Aller au contenu principal
2015 conference-abstract

A single-institution experience with the pembrolizumab (PEM) Expanded Access Program (EAP).

2Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
1Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

e20088 Background: PEM is contingently approved in the US to treat patients (pts) with advanced melanoma (MEL) whose disease progressed following ipilimumab (IPI) and a BRAF inhibitor (if BRAFV600-mutated MEL). We report our clinical experience of MEL pts enrolled in the PEM EAP. Methods: 62 pts were enrolled and treated on PEM EAP from May to September 2014 at MD Anderson Cancer Center. PEM was administered at 2 mg/kg every 3 wk until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, or for up to 2 yr. Toxicity was assessed before each dosing. Response was evaluated every 12 wk (after every 4 doses) using immune-related response criteria. Results: Table showsbaseline characteristics of 60 pts included in the efficacy analysis (excluding 2 pts with uveal MEL). Median number of PEM doses administered was 6 (range 1-12). At a median follow-up of 5.4 mo (range 0.2-7.8), the overall response rate (ORR) was 22% (26% in 51 pts who received ≥ 4 doses), with 17% (20%) stable disease. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.5 mo (95% CI 2.8-4.8); median overall survival (OS) was not reached (95% CI 6.7-not evaluable). Univariate analysis showed a statistically significant association between OS and ECOG PS and LDH; PFS and ORR were associated with ECOG PS, LDH, and stage. BRAF mutation status was not associated with treatment outcome. Adverse drug events (ADE) occurred in 87% of pts (n = 62), all grade 1/2. ADE of interest were pruritus (11%), rash (18%), diarrhea (18%), elevated liver function tests (42%) and abnormal thyroid function tests (9.6%). One pt developed grade 2 pneumonitis. Grade 3-4 toxicities and treatment-related deaths were not observed. Conclusions: Our experience with PEM EAP was similar to published data of PEM in metastatic MEL. PEM is safe and effective in pts with advanced MEL refractory to standard-of-care therapy including IPI and BRAF inhibitor. Clinical trial information: NCT02083484.Patient characteristics. Number of patients N Age Median (Range) Stage M1c N (%) Prior Therapies Median (Range) Elevated LDH N (%) History of Brain Metastases N (%) Mutations N (%) ECOG PS N (%) BRAF NRAS 0 1 60 60.5 (16-85) 45 (75) 2 (1-7) 25 (42) 15 (25) 15 (25) 20 (33.3) 40 (66.7) 20 (33.3)

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
A single-institution experience with the pembrolizumab (PEM) Expanded Access Program (EAP).
Date Crossref
20/05/2015
Éditeur
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Où se fait cette recherche

  • The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center pays non établi dans la notice
    Établissement de santé

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Cancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersMelanoma and MAPK PathwaysCAR-T cell therapy research

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.