Nivolumab and Ipilimumab versus Ipilimumab in Untreated Melanoma
Top Cited Papers
- 21 May 2015
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 372 (21), 2006-2017
- https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1414428
Abstract
In a phase 1 dose-escalation study, combined inhibition of T-cell checkpoint pathways by nivolumab and ipilimumab was associated with a high rate of objective response, including complete responses, among patients with advanced melanoma. In this double-blind study involving 142 patients with metastatic melanoma who had not previously received treatment, we randomly assigned patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram of body weight) combined with either nivolumab (1 mg per kilogram) or placebo once every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) or placebo every 2 weeks until the occurrence of disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary end point was the rate of investigator-assessed, confirmed objective response among patients with BRAF V600 wild-type tumors. Among patients with BRAF wild-type tumors, the rate of confirmed objective response was 61% (44 of 72 patients) in the group that received both ipilimumab and nivolumab (combination group) versus 11% (4 of 37 patients) in the group that received ipilimumab and placebo (ipilimumab-monotherapy group) (PBRAF mutation–positive tumors. Drug-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were reported in 54% of the patients who received the combination therapy as compared with 24% of the patients who received ipilimumab monotherapy. Select adverse events with potential immunologic causes were consistent with those in a phase 1 study, and most of these events resolved with immune-modulating medication. The objective-response rate and the progression-free survival among patients with advanced melanoma who had not previously received treatment were significantly greater with nivolumab combined with ipilimumab than with ipilimumab monotherapy. Combination therapy had an acceptable safety profile. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01927419.)Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Nivolumab in Previously Untreated Melanoma withoutBRAFMutationNew England Journal of Medicine, 2015
- Improved Overall Survival in Melanoma with Combined Dabrafenib and TrametinibNew England Journal of Medicine, 2015
- Combined BRAF (Dabrafenib) and MEK Inhibition (Trametinib) in Patients With BRAFV600-Mutant Melanoma Experiencing Progression With Single-Agent BRAF InhibitorJournal of Clinical Oncology, 2014
- Combined Vemurafenib and Cobimetinib in BRAF-Mutated MelanomaNew England Journal of Medicine, 2014
- Combined BRAF and MEK Inhibition versus BRAF Inhibition Alone in MelanomaNew England Journal of Medicine, 2014
- Safety and efficacy of vemurafenib in BRAFV600E and BRAFV600K mutation-positive melanoma (BRIM-3): extended follow-up of a phase 3, randomised, open-label studyThe Lancet Oncology, 2014
- Combined BRAF and MEK Inhibition in Melanoma with BRAF V600 MutationsNew England Journal of Medicine, 2012
- Ipilimumab plus Dacarbazine for Previously Untreated Metastatic MelanomaNew England Journal of Medicine, 2011
- Improved Survival with Vemurafenib in Melanoma with BRAF V600E MutationNew England Journal of Medicine, 2011
- Improved Survival with Ipilimumab in Patients with Metastatic MelanomaNew England Journal of Medicine, 2010