Anti‐cytotoxic T lymphocyte‐associated antigen‐4 (CTLA‐4) and anti‐programmed cell death‐1 (PD‐1) inhibitors have been shown to significantly improve survival in patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma. However, there was some heterogeneity as well as some variation in the degree of benefit across studies. We reviewed randomized trials and performed a meta‐analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in comparison with conventional regimens. Eligible studies were limited to randomized controlled trials comparing anti‐CTLA‐4 or anti‐PD‐1 inhibitors to chemotherapy or vaccination treatment in adult patients with unresectable cutaneous metastatic melanoma. Progression‐free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months was 28.5% versus 17.7% (RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.76–0.93), overall survival (OS) rate at 1 year was 51.2% versus 38.8% (RR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.59–0.88), and overall response rate (ORR) at 6 months was 29.6% versus 17.7% (RR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.76–0.95) favoring immune check point inhibitors over chemotherapies or vaccination. Immune check point inhibitors were associated with more frequent immune‐related adverse events at 13.7% versus 2.4% of treated patients (RR: 6.74, 95% CI: 4.65–9.75). Subgroup analyses demonstrated significant PFS (RR: 0.92 vs. 0.74, P <0.00001) and ORR (RR: 0.95 vs. 0.76, P =0.0004) improvement with anti‐PD‐1 treatment compared to anti‐CTLA‐4 when each of them was compared to control treatments. Collectively, these results demonstrate that immune checkpoint inhibitors have superior outcomes compared to conventional chemotherapies or vaccination, and support the results of recent randomized trials that showed superior outcomes with anti‐PD‐1 agents over ipilimumab in unresectable metastatic cutaneous melanoma patients.
1 January 2017 in Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma and Leukemia
Metastatic cutaneous melanoma has poor prognosis with 2-year survival rate of 10–20%. Melanoma cells express various antigens including gp100, melanoma antigen recognized by T cells 1 (MART-1), and tyrosinase, which can induce immune-mediated anticancer response via T cell activation. Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) is an immune check point molecule that negatively regulates T cell activation and proliferation. Accordingly, recent phase III clinical trials demonstrated significant survival benefit with ipilimumab, a human monoclonal antibody (IgG1) that blocks the interaction of CTLA-4 with its ligands. Since the efficacy of ipilimumab depends on T cell activation, it is associated with substantial risk of immune mediated adverse reactions such as colitis, hepatitis, thyroiditis, and hypophysitis. We report the first case of late onset pericarditis and cardiac tamponade associated with ipilimumab treatment in patient with metastatic cutaneous melanoma.
Aberrant DNA methylation has been identified as a key molecular event regulating the pathogenesis of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS); myeloid neoplasms with an inherent risk of transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Based on the above findings, DNA hypomethylating agents (HMA) have been widely used to treat AML and MDS, especially in elderly patients and in those who are not eligible for allogeneic stem cell transplantation (SCT). Our goal was to determine if there is any therapeutic advantage of HMA vs. conventional care regimens (CCR) and indirectly compare the efficacy of azacitidine and decitabine in this patient population. Eligible studies were limited to randomized controlled trials comparing HMA to CCR in adult patients with AML or MDS. Overall survival (OS) rate was 33.2 vs. 21.4 % (RR 0.83, 95 % CI 0.71–0.98) and overall response rate (ORR) 23.7 vs. 13.4 % (RR 0.87, 95 % CI 0.81–0.93) for HMA and CCR, respectively. In subgroup analyses, only azacitidine treatment showed OS improvement (RR 0.75, 95 % CI 0.64–0.98) and not decitabine. Cytogenetic risk or bone marrow blast count did not have independent prognostic impact. Collectively, these results demonstrate that HMA have superior outcomes compared to CCR and suggest that azacitidine in comparison to decitabine, may be more effective.
1 May 2017 in Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma and Leukemia