Garbe, Claus

Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) plus ipilimumab has demonstrated greater antitumor activity versus ipilimumab alone, without additional toxicity, in patients with advanced melanoma. Here, we report the 5-year outcomes from a randomized phase II study. These data provide the longest efficacy and safety follow-up for patients with melanoma treated with a combination of an oncolytic virus and a checkpoint inhibitor. Eligible patients with unresectable stage IIIB‒IV melanoma were randomized 1:1 to receive T-VEC plus ipilimumab or ipilimumab alone. T-VEC was administered intralesionally at 10 6 plaque-forming units (PFU)/mL in week 1, followed by 10 8 PFU/mL in week 4 and every 2 weeks thereafter. Ipilimumab (3 mg/kg every 3 weeks; ≤4 doses) was administered intravenously starting at week 1 in the ipilimumab arm and week 6 in the combination arm. The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per immune-related response criteria; key secondary end points included durable response rate (DRR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Overall, 198 patients were randomized to receive the combination (n=98) or ipilimumab (n=100). The combination improved the ORR versus ipilimumab (35.7% vs 16.0%; OR 2.9; 95% CI 1.5 to 5.7; p=0.003). DRR was 33.7% and 13.0% (unadjusted OR 3.4; 95% CI 1.7 to 7.0; descriptive p=0.001), respectively. Among the objective responders, the median DOR was 69.2 months (95% CI 38.5 to not estimable) with the combination and was not reached with ipilimumab. Median PFS was 13.5 months with the combination and 6.4 months with ipilimumab (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.09; descriptive p=0.14). Estimated 5-year OS was 54.7% (95% CI 43.9 to 64.2) in the combination arm and 48.4% (95% CI 37.9 to 58.1) in the ipilimumab arm. Forty-seven (48.0%) and 65 (65.0%) patients in the combination and ipilimumab arms, respectively, received subsequent therapies. No new safety signals were reported. At the 5-year follow-up, the improved response rates observed with T-VEC plus ipilimumab were durable. This is the first randomized controlled study of the combination of an oncolytic virus and a checkpoint inhibitor that meets its primary end point.Trial registration number: NCT01740297 .

10029 Background: This is the first randomized trial testing the addition of an oncolytic virus to an immune checkpoint inhibitor for advanced melanoma. At the 3-year (yr) follow-up, the combination (combo) of T-VEC and ipi demonstrated durable and statistically superior objective response rate (ORR) over ipi alone (36.7% vs. 16.0%; odds ratio, 3.0; 95% Cl, 1.6–6.0; P = 0.002). Complete response (CR) rate was 21.4% with the combo and 6.0% with ipi. Median overall survival (OS) was not reached in either arm. In this post hoc analysis, we utilized the 3-yr landmark data to explore the relationship between CR and OS in the combo arm. Methods: Pts with unresectable, stage IIIB-IV melanoma were randomized 1:1 to receive combo or ipi alone. T-VEC was administered intratumorally on day 1 of week (wk) 1 at 106 plaque-forming units (PFU)/mL followed by subsequent doses at 108 PFU/mL on day 1 of wk 4, and every 2 wks thereafter. Ipi (3 mg/kg) was given every 3 wks starting on day 1 of wk 6 for up to 4 doses. Response was assessed by investigators per immune-related response criteria every 12 wks until disease progression. The primary endpoint was ORR; key secondary endpoints were OS, progression-free survival, and safety. Results: 198 pts were randomized (98 to combo; 100 to ipi). As of February 25, 2019, the median follow-up time was 40.0 mos (range: 0.2–63.7) for the combo arm. Among 98 pts who received combo, 21 (21.4%) had a best overall response of CR including 8 who converted from an initial partial response (PR), 15 (15.3%) had PR, 19 (19.4%) had stable disease, 30 (30.6%) had progressive disease, and 13 (13.2%) were unevaluable. Of 21 pts achieving CR, 17 (81%) had ECOG status of 0, 16 (76.2%) had stage IIIB-IVM1a disease, and 16 (76.2%) had no visceral metastases. Median duration of CR was not reached (range: 5.4[+]–58.2[+] mos); 19 of 21 CRs lasted more than 6 months. The baseline tumor burden was lower in pts with CR than in those with non-CR. Median OS was not reached in pts with CR (range: 25.1[+]–63.7[+] mos) and was 47.6 mos (range: 0.2[+]– 63.7[+] mos) in pts with non-CR (Log-rank P = 0.0005). The Kaplan–Meier estimated 3-year OS rate was 100.0% for patients with CR and 52.3% for those with non-CR. Conclusions: CR rate was higher with T-VEC plus ipi than with ipi alone in pts with advanced melanoma (21.4% vs. 6.0%). In the combo arm, CR was associated with prolonged OS, and pts with CR tended to have better ECOG performance status, earlier-stage disease, and lower baseline tumor burden, as compared with those with non-CR. Clinical trial information: NCT01740297.

9037 Background: Therapies for aBCC, which includes metastatic (m) and locally advanced (la) BCC, are limited. Abnormal Hedgehog pathway signaling is a key driver in BCC pathogenesis. Primary analysis of the pivotal ERIVANCE BCC trial of vismodegib, an oral hedgehog pathway inhibitor (HPI), demonstrated an objective response rate (ORR) of 30% and 43%, in mBCC and laBCC patients, respectively, with a median duration of response (DOR) of 7.6 months. We present safety and investigator (INV) assessed efficacy results 18 months (29 May 2012) after primary analysis (26 Nov 2010). Methods: Multicenter, international, nonrandomized study in patients (N=104) with radiographically measurable mBCC or laBCC (surgery inappropriate due to multiple recurrence, or substantial morbidity or deformity anticipated) receiving 150 mg oral vismodegib daily until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Key secondary endpoints included INV-assessed ORR, progression-free survival (PFS), DOR, overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: At data cutoff, 21 patients continued to undergo protocol-specified assessments and 56 patients were in survival follow-up. The median dose intensity was comparable with primary analysis. ORR was 48.5%, mBCC; 60.3%, laBCC, comparable with primary analysis. However, median DOR improved (mBCC=14.7; laBCC=20.3 months). The median OS for mBCC was 30.9 months but not estimable in laBCC. Adverse events remained consistent, with muscle spasm, alopecia, dysgeusia, weight decrease, and fatigue most frequently reported. Eleven more deaths were reported in the update period after primary analysis; these occurred in survival follow-up and were not drug-related. Conclusions: Vismodegib is the first FDA-approved HPI; thus, long-term efficacy and safety data are particularly relevant. 18-month update data confirmed prolonged responses and consistent safety in vismodegib-treated aBCC patients. Clinical trial information: NCT00833417.

Purpose We evaluated the combination of talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma in a phase II study. To our knowledge, this was the first randomized trial to evaluate addition of an oncolytic virus to a checkpoint inhibitor. Methods Patients with unresectable stages IIIB to IV melanoma, with no more than one prior therapy if BRAF wild-type, no more than two prior therapies if BRAF mutant, measurable/injectable disease, and without symptomatic autoimmunity or clinically significant immunosuppression were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab or ipilimumab alone. Talimogene laherparepvec treatment began in week 1 (first dose, ≤ 4 mL × 10 6 plaque-forming units/mL; after 3 weeks, ≤ 4 mL × 10 8 plaque-forming units/mL every 2 weeks). Ipilimumab (3 mg/kg every 3 weeks; up to four doses) began week 1 in the ipilimumab alone arm and week 6 in the combination arm. The primary end point was objective response rate evaluated by investigators per immune-related response criteria. Results One hundred ninety-eight patients were randomly assigned to talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab (n = 98), or ipilimumab alone (n = 100). Thirty-eight patients (39%) in the combination arm and 18 patients (18%) in the ipilimumab arm had an objective response (odds ratio, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.5 to 5.5; P = .002). Responses were not limited to injected lesions; visceral lesion decreases were observed in 52% of patients in the combination arm and 23% of patients in the ipilimumab arm. Frequently occurring adverse events (AEs) included fatigue (combination, 59%; ipilimumab alone, 42%), chills (combination, 53%; ipilimumab alone, 3%), and diarrhea (combination, 42%; ipilimumab alone, 35%). Incidence of grade ≥ 3 AEs was 45% and 35%, respectively. Three patients in the combination arm had fatal AEs; none were treatment related. Conclusion The study met its primary end point; the objective response rate was significantly higher with talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone. These data indicate that the combination has greater antitumor activity without additional safety concerns versus ipilimumab.