Purpose To provide a more precise estimate of long-term survival observed for ipilimumab-treated patients with advanced melanoma, we performed a pooled analysis of overall survival (OS) data from multiple studies. Methods The primary analysis pooled OS data for 1,861 patients from 10 prospective and two retrospective studies of ipilimumab, including two phase III trials. Patients were previously treated (n = 1,257) or treatment naive (n = 604), and the majority of patients received ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (n = 965) or 10 mg/kg (n = 706). We also conducted a secondary analysis of OS data (n = 4,846) with an additional 2,985 patients from an expanded access program. OS rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results Among 1,861 patients, median OS was 11.4 months (95% CI, 10.7 to 12.1 months), which included 254 patients with at least 3 years of survival follow-up. The survival curve began to plateau around year 3, with follow-up of up to 10 years. Three-year survival rates were 22%, 26%, and 20% for all patients, treatment-naive patients, and previously treated patients, respectively. Including data from the expanded access program, median OS was 9.5 months (95% CI, 9.0 to 10.0 months), with a plateau at 21% in the survival curve beginning around year 3. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the largest analysis of OS to date for ipilimumab-treated patients with advanced melanoma. We observed a plateau in the survival curve, beginning at approximately 3 years, which was independent of prior therapy or ipilimumab dose. These data add to the evidence supporting the durability of long-term survival in ipilimumab-treated patients with advanced melanoma.

PURPOSE While the immediate care and access disruptions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have received growing attention in certain areas, the full range of gaps in cancer screenings and treatment is not yet well understood or well documented throughout the country comprehensively. METHODS This study used a large medical claims clearinghouse database representing 5%-7% of the Medicare fee-for-service population to characterize changes in the utilization of cancer care services and gain insight into the impact of COVID-19 on the US cancer population, including identification of new patients, gaps in access to care, and disruption of treatment journeys. RESULTS In March-July 2020, in comparison with the baseline period of March-July 2019, there is a substantial decrease in cancer screenings, visits, therapy, and surgeries, with variation by cancer type and site of service. At the peak of the pandemic in April, screenings for breast, colon, prostate, and lung cancers were lower by 85%, 75%, 74%, and 56%, respectively. Significant utilization reductions were observed in April for hospital outpatient evaluation and management (E&M) visits (−74%), new patient E&M visits (−70%), and established patient E&M visits (−60%). A decrease in billing frequency was observed for the top physician-administered oncology products, dropping in both April (−26%) and July (−31%). Mastectomies were reduced consistently in April through July, with colectomies similarly reduced in April and May and prostatectomies dipping in April and July. CONCLUSION The current impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer care in the United States has resulted in decreases and delays in identifying new cancers and delivery of treatment. These problems, if unmitigated, will increase cancer morbidity and mortality for years to come.

Purpose The phase 2 MONARCH 1 study was designed to evaluate the single-agent activity and adverse event (AE) profile of abemaciclib, a selective inhibitor of CDK4 and CDK6, in women with refractory hormone receptor positive (HR+), HER2− metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Experimental Design MONARCH 1 was a phase 2 single arm open-label study. Women with HR+/HER2− MBC who had progressed on or after prior endocrine therapy and had 1 or 2 chemotherapy regimens in the metastatic setting were eligible. Abemaciclib 200 mg was administered orally on a continuous schedule every 12 hours until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective of MONARCH 1 was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Other endpoints included clinical benefit rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results Patients (n=132) had a median of 3 (range 1–8) lines of prior systemic therapy in the metastatic setting, 90.2% had visceral disease, and 50.8% had ≥3 metastatic sites. At the 12 month final analysis, the primary objective of confirmed objective response rate was 19.7% (95% CI: 13.3, 27.5; 15% not excluded); clinical benefit rate (CR+PR+SD≥6 months) was 42.4%, median progression-free survival was 6.0 months, and median overall survival was 17.7 months. The most common treatment-emergent AEs of any grade were diarrhea, fatigue, and nausea; discontinuations due to AEs were infrequent (7.6%). Conclusion In this poor-prognosis, heavily pre-treated population with refractory HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer, continuous dosing of single agent abemaciciclib was well tolerated and exhibited promising clinical activity.

The addition of iniparib to chemotherapy improved the clinical benefit and survival of patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer without significantly increased toxic effects. On the basis of these results, a phase 3 trial adequately powered to evaluate overall survival and progression-free survival is being conducted. (Funded by BiPar Sciences [now owned by Sanofi-Aventis]; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00540358.).

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) previously demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer at the second interim analysis, however follow-up was limited. Here, we present results of the prespecified primary outcome analysis and an additional follow-up analysis. Patients and methods: This global, phase III, open-label trial randomized (1 : 1) 5637 patients to adjuvant ET for !5 years AE abemaciclib for 2 years. Cohort 1 enrolled patients with !4 positive axillary lymph nodes (ALNs), or 1-3 positive ALNs and either grade 3 disease or tumor !5 cm. Cohort 2 enrolled patients with 1-3 positive ALNs and centrally determined high Ki-67 index (!20%). The primary endpoint was IDFS in the intent-to-treat population (cohorts 1 and 2). Secondary endpoints were IDFS in patients with high Ki-67, DRFS, overall survival, and safety. Results: At the primary outcome analysis, with 19 months median follow-up time, abemaciclib þ ET resulted in a 29% reduction in the risk of developing an IDFS event [hazard ratio (HR) ¼ 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-0.87; nominal P ¼ 0.0009]. At the additional follow-up analysis, with 27 months median follow-up and 90% of patients off treatment, IDFS (HR ¼ 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.82; nominal P < 0.0001) and DRFS (HR ¼ 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.83; nominal P < 0.0001) benefit was maintained. The absolute improvements in 3-year IDFS and DRFS rates were 5.4% and 4.2%, respectively. Whereas Ki-67 index was prognostic, abemaciclib benefit was consistent regardless of Ki-67 index. Safety data were consistent with the known abemaciclib risk profile. Conclusion: Abemaciclib þ ET significantly improved IDFS in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer, with an acceptable safety profile. Ki-67 index was prognostic, but abemaciclib benefit was observed regardless of Ki-67 index. Overall, the robust treatment benefit of abemaciclib extended beyond the 2-year treatment period.

HER2-targeted therapy is recommended for patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer, except for those with clinical congestive heart failure or significantly compromised left ventricular ejection fraction, who should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and taxane for first-line treatment and T-DM1 for second-line treatment are recommended. In the third-line setting, clinicians should offer other HER2-targeted therapy combinations or T-DM1 (if not previously administered) and may offer pertuzumab, if the patient has not previously received it. Optimal duration of chemotherapy is at least 4 to 6 months or until maximum response, depending on toxicity and in the absence of progression. HER2-targeted therapy can continue until time of progression or unacceptable toxicities. For patients with HER2-positive and estrogen receptor-positive/progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer, clinicians may recommend either standard first-line therapy or, for selected patients, endocrine therapy plus HER2-targeted therapy or endocrine therapy alone.