GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

feed icon rss

Ihre E-Mail wurde erfolgreich gesendet. Bitte prüfen Sie Ihren Maileingang.

Leider ist ein Fehler beim E-Mail-Versand aufgetreten. Bitte versuchen Sie es erneut.

Vorgang fortführen?

Exportieren
  • 1
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 29, No. 15_suppl ( 2011-05-20), p. e19671-e19671
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publikationsdatum: 2011
    ZDB Id: 2005181-5
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 2
    In: New England Journal of Medicine, Massachusetts Medical Society, Vol. 375, No. 19 ( 2016-11-10), p. 1856-1867
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 0028-4793 , 1533-4406
    RVK:
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: Massachusetts Medical Society
    Publikationsdatum: 2016
    ZDB Id: 1468837-2
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 3
    In: Cancer Research, American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), Vol. 76, No. 14_Supplement ( 2016-07-15), p. CT099-CT099
    Kurzfassung: Background: Patients (pts) with platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN have an extremely poor prognosis and no chemotherapy (CT) options to extend survival. Nivo, a fully human anti-programmed death-1 monoclonal antibody, is FDA-approved and improves survival in other tumor types. Methods: A randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial (NCT02105636) assigned pts (stratified by prior cetuximab) with SCCHN who progressed within 6 mo of platinum-based CT in a 2:1 ratio to nivo 3 mg/kg Q2W or weekly single-agent IC (methotrexate 40-60 mg/m2, docetaxel 30-40 mg/m2, or cetuximab 400-mg/m2 loading dose followed by 250 mg/m2 weekly). Pts must not have received systemic therapy subsequent to biopsy and prior to screening. Pts could receive nivo beyond disease progression if there was evidence of clinical benefit. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints were PFS and objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST 1.1. Additional endpoints included safety and outcomes by PD-L1 and HPV (p16 IHC) status. An interim analysis (IA) was planned after at least 195 deaths. Results: Of 361 randomized pts, median age was 60.0 yr, 76.5% were current/former smokers, 54.8% had received ?2 prior lines of CT, 91.4% had prior radiotherapy, and 98.3% had ECOG score ?1. At IA, 133 of 240 pts (55.4%) on nivo and 85 of 121 pts (70.2%) on IC had died. Nivo-treated pts had a 30% reduction in risk of death (HR, 0.70; 97.73% CI, 0.51-0.96; P = 0.010); median OS was 7.5 mo (95% CI, 5.5-9.1) with nivo vs 5.1 mo (95% CI, 4.0-6.0) with IC. Tumor PD-L1 status was evaluable in 260 pts (72.0%). Median OS in pts with PD-L1 ?1% was 8.7 mo with nivo vs 4.6 mo with IC (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.36-0.83) and, in pts with PD-L1 & lt;1%, 5.7 vs 5.8 mo, respectively (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.54-1.45). HPV status by IHC was available in 178 pts (49.3%). Median OS in HPV+ pts was 9.1 mo with nivo vs. 4.4 mo with IC (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.32-0.99) and 7.5 mo vs. 5.8 mo, respectively, in HPV- pts (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.42-1.25). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade occurred in 58.9% of pts on nivo vs 77.5% of pts on IC; TRAEs Grade 3-4 were reported in 13.1% vs 35.1% of pts, respectively. Two treatment-related deaths on the nivo arm and one on the IC arm occurred. Conclusions: Nivo improved OS in pts with platinum-refractory R/M SCCHN compared to single-agent IC therapy. Pts with PD-L1 ?1% and HPV+ pts had significantly longer median OS with nivo than with IC, but nivo was effective regardless of PD-L1 or HPV status. As the first immunotherapy agent to increase survival in a randomized phase 3 study in R/M SCCHN, nivo is a new standard of care option for these pts. Citation Format: Maura L. Gillison, George Blumenschein, Jérôme Fayette, Joel Guigay, A. Dimitrios Colevas, Lisa Licitra, Kevin Harrington, Stefan Kasper, Everett E. Vokes, Caroline Even, Francis Worden, Nabil F. Saba, Lara Carmen Iglesias Docampo, Robert Haddad, Tamara Rordorf, Naomi Kiyota, Makoto Tahara, Manish Monga, Mark Lynch, William J. Geese, Mark Schactman, Justin Kopit, James W. Shaw, Robert L. Ferris. Nivolumab (nivo) vs investigator's choice (IC) for recurrent or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC): CheckMate-141. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr CT099.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 0008-5472 , 1538-7445
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
    Publikationsdatum: 2016
    ZDB Id: 2036785-5
    ZDB Id: 1432-1
    ZDB Id: 410466-3
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 4
    In: Cancer Research, American Association for Cancer Research (AACR), Vol. 78, No. 13_Supplement ( 2018-07-01), p. CT116-CT116
    Kurzfassung: Aim: Nivo is the only immunotherapy to significantly improve overall survival (OS) in patients (pts) with R/M SCCHN who have progressed on or after platinum-based therapy. Here we report long-term data from the randomized, open-label, phase 3 CheckMate 141 study (NCT02105636). Patients: Pts with R/M SCCHN who progressed on or after platinum-based therapy were randomized 2:1 to nivo 3 mg/kg q2wk (n = 240) or IC (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab; n = 121). Endpoints: OS (primary), progression-free survival (PFS), safety. Minimum follow-up: 24.2 mo (data cut: Sep 2017). Results: Nivo improved OS significantly vs IC in the overall population (median [95% CI]: 7.7 [5.7, 8.8] mo vs 5.1 [4.0, 6.2] mo; HR [95% CI] : 0.68 [0.54, 0.86]). 2-yr OS rate (95% CI) was 16.9% (12.4, 22.0) with nivo vs 6.0% (2.7, 11.3) with IC. 8.3% of pts in the IC arm received subsequent immunotherapy. Outcomes by PD-L1 and HPV subgroups are shown in the Table. In pts with tumor PD-L1 & lt;1%, risk of death at 2 yrs was reduced by 27% with nivo vs IC with the HR trending lower with longer follow-up; HR (95% CI) = 0.89 (0.54, 1.45), 0.83 (0.54, 1.29), and 0.73 (0.49, 1.09) at 6 mo (Dec 2015 data cut), 1 yr (Sep 2016 data cut), and 2 yrs of follow-up, respectively. Nivo also continued to improve OS vs IC in pts with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1%. Complete responses were noted in both PD-L1 ≥ 1% and & lt;1% groups. Key baseline characteristics, including PD-L1 expression and HPV status, were similar among patients who survived 2 yrs compared with all patients in the nivo arm. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 15.3% (nivo) vs 36.9% (IC) of pts; toxicity-related deaths in 2 pts (0.8%) and 1 pt (0.9%), respectively. Conclusion: With 2-yr follow-up, nivo continued to significantly improve OS and maintain a favorable safety profile vs IC. Nivo is the only immunotherapy to demonstrate OS benefit irrespective of PD-L1 expression in pts with SCCHN. Table: Outcomes by PD-L1 expression and HPV statusMedian OS (95% CI), monthsMedian PFS (95% CI), monthsNivoICHR (95% CI)NivoICHR (95% CI)PD-L1 & lt; 1%6.5 (4.4, 11.7)5.5 (3.7, 8.5)0.73 (0.49, 1.09)2.0 (1.9, 2.1)2.7 (2.0, 4.6)1.13 (0.75, 1.71)PD-L1 ≥ 1%8.2 (6.7, 9.5)4.7 (3.8, 6.2)0.55 (0.39, 0.78)2.1 (2.0, 3.5)2.0 (1.9, 3.1)0.59 (0.41, 0.84)HPV+9.1 (6.5, 11.8)4.4 (3.0, 9.8)0.60 (0.37, 0.97)2.0 (1.9, 3.3)2.0 (1.6, 2.8)0.75 (0.46, 1.23)HPV−7.7 (4.8, 13.0)6.5 (3.9, 8.7)0.59 (0.38, 0.92)2.1 (1.9, 3.1)3.3 (1.9, 4.0)1.01 (0.65, 1.56) Citation Format: Robert L. Ferris, George R. Blumenschein, Jerome Fayette, Joel Guigay, A Dimitrios Colevas, Lisa Licitra, Kevin J. Harrington, Stefan Kasper, Everett E. Vokes, Caroline Even, Francis Worden, Nabil F. Saba, Lara Carmen Iglesias Docampo, Robert Haddad, Tamara Rordorf, Naomi Kiyota, Makoto Tahara, Mark Lynch, Vijayvel Jayaprakash, Li Li, Maura L. Gillison. Nivolumab (Nivo) vs investigator's choice (IC) in recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN): 2-yr outcomes in the overall population and PD-L1 subgroups of CheckMate 141 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT116.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 0008-5472 , 1538-7445
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
    Publikationsdatum: 2018
    ZDB Id: 2036785-5
    ZDB Id: 1432-1
    ZDB Id: 410466-3
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
  • 5
    In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 35, No. 15_suppl ( 2017-05-20), p. 6019-6019
    Kurzfassung: 6019 Background: In CheckMate 141, a randomized, phase 3 trial, nivo demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) and better tolerability in patients (pts) with PR R/M SCCHN compared with IC. Pts with SCCHN progressing within 6 mos of platinum in the primary treatment setting have dismal prognosis. We report outcomes in pts who were PR in the primary or adjuvant setting, and updated results in the overall population. Methods: Pts (N = 361) with PR R/M SCCHN were randomized 2:1 to nivo 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or weekly IC (methotrexate, docetaxel, or cetuximab). Primary endpoint was OS estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and confidence intervals (CIs). Additional endpoints include objective response rate (ORR) and safety. Outcomes were analyzed overall and post hoc in pts who were PR in the primary/adjuvant setting and received nivo/IC as 1L R/M therapy. Results: Characteristics of the 78 (21.6%) pts who received nivo (n = 52) or IC (n = 26) in the 1L R/M setting were similar to the overall population.Nivo significantly improved OS vs IC among 1L R/M pts (median [95% CI] : 7.7 mo [3.1, 13.8] vs 3.3 mo [2.1, 6.4] ; HR [95% CI] = 0.56 [0.33, 0.95] ); 12-mo OS rate: 39.2% vs 15.4%. ORR was 19.2% for nivo vs 11.5% for IC in this subgroup. At 11.4-mo minimum follow-up, updated efficacy and safety in the overall population were similar to the primary analysis. Median OS (95% CI) was 7.7 mo (5.7, 8.8) for nivo vs 5.1 mo (4.0, 6.2) for IC; HR (95% CI) = 0.71 (0.55, 0.90); P = 0.0048. For nivo vs IC, the 18-mo OS rate was 21.5% vs 8.3% and ORR was 13.3% vs 5.8%. Nivo doubled the median duration of response vs IC (9.7 vs 4.0 mo). Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse event rates for nivo vs IC were 15.3% vs 36.0% overall and 27.5% vs 32.0% for 1L R/M pts; there were no new deaths due to study drug toxicity. Conclusions: Nivo significantly improved OS and increased ORR vs IC in a 1L R/M subgroup, supporting its use as 1L therapy for pts with PR R/M SCCHN. Nivo continued to show a significant survival benefit and better tolerability vs IC in pts with PR R/M SCCHN. Clinical trial information: NCT02105636.
    Materialart: Online-Ressource
    ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Sprache: Englisch
    Verlag: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
    Publikationsdatum: 2017
    ZDB Id: 2005181-5
    Standort Signatur Einschränkungen Verfügbarkeit
    BibTip Andere fanden auch interessant ...
Schließen ⊗
Diese Webseite nutzt Cookies und das Analyse-Tool Matomo. Weitere Informationen finden Sie hier...