PURPOSE Ipilimumab and nivolumab have each shown treatment benefit for high-risk resected melanoma. The phase III CheckMate 915 trial evaluated adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab alone in patients with resected stage IIIB-D or IV melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this randomized, double-blind, phase III trial, 1,833 patients received nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks (916 patients) or nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks (917 patients) for ≤ 1 year. After random assignment, patients were stratified by tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and stage. Dual primary end points were recurrence-free survival (RFS) in randomly assigned patients and in the tumor PD-L1 expression-level < 1% subgroup. RESULTS At a minimum follow-up of approximately 23.7 months, there was no significant difference between treatment groups for RFS in the all-randomly assigned patient population (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.09; P = .269) or in patients with PD-L1 expression < 1% (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.14). In all patients, 24-month RFS rates were 64.6% (combination) and 63.2% (nivolumab). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 32.6% of patients in the combination group and 12.8% in the nivolumab group. Treatment-related deaths were reported in 0.4% of patients in the combination group and in no nivolumab-treated patients. CONCLUSION Nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks did not improve RFS versus nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks in patients with stage IIIB-D or stage IV melanoma. Nivolumab showed efficacy consistent with previous adjuvant studies in a population resembling current practice using American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition, reaffirming nivolumab as a standard of care for melanoma adjuvant treatment.
Adaptive responses have been demonstrated to limit activity to targeted therapies. Saei et al. show that loss of USP28/FBW7-mediated BRAF degradation is observed in a proportion of melanoma patients and can be responsible for resistance through upregulation of MAPK signaling pathway.
HER2-positive tumors have a worse prognosis than HER2-negative cancers. Although the standard treatment for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer is chemotherapy and trastuzumab, the combination of aromatase inhibitors with anti-HER2 therapies has become an available strategy in patients with HER2-positive and hormone receptor-positive tumors. However, although this new treatment option is more effective than hormone therapy alone, it has not been compared with the standard chemotherapy and trastuzumab-based regimens. In fact, the activity observed in randomized clinical trials with chemotherapy and anti-HER2 therapies seems to be higher than that observed with aromatase inhibitors and trastuzumab-based or lapatinib-based therapies. In this article, we highlight the importance of considering chemotherapy and anti-HER2 therapy as the standard of care in HER2-positive and hormone receptor-positive tumors.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.