Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)  (3)
  • Foller, Susan  (3)
  • 2020-2024  (3)
Type of Medium
Publisher
  • American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)  (3)
Language
Years
  • 2020-2024  (3)
Year
Subjects(RVK)
  • 1
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 40, No. 19 ( 2022-07-01), p. 2128-2137
    Abstract: Several anti–programmed cell death (ligand)-1 (PD-[L]1) immune checkpoint inhibitors are approved in advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Recently, improved activity of an anti–PD-1/anticytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 (CTLA-4) combination versus anti–PD-1 monotherapy has been reported. We report a response-based approach starting treatment with nivolumab monotherapy with nivolumab/ipilimumab as immunotherapeutic boost. METHODS After four doses of nivolumab induction, responders continued with nivolumab maintenance therapy. Patients with stable/progressive disease received nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 2 doses followed by nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 2 doses, if not responding to the initial boost. Responders to boosts continued with nivolumab maintenance. Between July 2017 and April 2019, 86 patients were enrolled. The median follow-up is 7.7 months. The primary end point is objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST1.1. Secondary end points include efficacy of nivolumab induction, remission rate with nivolumab/ipilimumab boosts, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS Of all patients, 42, 39, and five were first- (1L), second- (2L), and third-line (3L), respectively. The median age was 68 years. The ORR with nivolumab monotherapy (assessed at week 8) was 29% in 1L and 23% in 2/3L, respectively. Forty-one patients received early (week 8) and 11 received later nivolumab/ipilimumab boosts. ORRs with nivolumab with or without nivolumab/ipilimumab (best overall response) were 45% and 27% in 1L and 2/3L, respectively. In 1L, 7 of 17 patients receiving boosts at week 8 improved, compared with 2 of 24 in 2/3L. CONCLUSION The tailored approach of TITAN-TCC shows meaningful clinical activity supporting dual checkpoint inhibition in 1L mUC. However, starting therapy with nivolumab exclusively appears inadequate given the aggressive nature of mUC. In 2/3L, nivolumab/ipilimumab boosts with escalating ipilimumab dose did not improve efficacy outcomes versus nivolumab monotherapy. An independent 2L cohort of TITAN-TCC receiving nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for 4 doses is ongoing.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 40, No. 6_suppl ( 2022-02-20), p. 441-441
    Abstract: 441 Background: Nivolumab (nivo) is an approved 2 nd line treatment after platinum-based chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). Recent studies suggest improved outcomes for dual checkpoint inhibition in mUC in particular with higher ipilimumab (ipi) doses (nivo 1mg/kg + ipi 3mg/kg). TITAN-TCC uses a response-based approach starting with 4 doses of nivo (8 weeks) followed by nivo+ipi boosts in non-responders. Here we report cohort 2 of TITAN-TCC applying nivo1/ipi3 boost doses in patients after prior platinum-based chemotherapy (2 nd /3 rd line). Methods: Between April 2019 and February 2021 83 patients with histologically confirmed mUC (TITAN-TCC cohort 2) started with nivo 240mg Q2W induction. After 4 doses and tumor assessment at week 8 (i) non-responders (stable (SD)/ progressive disease (PD)) received 2-4 doses nivo1+ipi3 while (ii) responders (complete (CR)/ partial response (PR)) continued with nivo maintenance but could receive nivo1+ipi3 for later PD. Primary endpoint was confirmed investigator-assessed ORR per RECIST1.1. Using a Fleming single-stage phase II design 77 evaluable patients would provide a 90% power to reject the null-hypothesis that ORR was ≤20% at a one-sided 5% type I error if the true ORR was ≥35%. Secondary endpoints included activity of nivo monotherapy at week 8, remission rate with nivo+ipi boosts, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: Median follow-up time was 5.6 months. Of the patients, 78 (94%) were 2 nd line. Median age was 68 years (range 37-84) and 57 patients (69%) were male. ORR with nivo monotherapy at first assessment (week 8) was 20.5%. Of the patients, 44 and 6 received nivo+ipi boosts after week 8 and for later PD, respectively. Confirmed objective response with nivo induction ± nivo+ipi boosts was achieved in 27/83 (32.5%) of the patients (significant 〉 20%, p 〈 0.01). Patients with PD-L1 expression in ≥1% of tumor cells had a numerically higher ORR (46% vs. 24% for PD-L1 negatives). Of the patients with initial SD after nivo induction, 4/13 (31%) achieved response upon boost. Of the patients boosted for PD, 9/37 (24%) improved. Median PFS was 1.9 months (95% CI 1.8-3.2), median OS was 7.6 months (95% CI 5.1-14.9). No new safety signals emerged. Conclusions: In patients after prior platinum-based chemotherapy treatment with nivo and nivo+ipi boosts in non-responders significantly improved ORR compared to the one reported for nivo as 2 nd line monotherapy. Patients with PD-L1 positive tumors appear to benefit most. Our study provides further evidence for the added value of high dose (3mg/kg) ipilimumab in mUC. Clinical trial information: NCT0321977.[Table: see text]
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 39, No. 6_suppl ( 2021-02-20), p. 446-446
    Abstract: 446 Background: Several PD-1 immune-checkpoint inhibitors including Nivolumab (Nivo) are approved in urothelial cancer. Recently, in the front line setting, improved activity of combined PD-L1 and CTLA4 immune-checkpoint inhibition has been reported and a phase III trial with Nivolumab + Ipilimumab (Nivo+Ipi) is ongoing. Here we report a response-based tailored approach starting treatment with Nivo monotherapy using Nivo+Ipi as immunotherapeutic “boost”. Methods: Between July 2017 and April 2019 86 patients were enrolled and treated according to protocol version 3 (cohort 1). Patients started with Nivo 240 mg Q2W induction. After 4 dosings and tumor assessment at week 8 (i) responders (PR/CR) to Nivo monotherapy continued with maintenance while (ii) patients with stable (SD) or progressive disease (PD) received 2 cycles Nivo3+Ipi1 followed by another 2 cycles Nivo1+Ipi3 if not responding. Median follow-up is 8.7 months. The primary endpoint is confirmed investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST1.1. Secondary endpoints include activity of Nivo monotherapy at week 8, remission rate with Nivo+Ipi “boosts”, safety, overall survival and quality of life. Results: Of the patients 42, 39 and 5 were first, second and third line, respectively. Median age was 67 years (range 45-84), 61 patients (71 %) were male and 25 female. ORR with Nivo monotherapy at first assessment (week 8) was 29 % and 23 % in first and second/third line, respectively. Of the patients 41 received Nivo+Ipi “boosts” after week 8 while 12 received later “boosts”. Best overall response (BOR) rate with Nivo induction ± Nivo+Ipi “boosts” was 48 % and 27 % in first and second/third line, respectively. In first line 7/17 (41 %) patients receiving Nivo+Ipi after week 8 had an improved response compared to 2/24 (8.3 %) in second/third line. Of the patients who continued with Nivo maintenance after week 8 and received later “boosts” 2/12 (17 %) had a PR and 2/12 (17 %) improved to SD. Treatment-related AEs will be presented. Conclusions: TITAN–TCC explores a response-driven use of Nivo+Ipi as an immunotherapeutic “boost”. In first line, this significantly improved ORR compared to the expected response rate of Nivo monotherapy, providing further evidence to the added value of Ipi in combination with Nivo. Further follow-up is ongoing to characterize duration and depth of response. Clinical trial information: NCT03219775 . Research Sponsor: Bristol-Myers Squibb[Table: see text]
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publication Date: 2021
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. Further information can be found on the KOBV privacy pages