Back to Authors

Friedlander, Philip

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6538-1615

Mayo Clinic

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

Citations 3

Talimogene laherparepvec in combination with ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone for advanced melanoma: 5-year final analysis of a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase II trial
Chesney, Jason , Puzanov, Igor , Collichio, Frances A. , Milhem, Mohammed , Hamid, Omid , Ross, Merrick I. , Friedlander, Philip , Logan, Theodore F. , Joshi, Harshada, Snyder, Wendy, Mehnert, Janice M. , Singh, Parminder , Chesney, Jason A , Milhem, Mohammed M , Puzanov, Igor , Singh, Parminder , Singh, Parminder Pal , Glaspy, John A. , Garbe, Claus , Hauschild, Axel , Lebbé, Célèste

Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer | May 4, 2023 | Volume: 11 | Issue: 5 | Pages: e006270

10.1136/jitc-2022-006270 Get It

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 .
433 Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) in combination with ipilimumab (IPI) versus IPI alone for advanced melanoma: 4-year interim analysis of a randomized, open-label, phase 2 trial
Chesney, Jason , Collichio, Frances A. , Hamid, Omid , Ross, Merrick I. , Friedlander, Philip , Yi, Min , Snyder, Wendy, Mehnert, Janice M. , Puzanov, Igor , Singh, Parminder Pal , Milhem, Mohammed , Glaspy, John A. , Garbe, Claus , Logan, Theodore F. , Hauschild, Axel , Lebbé, Célèste

Regular and young investigator award abstracts | November 9, 2020 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: A263.2-A264

10.1136/jitc-2020-sitc2020.0433 Get It

Randomized, Open-Label Phase II Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Talimogene Laherparepvec in Combination With Ipilimumab Versus Ipilimumab Alone in Patients With Advanced, Unresectable Melanoma
Chesney, Jason , Collichio, Frances A. , Milhem, Mohammed , Hamid, Omid , Ross, Merrick I. , Friedlander, Philip , Garbe, Claus , Logan, Theodore F. , Chen, Lisa , Gansert, Jennifer, Andtbacka, Robert H.I. , Singh, Parminder , Collichio, Frances, Milhem, Mohammed M, Glaspy, John, Ross, Merrick, Hauschild, Axel, Lebbe, Celeste, Kim, Jenny J, Kaufman, Howard L, Milhem, Mohammed M , Puzanov, Igor , Singh, Parminder Pal , Glaspy, John A. , Hauschild, Axel , Lebbé, Célèste , Kim, Jaeyeon , Kaufman, Howard L. , Singh, Parminder

Journal of Clinical Oncology | October 5, 2017 | Volume: 36 | Issue: 17 | Pages: 1658-1667

10.1200/jco.2017.73.7379 Get It

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.