Search

BACKGROUND: Tebentafusp, a T-cell receptor-bispecific molecule that targets glycoprotein 100 and CD3, is approved for adult patients who are positive for HLA-A*02:01 and have unresectable or metastatic uveal melanoma. The primary analysis in the present phase 3 trial supported a long-term survival benefit associated with the drug. METHODS: We report the 3-year efficacy and safety results from our open-label, phase 3 trial in which HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive tebentafusp (tebentafusp group) or the investigators choice of therapy with pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine (control group), with randomization stratified according to the lactate dehydrogenase level. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of 36 months, median overall survival was 21.6 months in the tebentafusp group and 16.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 0.87). The estimated percentage of patients surviving at 3 years was 27% in the tebentafusp group and 18% in the control group. The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade in the tebentafusp group were rash (83%), pyrexia (76%), pruritus (70%), and hypotension (38%). Most tebentafusp-related adverse events occurred early during treatment, and no new adverse events were observed with long-term administration. The percentage of patients who discontinued treatment because of adverse events continued to be low in both treatment groups (2% in the tebentafusp group and 5% in the control group). No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This 3-year analysis supported a continued long-term benefit of tebentafusp for overall survival among adult HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma. (Funded by Immunocore; IMCgp100-202 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03070392; EudraCT number, 2015-003153-18.).

PurposeThe 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.MethodsPatients 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.ResultsOverall, 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.ConclusionT-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.

This study examined the efficiency of teaching Russian as a foreign language (L2) in two groups of students -- the first benefited from the e-learning platform's capabilities (experimental), and the second underwent a traditional in-class course. Students learning Russian as L2 at People's Friendship University of Russia (Moscow, Russia) were enrolled in the experiment. The research sample comprised 75 individuals distributed to three experimental groups and 33 individuals allocated to three control groups. All data obtained as a result of the study were statistically analyzed. In order to study the overall effect of using the iSpring platform, the research outcomes were combined by Stouffer's Z-score method. Together with this, at each examination stage, repeated analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted. Students' progress in learning Russian was evaluated by way of pre- and post-testing. After the experiment finished, all respondents were surveyed to analyze their perception of the effectiveness, convenience, and satisfaction of the chosen learning mode. The study found that students from experimental groups spent significantly more time for learning, demonstrating better performance. It was remarked that iSpring's adaptive learning features contribute to improving students' performance by encouraging them to learn better and faster.

PurposeThe randomized phase III coBRIM study (NCT01689519) demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with addition of cobimetinib to vemurafenib compared with vemurafenib in patients with previously untreated BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. We report long-term follow-up of coBRIM, with at least 5 years since the last patient was randomized.Patients and methodsEligible patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either oral cobimetinib (60 mg once daily on days 1-21 in each 28-day cycle) or placebo in combination with oral vemurafenib (960 mg twice daily).Results495 patients were randomized to cobimetinib plus vemurafenib (n = 247) or placebo plus vemurafenib (n = 248). Median follow-up was 21.2 months for cobimetinib plus vemurafenib and 16.6 months for placebo plus vemurafenib. Median OS was 22.5 months (95% CI, 20.3-28.8) with cobimetinib plus vemurafenib and 17.4 months (95% CI, 15.0-19.8) with placebo plus vemurafenib; 5-year OS rates were 31% and 26%, respectively. Median PFS was 12.6 months (95% CI, 9.5-14.8) with cobimetinib plus vemurafenib and 7.2 months (95% CI, 5.6-7.5) with placebo plus vemurafenib; 5-year PFS rates were 14% and 10%, respectively. OS and PFS were longest in patients with normal baseline lactate dehydrogenase levels and low tumor burden, and in those achieving complete response. The safety profile remained consistent with previously published reports.ConclusionsExtended follow-up of coBRIM confirms the long-term clinical benefit and safety profile of cobimetinib plus vemurafenib compared with vemurafenib monotherapy in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma.

BackgroundPrevious analyses of BREAK-2 and BREAK-3 showed that durable outcomes lasting ≥3 years are achievable with dabrafenib in some patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma (MM); however, additional follow-up is needed to fully characterise the long-term impact of dabrafenib in these patients.MethodsBREAK-2 was a single-arm phase 2 study evaluating dabrafenib in treatment-naive or previously treated BRAF V600E/K-mutant MM. BREAK-3, a randomised (3:1) phase 3 study, assessed dabrafenib versus dacarbazine in previously untreated unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600E-mutant melanoma. Five-year analyses were performed.ResultsAll BREAK-2 patients (N = 92 [V600E, n = 76; V600K, n = 16]) discontinued treatment by the data cutoff. Median follow-up was 13.0 months. In BRAF V600E patients, 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 11% and 20%, respectively. Subsequent immunotherapy was received by 22% of patients. In BREAK-3, median follow-up was 17.0 and 12.0 months in the dabrafenib (n = 187) and dacarbazine (n = 63) arms, respectively. Thirty-seven patients (59%) receiving dacarbazine crossed over to dabrafenib following disease progression as per protocol. Five-year PFS was 12% in the dabrafenib arm; all dacarbazine-arm patients progressed or were censored by 5 years. Dabrafenib improved PFS versus dacarbazine, regardless of baseline lactate dehydrogenase levels. Five-year OS rates were 24% and 22% in the dabrafenib and dacarbazine arms, respectively. Subsequent therapy in each arm included anti-CTLA-4 (dabrafenib [24%] and dacarbazine [24%]) and/or anti-PD-1 (8% and 2%) treatment. No new safety signals were observed.Conclusions and relevanceThese data, representing extended follow-up for dabrafenib monotherapy, demonstrate that durable benefit lasting ≥5 years is achievable in a subset of patients.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (BREAK-2, NCT01153763; BREAK-3, NCT01227889).

BackgroundIn the coBRIM study, cobimetinib plus vemurafenib (C+V) significantly improved survival outcomes vs placebo and vemurafenib (P+V) in patients with advanced/metastatic BRAFV600-mutated melanoma. An analysis of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) from coBRIM is reported.MethodsPatients completing the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) at baseline and ⩾1 time point thereafter constituted the analysis population. Change from baseline ⩾10 points was considered clinically meaningful.ResultsMean baseline scores for all QLQ-C30 domains were similar between arms. Most on-treatment scores for QLQ-C30 domains were also comparable between arms. A transient deterioration in role function in cycle 1 day 15 (C1D15; -14.7 points) in the P+V arm and improvement in insomnia in the C+V arm at C2D15 (-12.4 points) was observed. Among patients who experienced a ⩾10-point change from baseline (responders), between-group differences were greatest for insomnia (16%), social functioning (10%), fatigue (9%) and pain (7%), all favouring C+V. Diarrhoea, photosensitivity reaction, pyrexia, and rash did not meaningfully affect global health status (GHS). Serous retinopathy was associated with a transient decrease in GHS at C1D15 assessment.ConclusionsIn patients with advanced/metastatic BRAFV600-mutated melanoma, treatment with C+V maintained HRQOL compared with P+V, with superior efficacy.

Background: Prolgolimab is the first Russian PD-1 inhibitor approved for the first-line treatment of unresectable or metastatic melanoma and advanced non-small cell lung cancer. It was approved in two weight-based regimens of 1 mg/kg Q2W and 3 mg/kg Q3W, but because of re-evaluation of weight-based dosing paradigm, studying of a fixed-dose regimen was considered perspective. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, single-arm, open-label efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and safety study to obtain data that would allow the approval of the new flat dosing regimen of prolgolimab in patients with previously untreated unresectable or metastatic melanoma (BCD-100-8/FLAT, NCT05783882). The primary objective was to prove the non-inferiority of prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W versus prolgolimab 1 mg/kg Q2W for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma in terms of ORR according to RECIST 1.1. Patients from the MIRACULUM study (BCD-100-2/MIRACULUM, NCT03269565) comprised a historical control group. Results: One hundred fourteen patients received prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W, and 61 patients received prolgolimab (Prolgo) 1 mg/kg Q2W (historical control). Objective response was achieved by 33.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 24.8, 42.8] of patients in the Prolgo 250 mg group compared with 32.8% (95% CI: 21.3, 46.0) of patients in the Prolgo 1 mg/kg group. Risk difference was 0.00, 95% CI (-0.12; NA), p = 0.0082. Both regimens were well tolerated, and safety profiles were comparable. The pharmacokinetic analysis (PK) showed that the regimen with the fixed dose of 250 mg Q3W was characterized by higher PK parameters. The immunogenicity study did not detect binding antibodies to prolgolimab in any of the subjects. Conclusion: The obtained results showed that the selected fixed dosing regimen of prolgolimab 250 mg Q3W is characterized by efficacy and safety parameters comparable to that observed for the 1 mg/kg Q2W regimen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]