vs 44%), AJCC M1C/M1D stage (72% vs 94%) and progressing brain metastases at the start of PD1±IPI (34% vs 57%). Median follow-up from PD1±IPI start was 37.8 months (95% CI, 33.9 to 52.9). ORR was 36%; 34% with PD1 vs 39% with IPI+PD1 (p=0.5713). Median PFS was 3.4 months; 3.4 with PD1 vs 3.6 months with IPI+PD1 (p=0.6951). Median OS was 15.4 months; 14.4 for PD1 vs 20.5 months with IPI+PD1 (p=0.2603). The rate of grade 3 or 4 toxicities was higher with IPI+PD1 (31%) vs PD1 (7%). ORR, PFS and OS were numerically higher with IPI+PD1 vs PD1 across most subgroups except for females, those with <10 days between BRAF/MEKi and PD1±IPI, and those with stage III/M1A/M1B melanoma. The combination of ECOG PS=0 and absence of liver metastases identified patients with >3 years OS (area under the curve, AUC=0.74), while ECOG PS ≥1, progressing brain metastases and presence of bone metastases predicted primary progression (AUC=0.67). CONCLUSIONS: IPI+PD1 and PD1 after BRAF/MEKi have similar outcomes despite worse baseline prognostic features in the IPI+PD1 group, however, IPI+PD1 is more toxic. A combination of clinical factors can identify long-term survivors, but less accurately those with primary resistance to immunotherapy after targeted therapy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9263926 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92639262022-07-25 Efficacy and safety of anti-PD1 monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma Pires da Silva, Ines Zakria, Danny Ahmed, Tasnia Trojanello, Claudia Dimitriou, Florentia Allayous, Clara Gerard, Camille Zimmer, Lisa Lo, Serigne Michielin, Olivier Lebbe, Celeste Mangana, Johanna Ascierto, Paolo Antonio Johnson, Douglas B Carlino, Matteo Menzies, Alexander Long, Georgina J Immunother Cancer Clinical/Translational Cancer Immunotherapy BACKGROUND: Patients with V600BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma have higher rates of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with first-line anti-PD1 (PD1]+anti-CTLA-4 (IPI) versus PD1. Whether this is also true after BRAF/MEKi therapy is unknown. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of PD1 versus IPI +PD1 after BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi). METHODS: Patients with V600BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF/MEKi who had subsequent PD1 versus IPI+PD1 at eight centers were included. The endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), PFS, OS and safety in each group. RESULTS: Of 200 patients with V600E (75%) or non-V600E (25%) mutant metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF/MEKi (median time of treatment 7.6 months; treatment cessation due to progressive disease in 77%), 115 (57.5%) had subsequent PD1 and 85 (42.5%) had IPI+PD1. Differences in patient characteristics between PD1 and IPI+PD1 groups included, age (med. 63 vs 54 years), time between BRAF/MEKi and PD1±IPI (16 vs 4 days), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) of ≥1 (62% vs 44%), AJCC M1C/M1D stage (72% vs 94%) and progressing brain metastases at the start of PD1±IPI (34% vs 57%). Median follow-up from PD1±IPI start was 37.8 months (95% CI, 33.9 to 52.9). ORR was 36%; 34% with PD1 vs 39% with IPI+PD1 (p=0.5713). Median PFS was 3.4 months; 3.4 with PD1 vs 3.6 months with IPI+PD1 (p=0.6951). Median OS was 15.4 months; 14.4 for PD1 vs 20.5 months with IPI+PD1 (p=0.2603). The rate of grade 3 or 4 toxicities was higher with IPI+PD1 (31%) vs PD1 (7%). ORR, PFS and OS were numerically higher with IPI+PD1 vs PD1 across most subgroups except for females, those with <10 days between BRAF/MEKi and PD1±IPI, and those with stage III/M1A/M1B melanoma. The combination of ECOG PS=0 and absence of liver metastases identified patients with >3 years OS (area under the curve, AUC=0.74), while ECOG PS ≥1, progressing brain metastases and presence of bone metastases predicted primary progression (AUC=0.67). CONCLUSIONS: IPI+PD1 and PD1 after BRAF/MEKi have similar outcomes despite worse baseline prognostic features in the IPI+PD1 group, however, IPI+PD1 is more toxic. A combination of clinical factors can identify long-term survivors, but less accurately those with primary resistance to immunotherapy after targeted therapy. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-07-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9263926/ /pubmed/35798536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2022-004610 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Clinical/Translational Cancer Immunotherapy Pires da Silva, Ines Zakria, Danny Ahmed, Tasnia Trojanello, Claudia Dimitriou, Florentia Allayous, Clara Gerard, Camille Zimmer, Lisa Lo, Serigne Michielin, Olivier Lebbe, Celeste Mangana, Johanna Ascierto, Paolo Antonio Johnson, Douglas B Carlino, Matteo Menzies, Alexander Long, Georgina Efficacy and safety of anti-PD1 monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma |
title | Efficacy and safety of anti-PD1 monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma |
title_full | Efficacy and safety of anti-PD1 monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma |
title_fullStr | Efficacy and safety of anti-PD1 monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy and safety of anti-PD1 monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma |
title_short | Efficacy and safety of anti-PD1 monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma |
title_sort | efficacy and safety of anti-pd1 monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab after braf/mek inhibitors in patients with braf mutant metastatic melanoma |
topic | Clinical/Translational Cancer Immunotherapy |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9263926/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35798536 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2022-004610 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT piresdasilvaines efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT zakriadanny efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT ahmedtasnia efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT trojanelloclaudia efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT dimitriouflorentia efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT allayousclara efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT gerardcamille efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT zimmerlisa efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT loserigne efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT michielinolivier efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT lebbeceleste efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT manganajohanna efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT asciertopaoloantonio efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT johnsondouglasb efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT carlinomatteo efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT menziesalexander efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma AT longgeorgina efficacyandsafetyofantipd1monotherapyorincombinationwithipilimumabafterbrafmekinhibitorsinpatientswithbrafmutantmetastaticmelanoma |