25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The Predicted Impact of Ipilimumab Usage on Survival in Previously Treated Advanced or Metastatic Melanoma in the UK

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Evaluating long-term prognosis is important for physicians, patients and payers. This study reports the results of a model developed to predict long-term survival for UK patients receiving second-line ipilimumab.

          Methods

          MDX010-20 trial data were used to predict survival for ipilimumab versus UK best supportive care. Two aspects of this analysis required novel approaches: 1) The overall survival Kaplan–Meier data shape is unusual: an initial steep decline is observed before a ‘plateau’. 2) The need to extrapolate beyond the trial end (4.6 years). Based upon UK clinician advice, a three-part curve fit was used: from 0–1.5 years, Kaplan–Meier data from the trial; from 1.5–5 years, standard parametric curve fits; after 5 years, long-term data from the American Joint Committee on Cancer registry.

          Results

          This approach provided good internal validity: low mean absolute error and good match to median and mean trial data. Lifetime predicted means were 2.77 years for ipilimumab and 1.07 for best supportive care, driven by increased long-term survival with ipilimumab.

          Conclusion

          To understand the full benefit of treatment and to meet reimbursement requirements, accurate estimation of treatment benefit is key. Models, such as the one presented, can be used to extrapolate beyond trials.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Cancer immunotherapy: moving beyond current vaccines.

          Great progress has been made in the field of tumor immunology in the past decade, but optimism about the clinical application of currently available cancer vaccine approaches is based more on surrogate endpoints than on clinical tumor regression. In our cancer vaccine trials of 440 patients, the objective response rate was low (2.6%), and comparable to the results obtained by others. We consider here results in cancer vaccine trials and highlight alternate strategies that mediate cancer regression in preclinical and clinical models.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Safety and efficacy of vemurafenib in BRAF(V600E) and BRAF(V600K) mutation-positive melanoma (BRIM-3): extended follow-up of a phase 3, randomised, open-label study.

            In the BRIM-3 trial, vemurafenib was associated with risk reduction versus dacarbazine of both death and progression in patients with advanced BRAF(V600) mutation-positive melanoma. We present an extended follow-up analysis of the total population and in the BRAF(V600E) and BRAF(V600K) mutation subgroups. Patients older than 18 years, with treatment-naive metastatic melanoma and whose tumour tissue was positive for BRAF(V600) mutations were eligible. Patients also had to have a life expectancy of at least 3 months, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate haematological, hepatic, and renal function. Patients were randomly assigned by interactive voice recognition system to receive either vemurafenib (960 mg orally twice daily) or dacarbazine (1000 mg/m(2) of body surface area intravenously every 3 weeks). Coprimary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (n=675), with data censored at crossover. A sensitivity analysis was done. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01006980. 675 eligible patients were enrolled from 104 centres in 12 countries between Jan 4, 2010, and Dec 16, 2010. 337 patients were randomly assigned to receive vemurafenib and 338 to receive dacarbazine. Median follow-up was 12·5 months (IQR 7·7-16·0) on vemurafenib and 9·5 months (3·1-14·7) on dacarbazine. 83 (25%) of the 338 patients initially randomly assigned to dacarbazine crossed over from dacarbazine to vemurafenib. Median overall survival was significantly longer in the vemurafenib group than in the dacarbazine group (13·6 months [95% CI 12·0-15·2] vs 9·7 months [7·9-12·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·57-0·87]; p=0·0008), as was median progression-free survival (6·9 months [95% CI 6·1-7·0] vs 1·6 months [1·6-2·1]; HR 0·38 [95% CI 0·32-0·46]; p<0·0001). For the 598 (91%) patients with BRAF(V600E) disease, median overall survival in the vemurafenib group was 13·3 months (95% CI 11·9-14·9) compared with 10·0 months (8·0-14·0) in the dacarbazine group (HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·60-0·93]; p=0·0085); median progression-free survival was 6·9 months (95% CI 6·2-7·0) and 1·6 months (1·6-2·1), respectively (HR 0·39 [95% CI 0·33-0·47]; p<0·0001). For the 57 (9%) patients with BRAF(V600K) disease, median overall survival in the vemurafenib group was 14·5 months (95% CI 11·2-not estimable) compared with 7·6 months (6·1-16·6) in the dacarbazine group (HR 0·43 [95% CI 0·21-0·90]; p=0·024); median progression-free survival was 5·9 months (95% CI 4·4-9·0) and 1·7 months (1·4-2·9), respectively (HR 0·30 [95% CI 0·16-0·56]; p<0·0001). The most frequent grade 3-4 events were cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma (65 [19%] of 337 patients) and keratoacanthomas (34 [10%]), rash (30 [9%]), and abnormal liver function tests (38 [11%]) in the vemurafenib group and neutropenia (26 [9%] of 287 patients) in the dacarbazine group. Eight (2%) patients in the vemurafenib group and seven (2%) in the dacarbazine group had grade 5 events. Inhibition of BRAF with vemurafenib improves survival in patients with the most common BRAF(V600E) mutation and in patients with the less common BRAF(V600K) mutation. F Hoffmann-La Roche-Genentech. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Meta-analysis of phase II cooperative group trials in metastatic stage IV melanoma to determine progression-free and overall survival benchmarks for future phase II trials.

              Objective tumor response rates observed in phase II trials for metastatic melanoma have historically not provided a reliable indicator of meaningful survival benefits. To facilitate using overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) as an endpoint for future phase II trials, we evaluated historical data from cooperative group phase II trials to attempt to develop benchmarks for OS and PFS as reference points for future phase II trials. Individual-level and trial-level data were obtained for patients enrolled onto 42 phase II trials (70 trial arms) that completed accrual in the years 1975 through 2005 and conducted by Southwest Oncology Group, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, Cancer and Leukemia Group B, North Central Cancer Treatment Group, and the Clinical Trials Group of the National Cancer Institute of Canada. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic variables, and between-trial(-arm) variability in 1-year OS rates and 6-month PFS rates were examined. Statistically significant individual-level and trial-level prognostic factors found in a multivariate survival analysis for OS were performance status, presence of visceral disease, sex, and whether the trial excluded patients with brain metastases. Performance status, sex, and age were statistically significant prognostic factors for PFS. Controlling for these prognostic variables essentially eliminated between-trial variability in 1-year OS rates but not in 6-month PFS rates. Benchmarks are provided for 1-year OS or OS curves that make use of the distribution of prognostic factors of the patients in the phase II trial. A similar benchmark for 6-month PFS is provided, but its use is more problematic because of residual between-trial variation in this endpoint.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                23 December 2015
                2015
                : 10
                : 12
                : e0145524
                Affiliations
                [1 ]The Royal Marsden Foundation NHS Trust, Fulham Rd, London, SW3 6JJ, United Kingdom
                [2 ]BresMed, 84 Queen St, Sheffield, S1 2DW, United Kingdom
                [3 ]Mount Vernon Cancer Centre, Rickmansworth Rd, Northwood, Middlesex, HA6 2RN, United Kingdom
                [4 ]Bristol–Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Limited, Sanderson Road, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 1DH, United Kingdom
                University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, AUSTRALIA
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The funding agreement ensured the authors’ independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report. The following author was employed by the sponsor at the time of analysis: Maximilian Lebmeier. BresMed was reimbursed for its services as a consultancy in the preparation of this manuscript; Anthony J Hatswell and I are employees of BresMed. Dr Paul Nathan received financial compensation from Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Limited for attending an advisory board and a speaker’s bureau. This does not alter the authors’ adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: JL AJH PN ML DL. Analyzed the data: DL AJH. Wrote the paper: JL AJH PN ML DL.

                Article
                PONE-D-15-43327
                10.1371/journal.pone.0145524
                4689358
                26700304
                20547cc7-680a-4295-8395-525618383739
                © 2015 Larkin et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited

                History
                : 1 October 2015
                : 5 December 2015
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 3, Pages: 11
                Funding
                Financial support for this study was provided by Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceuticals Limited. The author Maximillian Lebmeier, who was employed by the sponsor at the time, was responsible for data acquisition, coordination of the analysis and review of the manuscript for content.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                Data are from study NCT00094653, described by Hodi et al. (2010), whose authors may be contacted at: Dr. Hodi, Dana–Farber Cancer Institute, 44 Binney St., Boston, MA 02115; or at stephen_hodi@ 123456dfci.harvard.edu .

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article