Reinhard Dummer

Prof. Dr. Reinhard Dummer

University Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
+2
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

35Years (1992-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
10 January 2022 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JWJedd D. Wolchok
Jedd D. Wolchok
VCVanna na Chiarion-Sileni
Vanna na Chiarion-Sileni
RGRene Gonzalez
Rene Gonzalez
JGJean-Jacques Grob
Jean-Jacques Grob
Piotr RutkowskiPiotr Rutkowski
Piotr Rutkowski
FHF. Stephen Hodi
F. Stephen Hodi
PURPOSE: In the phase III CheckMate 067 trial, durable clinical benefit was demonstrated previously with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and nivolumab alone versus ipilimumab. Here, we report 6.5-year efficacy and safety outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated unresectable stage III or stage IV melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (four doses) followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks (n = 314), nivolumab 3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks (n = 316), or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (four doses; n = 315). Coprimary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab versus ipilimumab. Secondary end points included objective response rate, descriptive efficacy assessments of nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab alone, and safety. Melanoma-specific survival (MSS; descriptive analysis), which excludes deaths unrelated to melanoma, was also evaluated. RESULTS: Median OS (minimum follow-up, 6.5 years) was 72.1, 36.9, and 19.9 months in the combination, nivolumab, and ipilimumab groups, respectively. Median MSS was not reached, 58.7, and 21.9 months, respectively; 6.5-year OS rates were 57%, 43%, and 25% in patients with BRAF-mutant tumors and 46%, 42%, and 22% in those with BRAF–wild-type tumors, respectively. In patients who discontinued treatment, the median treatment-free interval was 27.6, 2.3, and 1.9 months, respectively. Since the 5-year analysis, no new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: These 6.5-year CheckMate 067 results, which include the longest median OS in a phase III melanoma trial reported to date and the first report of MSS, showed durable, improved clinical outcomes with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab versus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma and, in descriptive analyses, with the combination over nivolumab monotherapy.

1 May 2018 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Reinhard DummerReinhard Dummer
Reinhard Dummer
PAPaolo A Ascierto
Paolo A Ascierto
HGHelen J Gogas
Helen J Gogas
AAAna Arance
Ana Arance
MMMario Mandala
Mario Mandala
KFKeith T Flaherty
Keith T Flaherty
Combined BRAF-MEK inhibitor therapy is the standard of care for BRAFV600-mutant advanced melanoma. We investigated encorafenib, a BRAF inhibitor with unique target-binding properties, alone or in combination with the MEK inhibitor binimetinib, versus vemurafenib in patients with advanced BRAFV600-mutant melanoma. COLUMBUS was conducted as a two-part, randomised, open-label phase 3 study at 162 hospitals in 28 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had histologically confirmed locally advanced (American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV), unresectable or metastatic cutaneous melanoma, or unknown primary melanoma; a BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutation; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1; and were treatment naive or had progressed on or after previous first-line immunotherapy. In part 1 of the study, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via interactive response technology to receive either oral encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus oral binimetinib 45 mg twice daily (encorafenib plus binimetinib group), oral encorafenib 300 mg once daily (encorafenib group), or oral vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily (vemurafenib group). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by blinded independent central review for encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib. Efficacy analyses were by intention-to-treat. Safety was analysed in patients who received at least one dose of study drug and one postbaseline safety assessment. The results of part 2 will be published separately. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01909453, and EudraCT, number 2013-001176-38. Between Dec 30, 2013, and April 10, 2015, 577 of 1345 screened patients were randomly assigned to either the encorafenib plus binimetinib group (n=192), the encorafenib group (n=194), or the vemurafenib group (n=191). With a median follow-up of 16·6 months (95% CI 14·8-16·9), median progression-free survival was 14·9 months (95% CI 11·0-18·5) in the encorafenib plus binimetinib group and 7·3 months (5·6-8·2) in the vemurafenib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·54, 95% CI 0·41-0·71; two-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events seen in more than 5% of patients in the encorafenib plus binimetinib group were increased γ-glutamyltransferase (18 [9%] of 192 patients), increased creatine phosphokinase (13 [7%]), and hypertension (11 [6%]); in the encorafenib group they were palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (26 [14%] of 192 patients), myalgia (19 [10%]), and arthralgia (18 [9%]); and in the vemurafenib group it was arthralgia (11 [6%] of 186 patients). There were no treatment-related deaths except for one death in the combination group, which was considered possibly related to treatment by the investigator. Encorafenib plus binimetinib and encorafenib monotherapy showed favourable efficacy compared with vemurafenib. Overall, encorafenib plus binimetinib appears to have an improved tolerability profile compared with encorafenib or vemurafenib. Encorafenib plus binimetinib could represent a new treatment option for patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma. Array BioPharma, Novartis.

1 October 2018 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Reinhard DummerReinhard Dummer
Reinhard Dummer
PAPaolo A Ascierto
Paolo A Ascierto
HGHelen J Gogas
Helen J Gogas
AAAna Arance
Ana Arance
MMMario Mandala
Mario Mandala
KFKeith T Flaherty
Keith T Flaherty

1 April 2017 in The Lancet Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Reinhard DummerReinhard Dummer
Reinhard Dummer
DSDirk Schadendorf
Dirk Schadendorf
PAPaolo A Ascierto
Paolo A Ascierto
AAAna Arance
Ana Arance
CDCaroline Dutriaux
Caroline Dutriaux
KFKeith Flaherty
Keith Flaherty

20 January 2023 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JCJason Chesney
Jason Chesney
ARAntoni Ribas
Antoni Ribas
GLGeorgina Venetia Long
Georgina Venetia Long
John M. KirkwoodJohn M. Kirkwood
John M. Kirkwood
Reinhard DummerReinhard Dummer
Reinhard Dummer
HGHelen Gogas
Helen Gogas
PURPOSE: The combination of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) and pembrolizumab previously demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and an encouraging complete response rate (CRR) in patients with advanced melanoma in a phase Ib study. We report the efficacy and safety from a phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, international study of T-VEC plus pembrolizumab (T-VEC-pembrolizumab) versus placebo plus pembrolizumab (placebo-pembrolizumab) in patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB-IVM1c unresectable melanoma, naïve to antiprogrammed cell death protein-1, were randomly assigned 1:1 to T-VEC-pembrolizumab or placebo-pembrolizumab. T-VEC was administered at ≤ 4 × 106 plaque-forming unit (PFU) followed by ≤ 4 × 108 PFU 3 weeks later and once every 2 weeks until dose 5 and once every 3 weeks thereafter. Pembrolizumab was administered intravenously 200 mg once every 3 weeks. The dual primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) per modified RECIST 1.1 by blinded independent central review and overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included objective response rate per mRECIST, CRR, and safety. Here, we report the primary analysis for PFS, the second preplanned interim analysis for OS, and the final analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 692 patients were randomly assigned (346 T-VEC-pembrolizumab and 346 placebo-pembrolizumab). T-VEC-pembrolizumab did not significantly improve PFS (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.04; P = .13) or OS (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.22; P = .74) compared with placebo-pembrolizumab. The objective response rate was 48.6% for T-VEC-pembrolizumab (CRR 17.9%) and 41.3% for placebo-pembrolizumab (CRR 11.6%); the durable response rate was 42.2% and 34.1% for the arms, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 20.7% of patients in the T-VEC-pembrolizumab arm and in 19.5% of patients in the placebo-pembrolizumab arm. CONCLUSION: T-VEC-pembrolizumab did not significantly improve PFS or OS compared with placebo-pembrolizumab. Safety results of the T-VEC-pembrolizumab combination were consistent with the safety profiles of each agent alone.

25 October 2022 in Clinical Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
FMFunda Meric-Bernstam
Funda Meric-Bernstam
RSRandy F. Sweis
Randy F. Sweis
SKStefan Kasper
Stefan Kasper
OHOmid Hamid
Omid Hamid
SBShailender Bhatia
Shailender Bhatia
Shahneen K. SandhuShahneen K. Sandhu
Shahneen K. Sandhu
Purpose: The stimulator of IFN genes (STING) is a transmembrane protein that plays a role in the immune response to tumors. Single-agent STING agonist MIW815 (ADU-S100) has demonstrated immune activation but limited antitumor activity. This phase Ib, multicenter, dose-escalation study assessed the safety and tolerability of MIW815 plus spartalizumab (PDR001), a humanized IgG4 antibody against PD-1, in 106 patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphomas. Patients and Methods: Patients were treated with weekly intratumoral injections of MIW815 (50–3,200 μg) on a 3-weeks-on/1-week-off schedule or once every 4 weeks, plus a fixed dose of spartalizumab (400 mg) intravenously every 4 weeks. Results: Common adverse events were pyrexia (n = 23; 22%), injection site pain (n = 21; 20%), and diarrhea (n = 12; 11%). Overall response rate was 10.4%. The MTD was not reached. Pharmacodynamic biomarker analysis demonstrated on-target activity. Conclusions: The combination of MIW815 and spartalizumab was well tolerated in patients with advanced/metastatic cancers, including in patients with anti-PD-1 refractory disease. Minimal antitumor responses were seen.