Hospitalized pediatric burns in North China: a 10-year epidemiologic review.

Liqiang Zhu,Yanqi Zhang,Ling Liu,Jingcheng Jiang,Yong Liu,Fusheng Shi,Dong Yi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2012.12.014

IF: 2.609

2013-08-01

Burns

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab or Monotherapy in Untreated Melanoma.

M. Smylie,J. Wagstaff,V. Chiarion-Sileni,P. Rutkowski,P. Ferrucci,A. Yang,M. Maio,I. Márquez-Rodas,K. Grossmann,L. Rollin,M. Callahan,C. Horak,F. Hodi,B. Dréno,P. Ascierto,G. Long,M. Sznol,G. McArthur,J. Larkin,C. Lao,M. Postow,R. Dummer,R. Gonzalez,J. Wolchok,L. Bastholt,C. Cowey,J. Grob,D. Schadendorf,A. Hill,M. Carlino,J. Haanen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1504030

IF: 158.5

2015-07-01

New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract:BACKGROUND Nivolumab (a programmed death 1 [PD-1] checkpoint inhibitor) and ipilimumab (a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 [CTLA-4] checkpoint inhibitor) have been shown to have complementary activity in metastatic melanoma. In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study, nivolumab alone or nivolumab plus ipilimumab was compared with ipilimumab alone in patients with metastatic melanoma. METHODS We assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, 945 previously untreated patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma to nivolumab alone, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, or ipilimumab alone. Progression-free survival and overall survival were coprimary end points. Results regarding progression-free survival are presented here. RESULTS The median progression-free survival was 11.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.9 to 16.7) with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, as compared with 2.9 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 3.4) with ipilimumab (hazard ratio for death or disease progression, 0.42; 99.5% CI, 0.31 to 0.57; P<0.001), and 6.9 months (95% CI, 4.3 to 9.5) with nivolumab (hazard ratio for the comparison with ipilimumab, 0.57; 99.5% CI, 0.43 to 0.76; P<0.001). In patients with tumors positive for the PD-1 ligand (PD-L1), the median progression-free survival was 14.0 months in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and in the nivolumab group, but in patients with PD-L1-negative tumors, progression-free survival was longer with the combination therapy than with nivolumab alone (11.2 months [95% CI, 8.0 to not reached] vs. 5.3 months [95% CI, 2.8 to 7.1]). Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 16.3% of the patients in the nivolumab group, 55.0% of those in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group, and 27.3% of those in the ipilimumab group. CONCLUSIONS Among previously untreated patients with metastatic melanoma, nivolumab alone or combined with ipilimumab resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than ipilimumab alone. In patients with PD-L1-negative tumors, the combination of PD-1 and CTLA-4 blockade was more effective than either agent alone. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb; CheckMate 067 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01844505.).

Medicine
Final, 10-Year Outcomes with Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma

Jedd D Wolchok,Vanna Chiarion-Sileni,Piotr Rutkowski,C Lance Cowey,Dirk Schadendorf,John Wagstaff,Paola Queirolo,Reinhard Dummer,Marcus O Butler,Andrew G Hill,Michael A Postow,Caroline Gaudy-Marqueste,Theresa Medina,Christopher D Lao,John Walker,Iván Márquez-Rodas,John B A G Haanen,Massimo Guidoboni,Michele Maio,Patrick Schöffski,Matteo S Carlino,Shahneen Sandhu,Céleste Lebbé,Paolo A Ascierto,Georgina V Long,Corey Ritchings,Ayman Nassar,Margarita Askelson,Melanie Pe Benito,Wenjia Wang,F Stephen Hodi,James Larkin,CheckMate 067 Investigators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2407417

2024-09-15

Abstract:Background: Previous results from this trial showed longer overall survival after treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or with nivolumab monotherapy than with ipilimumab monotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma. Given that patients with advanced melanoma are living longer than 7.5 years, longer-term data were needed to address new clinically relevant questions. Methods: We randomly assigned patients with previously untreated advanced melanoma, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to one of the following regimens: nivolumab (1 mg per kilogram of body weight) plus ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 2 weeks; nivolumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 2 weeks plus placebo; or ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 3 weeks for four doses plus placebo. Treatment was continued until the occurrence of disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. Randomization was stratified according to BRAF mutation status, metastasis stage, and programmed death ligand 1 expression. Here, we report the final, 10-year results of this trial, including results for overall survival and melanoma-specific survival, as well as durability of response. Results: With a minimum follow-up of 10 years, median overall survival was 71.9 months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 36.9 months with nivolumab, and 19.9 months with ipilimumab. The hazard ratio for death was 0.53 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44 to 0.65) for nivolumab plus ipilimumab as compared with ipilimumab and was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.52 to 0.76) for nivolumab as compared with ipilimumab. Median melanoma-specific survival was more than 120 months with nivolumab plus ipilimumab (not reached, with 37% of the patients alive at the end of the trial), 49.4 months with nivolumab, and 21.9 months with ipilimumab. Among patients who had been alive and progression-free at 3 years, 10-year melanoma-specific survival was 96% with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 97% with nivolumab, and 88% with ipilimumab. Conclusions: The final trial results showed a continued, ongoing survival benefit with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and with nivolumab monotherapy, as compared with ipilimumab monotherapy, in patients with advanced melanoma. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 067 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01844505.).
Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy of a primary second molar in a patient with agenesis of the permanent successor.

A. B. S. Moretti,T. M. Oliveira,V. T. Sakai,Carlos Ferreira dos Santos,Maria Aparecida de Andrade Moreira Machado,R. C. Abdo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1365-2591.2007.01274.X

2007-09-01

International Endodontic Journal

Abstract:AIM To describe a pulpotomy with mineral trioxide aggregate in a primary second molar with no permanent successor. SUMMARY Coronal pulpotomy was performed on a carious primary molar with no permanent successor in a 7-year-old child. Follow-up examinations 24 months later revealed that the treatment was successful in preserving the tooth and the vitality of its pulp. KEY LEARNING POINT Mineral trioxide aggregate might be considered as an alternative wound dressing for pulpotomy in primary molars, preserving pulp vitality and prolonging the useful life of the tooth.
Slime production by coagulase-negative staphylococci in the infected pulps.

T. Alaçam,A. Alaçam,N. Sultan,O. Bala,A. Gungor,S. Ozkan

Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

Abstract:In this study; slime factor which is produced by coagulase negative Staphylococci was investigated in infected pulps of 145 primary and permanent teeth. Staphylococci were isolated in 27% of the cultures and all of the isolated Staphylococci were coagulase negative (CNS) in permanent teeth whereas 75% of isolated Staphylococci were coagulase negative in primary teeth. Slime production rate was the same for both groups and 22% of CNS were found slime positive. It is thought that slime production is important not only in endodontic microbiology, but also in other fields of dentistry for the explanation of the pathogenesis of infection.
Standard-dose pembrolizumab in combination with reduced-dose ipilimumab for patients with advanced melanoma (KEYNOTE-029): an open-label, phase 1b trial

Georgina V Long,Victoria Atkinson,Jonathan S Cebon,Michael B Jameson,Bernie M Fitzharris,Catriona M McNeil,Andrew G Hill,Antoni Ribas,Michael B Atkins,John A Thompson,Wen-Jen Hwu,F Stephen Hodi,Alexander M Menzies,Alexander D Guminski,Richard Kefford,Benjamin Y Kong,Babak Tamjid,Archana Srivastava,Anna J Lomax,Mohammed Islam,Xinxin Shu,Scot Ebbinghaus,Nageatte Ibrahim,Matteo S Carlino

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30428-X

Abstract:Background: Reduced-dose nivolumab in combination with standard-dose ipilimumab improves objective response and progression-free survival compared with standard-dose ipilimumab alone, but increases toxicity. We assessed the safety and anti-tumour activity of standard-dose pembrolizumab in combination with reduced-dose ipilimumab. Methods: In this open-label, phase 1b trial, we recruited patients from 12 medical centres in Australia, New Zealand, and the USA. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years, had advanced melanoma, had an Eastern Coooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, had measurable disease according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1, had adequate organ function, had resolution of toxic effects of the most recent previous chemotherapy to grade 1 or less, had no active autoimmune disease requiring systemic steroids or immunosuppressive agents, had no active non-infectious pneumonitis, had no uncontrolled thyroid dysfunction or diabetes, had no active brain metastases, and had not received previous immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Patients received intravenous pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg plus intravenous ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by intravenous pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks for up to 2 years or disease progression, intolerable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability. The proportion of patients achieving an objective response assessed per RECIST version 1.1 by independent central review and overall survival were secondary endpoints. We also assessed progression-free survival. The primary endpoint was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of combination therapy. Activity was assessed in all enrolled patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02089685. Enrolment into this cohort is closed, but patients are still being monitored for safety and anti-tumour activity. Findings: Between Jan 13, 2015, and Sept 17, 2015, we enrolled and treated 153 patients. As of the Oct 17, 2016, cutoff date, median follow-up was 17·0 months (IQR 14·8-18·8). 110 (72%) of 153 patients received all four pembrolizumab plus ipilimumab doses; 64 (42%) remained on pembrolizumab monotherapy. 110 grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 69 (45%) patients. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Treatment-related adverse events led to discontinuation of pembrolizumab and ipilimumab in 22 (14%) patients, including 17 (11%) who discontinued both treatments for the same event and five (3%) who discontinued ipilimumab for one event and later discontinued pembrolizumab for another. 12 (8%) patients discontinued ipilimumab only and 14 (9%) discontinued pembrolizumab only because of treatment-related adverse events. 158 immune-mediated adverse events of any grade occurred in 92 (60%) patients, and 50 immune-mediated adverse events of grade 3-4 occurred in 42 (27%) patients; the most common immune-mediated adverse events were hypothyroidism (25 [16%]) and hyperthyroidism (17 [11%]). 93 (61% [95% CI 53-69]) patients achieved an objective response. Estimated 1 year progression-free survival was 69% (95% CI 60-75), and estimated 1 year overall survival was 89% (95% CI 83-93). Interpretation: Standard-dose pembrolizumab given in combination with four doses of reduced-dose ipilimumab followed by standard-dose pembrolizumab has a manageable toxicity profile and provides robust anti-tumour activity in patients with advanced melanoma. These data suggest that standard-dose pembrolizumab plus reduced-dose ipilimumab might be a tolerable, efficacious treatment option for patients with advanced melanoma. A randomised phase 2 trial of alternative dosing strategies of this combination is underway. Funding: Merck & Co, Inc.
Pooled Long-Term Outcomes With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab or Nivolumab Alone in Patients With Advanced Melanoma

Georgina V. Long,James Larkin,Dirk Schadendorf,Jean-Jacques Grob,Christopher D. Lao,Iván Márquez-Rodas,John Wagstaff,Céleste Lebbé,Jacopo Pigozzo,Caroline Robert,Paolo A. Ascierto,Victoria Atkinson,Michael A. Postow,Michael B. Atkins,Mario Sznol,Margaret K. Callahan,Suzanne L. Topalian,Jeffrey A. Sosman,Srividya Kotapati,Pratik K. Thakkar,Corey Ritchings,Melanie Pe Benito,Sandra Re,Samira Soleymani,F. Stephen Hodi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.24.00400

IF: 45.3

2024-11-07

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:PURPOSE Nivolumab (NIVO) + ipilimumab (IPI) combination and NIVO monotherapy have demonstrated durable clinical benefit in patients with unresectable/metastatic melanoma. This analysis describes long-term overall survival (OS) with the combination or monotherapy pooled across all major company-sponsored trials, as well as clinical factors associated with survival, in patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment–naïve unresectable/metastatic melanoma. METHODS Data were pooled from six CheckMate studies in ICI treatment–naïve patients receiving NIVO + IPI (NIVO 1 mg/kg + IPI 3 mg/kg or NIVO 3 mg/kg + IPI 1 mg/kg) or NIVO monotherapy (3 mg/kg). OS was assessed for each treatment, as well as in select subgroups. Cox proportional multivariate analysis (MVA) and classification and regression tree (CART) analyses were performed within treatment arms. RESULTS Median follow-up for OS was 45.0 months for patients treated with NIVO + IPI (n = 839) and 35.8 months for patients treated with NIVO (n = 536). OS was longer with NIVO + IPI versus NIVO monotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.91]), with 6-year OS rates of 52% versus 41%, respectively. Consistent benefit was observed in BRAF -mutant and BRAF -wild-type patients and those with normal and elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Numerical difference in OS was also observed across PD-L1 expression levels, although more pronounced with no/low PD-L1 expression. Clinical factors associated with decreased survival in both the MVA and CART analyses were LDH > upper limit of normal with either treatment, age ≥65 years with NIVO + IPI, and the presence of liver metastases with NIVO monotherapy. CONCLUSION In this large, pooled nonrandomized retrospective analysis, we observed that NIVO + IPI provides longer OS than NIVO in patients with ICI treatment–naïve advanced melanoma and identifies clinical factors that appear to be associated with survival for each treatment, which may assist with treatment decision making.

oncology
Safety profile of pembrolizumab monotherapy based on an aggregate safety evaluation of 8937 patients

Julie R. Brahmer,Georgina V. Long,Omid Hamid,Edward B. Garon,Roy S. Herbst,Thierry Andre,Philippe Armand,Dean Bajorin,Joaquim Bellmunt,Barbara Burtness,Toni K. Choueiri,Ezra E.W. Cohen,Luis A. Diaz,Kohei Shitara,Girish Kulkarni,David McDermott,Manish Shah,Josep Tabernero,Arndt Vogel,Pier Luigi Zinzani,Niusha Jafari,Steven Bird,Ellen Snyder,Christine Gause,Oswaldo L. Bracco,M. Catherine Pietanza,Todd Gruber,Antoni Ribas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2024.113530

IF: 10.002

2024-01-13

European Journal of Cancer

Abstract:Background Pembrolizumab has a manageable safety profile as described in its label, which was primarily based on 2799 patients who participated in clinical trials for melanoma or non-small cell lung cancer. Here, we evaluated the safety of pembrolizumab in a broader population of patients from 31 advanced cancer clinical trials across 19 cancer types. Methods Safety was analyzed in patients who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks [Q3W], 10 mg/kg Q2W or Q3W, or 2 mg/kg Q3W). Adverse events (AEs) and immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions were evaluated. Results Safety data from 8937 patients in 31 trials of pembrolizumab monotherapy were pooled (median, 7 administrations; range, 1−59). Median duration on treatment was 4.1 months (range, 0.03−40.1). AEs occurred in 96.6% of patients. Grade 3−5 AEs occurred in 50.6% of patients. AEs led to pembrolizumab discontinuation in 12.7% of patients and death in 5.9%. Immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions occurred in 23.7% of patients (4.6% experienced multiple immune-mediated AEs/infusion reactions) and led to pembrolizumab discontinuation in 3.6% and death in 0.2%. Grade 3−5 immune-mediated AEs occurred in 6.3% of patients. Serious immune-mediated AEs and infusion reactions occurred in 6.0% of patients. Median time to immune-mediated AE onset was 85 days (range, 13–163). Of 2657 immune-mediated AEs, 22.3% were initially treated with prednisone ≥40 mg/day or equivalent, and 8.3% were initially treated with lower steroid doses. Conclusions This pooled analysis of 31 clinical trials showed that pembrolizumab has a consistent safety profile across indications.

oncology
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy with Nivolumab vs. Pembrolizumab in Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review

Anastasia Papaporfyriou,Konstantinos Bartziokas,Ioulianos Apessos,Jan Mueller,Vasileios Leivaditis,Efstratios Koletsis,Konstantinos Grapatsas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/curroncol31100469

2024-10-18

Abstract:Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Immunotherapy has emerged as a promising treatment option due to its favorable toxicity profile. However, selecting the most appropriate immunotherapeutic agent for neoadjuvant use-aimed at curative intent in early-stage NSCLC-based on efficacy and safety remains a critical question. This review aims to compare the efficacy and safety profiles of nivolumab and pembrolizumab when used as neoadjuvant treatments in NSCLC. A systematic review was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Wiley Online Library, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global, and Google Scholar, utilizing the search terms "Nivolumab OR Pembrolizumab AND Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy AND non-small cell lung cancer." Out of 1444 retrieved studies, 4 retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria by providing comparative data on nivolumab and pembrolizumab within the same study cohorts. Despite the critical risk of bias and the evidence quality ranging from moderate to very low across these studies, both nivolumab and pembrolizumab demonstrated efficacy rates exceeding 30% and maintained favorable safety profiles. There is no observed superiority between nivolumab and pembrolizumab in terms of efficacy and safety for the neoadjuvant treatment of early-stage NSCLC.
Re: Immunogenicity and safety of a strain-specific MenB OMV vaccine delivered to under 5 year olds in New Zealand, Oster P, O'Hallahan J, Aaberge I, Tilman S, Ypma E, Martin D. Vaccine 2007;25(16):3075-9.

D. Lennon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.06.025

IF: 4.169

2007-09-28

Vaccine

Abstract:
Overall Survival with Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1709684

2019-10-03

Abstract:Background Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab resulted in longer progression-free survival and a higher objective response rate than ipilimumab alone in a phase 3 trial involving patients with advanced melanoma. We now report 3-year overall survival outcomes in this trial. Full Text of Background... Methods We randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, patients with previously untreated advanced melanoma to receive nivolumab at a dose of 1 mg per kilogram of body weight plus ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks; nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks plus placebo; or ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses plus placebo, until progression, the occurrence of unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. Randomization was stratified according to programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status, BRAF mutation status, and metastasis stage. The two primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and in the nivolumab group versus the ipilimumab group. Full Text of Methods... Results At a minimum follow-up of 36 months, the median overall survival had not been reached in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and was 37.6 months in the nivolumab group, as compared with 19.9 months in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for death with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.55 [P<0.001]; hazard ratio for death with nivolumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.65 [P<0.001]). The overall survival rate at 3 years was 58% in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and 52% in the nivolumab group, as compared with 34% in the ipilimumab group. The safety profile was unchanged from the initial report. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 59% of the patients in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group, in 21% of those in the nivolumab group, and in 28% of those in the ipilimumab group. Full Text of Results... Conclusions Among patients with advanced melanoma, significantly longer overall survival occurred with combination therapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or with nivolumab alone than with ipilimumab alone. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 067 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01844505 .) Full Text of Discussion... Read the Full Article...
Adjuvant Nivolumab versus Ipilimumab in Resected Stage III or IV Melanoma

Jeffrey Weber,Mario Mandala,Michele Del Vecchio,Helen J Gogas,Ana M Arance,C Lance Cowey,Stéphane Dalle,Michael Schenker,Vanna Chiarion-Sileni,Ivan Marquez-Rodas,Jean-Jacques Grob,Marcus O Butler,Mark R Middleton,Michele Maio,Victoria Atkinson,Paola Queirolo,Rene Gonzalez,Ragini R Kudchadkar,Michael Smylie,Nicolas Meyer,Laurent Mortier,Michael B Atkins,Georgina V Long,Shailender Bhatia,Celeste Lebbé,Piotr Rutkowski,Kenji Yokota,Naoya Yamazaki,Tae M Kim,Veerle de Pril,Javier Sabater,Anila Qureshi,James Larkin,Paolo A Ascierto

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1709030

2019-10-03

Abstract:Background Nivolumab and ipilimumab are immune checkpoint inhibitors that have been approved for the treatment of advanced melanoma. In the United States, ipilimumab has also been approved as adjuvant therapy for melanoma on the basis of recurrence-free and overall survival rates that were higher than those with placebo in a phase 3 trial. We wanted to determine the efficacy of nivolumab versus ipilimumab for adjuvant therapy in patients with resected advanced melanoma. Full Text of Background... Methods In this randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 906 patients (≥15 years of age) who were undergoing complete resection of stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV melanoma to receive an intravenous infusion of either nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight every 2 weeks (453 patients) or ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses and then every 12 weeks (453 patients). The patients were treated for a period of up to 1 year or until disease recurrence, a report of unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. The primary end point was recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Full Text of Methods... Results At a minimum follow-up of 18 months, the 12-month rate of recurrence-free survival was 70.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 66.1 to 74.5) in the nivolumab group and 60.8% (95% CI, 56.0 to 65.2) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.65; 97.56% CI, 0.51 to 0.83; P<0.001). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 14.4% of the patients in the nivolumab group and in 45.9% of those in the ipilimumab group; treatment was discontinued because of any adverse event in 9.7% and 42.6% of the patients, respectively. Two deaths (0.4%) related to toxic effects were reported in the ipilimumab group more than 100 days after treatment. Full Text of Results... Conclusions Among patients undergoing resection of stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV melanoma, adjuvant therapy with nivolumab resulted in significantly longer recurrence-free survival and a lower rate of grade 3 or 4 adverse events than adjuvant therapy with ipilimumab. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; CheckMate 238 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02388906 ; Eudra-CT number, 2014-002351-26 .) Full Text of Discussion... Read the Full Article...
Immunotherapy after progression to double immunotherapy: pembrolizumab and lenvatinib versus conventional chemotherapy for patients with metastatic melanoma after failure of PD-1/CTLA-4 inhibition

Georgios Lyrarakis,Michael Liontos,Amalia Anastasopoulou,Spyridon Bouros,Aikaterini Gkoufa,Panagiotis Diamantopoulos,Helen Gogas,Dimitrios C. Ziogas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2024.1420879

IF: 4.7

2024-10-07

Frontiers in Oncology

Abstract:Background: Programmed cell death 1 receptor (PD-1) inhibition as monotherapy followed by Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) inhibition in case of progression or as upfront double co-inhibition has drastically improved the survival outcomes of metastatic melanoma. Still, many patients develop primary or acquired resistance to both agents, relapse soon, and survive less. For these patients, the therapeutic options are very limited, and for many years, conventional chemotherapy (CC) was the standard of care. Recently, the phase II LEAP-004 trial supported that pembrolizumab/lenvatinib could potentially overcome anti-PD-1/anti-CTLA-4 immunotherapy refractoriness. Materials and methods: In the absence of any prospective comparative study and to evaluate in a real-world context the clinical benefit of re-administering a PD-1 inhibitor (pembrolizumab 200 mg i.v. every 3 weeks, Q3W) with a multi-kinase inhibitor (lenvatinib, but at a reduced dose 10 mg p.o. daily due to its known toxicity) in this frail population of unmet need, we conducted here a retrospective comparison of LEAP-004-proposed combination with CC (carboplatin 4 AUC and dacarbazine 850 mg/m 2 i.v. Q3W) in melanoma patients who relapsed to both checkpoint inhibitors, either in combinatorial or in sequential setting, between July 2022 and January 2024. Baseline demographics, disease characteristics, and treatment outcomes (objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS)) were recorded. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan–Meier method. All patients were also considered for safety analysis. Results: A total of 84 patients were included in the effectiveness and safety analysis (pembrolizumab/lenvatinib, n=39 and CC, n=45). The median age was 67 (45–87) years and 64 (34–87) years, and men were 33.3% and 46.7%, respectively. The distribution of their metastatic sites was comparable, including 12.8% and 20% with brain involvement. Most patients had a good PS<2 (69.9% and 56.5%), increased lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (71.8% and 84.4%), BRAF -wild status (82.1% and 84.8%), and received ≥2 previous systemic therapies (61.5% and 53.3%). The median follow-up was 18 months. The ORR was 23.1% and 11.1% (p<0.0001), the median PFS was 4.8 months and 3.8 months [HR (95%CI), 0.57 (0.36–0.92); p=0.017], and the median OS was 14.2 months and 7.8 months [HR (95%CI), 0.39 (0.22–0.69), p=0.0009] in pembrolizumab/lenvatinib and CC arms, respectively. Grade 3–5 treatment-related adverse events were documented in 48.7% (pembrolizumab/lenvatinib) and 75.6% (CC) of patients (p=0.034), which led to treatment discontinuation in 10.3% and 17.8% of cases, respectively. Conclusions: This is the first comparative study in patients with metastatic melanoma refractory to PD-1/CTLA-4 inhibition and showed significantly longer outcomes in cases treated with pembrolizumab/lenvatinib versus CC.

oncology
Systematic review and meta-analysis efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced melanoma patients with anti-PD-1 progression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

N N Alrabadi,H M Abushukair,O E Ababneh,S S Syaj,S S Al-Horani,A A Qarqash,O A Darabseh,M M Al-Sous,S R Al-Aomar,Y B Ahmed,R Haddad,F A Al Qarqaz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12094-021-02598-6

Abstract:Background: More than half of melanoma patients taking first-line anti-PD-1 therapy either express transient or no response at all. The efficacy and safety of secondary treatments for these patients are still not well established. Here, we evaluate the efficacy and safety of different melanoma FDA-approved ICI modalities used in post-anti-PD-1 refractory settings. Materials and methods: We searched the PubMed database and the ASCO meetings library for studies on advanced melanoma patients with cancer progression on anti-PD-1 therapy and were then treated with ipilimumab, nivolumab/ipilimumab combination, or retreated with anti-PD-1. Primary and secondary endpoints were efficacy and toxicity, respectively. Pooled estimates for each treatment group were obtained using a random or fixed effects model according to detected heterogeneity. Results: Fourteen studies, of which 10 on ipilimumab, 2 on anti-PD-1 treatment, and 6 on combination therapies, were included, involving a total of 1460 patients. Twelve studies reported objective response rates (ORRs) and nine of them reported immune-related adverse events (irAEs). As for ORR, patients experienced a response that was inferior compared to the same therapy in treatment -naïve patients, with combination therapy having the best ORR of a pooled 23.08% (95% CI: 16.75% to 30.03%), followed by ipilimumab with a pooled ORR of 8.19% (95% CI: 5.78% to 10.92%). Survival data were also inferior in the ipilimumab cohort (mOS: 5.1 to 7.4 months) compared to ipilimumab in anti-PD-1 naive patients. As for grade 3/4 irAE occurrence, the ipilimumab cohort showed an estimate of 43.77% (95% CI 22.55% to 66.19%). Conclusion: Our findings provide the best current evidence that patients who progress on anti-PD-1 can still respond to different ICI modalities (ipilimumab with or without nivolumab, and retreatment or continuation beyond progression with anti-PD-1) with tolerable grade 3/4 irAEs. However, more prospective clinical trials are needed to confirm these results.
Desoxyribonuclease activity of rat mammary gland during pregnancy and lactation.

D. R. Griffith,C. W. Turner

Abstract:
Development of immunity-related adverse events correlates with baseline clinical factors, survival and response to anti-PD-1 treatment in patients with inoperable or metastatic melanoma

Bożena Cybulska-Stopa,Marcin Ziętek,Anna M. Czarnecka,Karolina Piejko,Robert Dziura,Łukasz Galus,Barbara Ziółkowska,Stanisław Kieszko,Natasza Kempa-Kamińska,Jacek Calik,Joanna Seredyńska,Kamila Gądek,Tomasz Zemełka,Paweł Teterycz,Tomasz Kubiatowski,Rafał Suwiński,Jacek Mackiewicz,Piotr Rutkowski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09546634.2021.1937477

2021-05-31

Journal of Dermatological Treatment

Abstract:The relationship between immune related adverse events (irAEs) and efficacy is not definitively proven, and data on the relationship between irAE and treatment efficacy are contradictory.Five hundred ninety-three consecutive patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma treated in the first line with anti-PD-1 (nivolumab or pembrolizumab) between January 2016 and December 2019 were enrolled in the study.Statistically significant differences were demonstrated between the group of patients without and with irAE in median OS and PFS (p < .0001 both) and also in OS between the group of patients without irAE and patients with irAE within 3, 6, and 9 months from the start of anti-PD-1 therapy (p = .0121, p = .0014, p < .0001; respectively) and PFS (p = .0369, p = .0052, p = .0001; respectively). A statistically significant relationship was demonstrated between the occurrence of irAE and the location of the primary tumor (skin vs. mucosa vs. unknown; p = .0183), brain metastasis (present vs. absent; p = .0032), other locations (present vs. absent, p = .0032), LDH (normal vs. elevated; p = .0046) and stage according to TNM (p = .0093).The occurrence of irAE was associated with longer OS, PFS, and more frequent response to treatment. IrAE occurred statistically significantly more often in patients with mucosa primary tumor, with normal LDH levels, without brain metastases, stages III, M1a, and M1b.

dermatology
Inhibition of Na+-stimulated glucose transport function and perturbation of intestinal microvillus membrane vesicles by ethanol and acetaldehyde.

L. Tillotson,E. Carter,K. Inui,K. Isselbacher

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9861(81)90043-6

IF: 4.114

1981-04-01

Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics

Abstract:
Glucose Transporter 1‐Positive Endothelial Cells in Infantile Hemangioma Exhibit Features of Facultative Stem Cells

Lan Huang,H. Nakayama,M. Klagsbrun,J. Mulliken,J. Bischoff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/stem.1841

IF: 5.845

2015-01-01

Stem Cells

Abstract:Endothelial glucose transporter 1 (GLUT1) is a definitive and diagnostic marker for infantile hemangioma (IH), a vascular tumor of infancy. To date, GLUT1‐positive endothelial cells in IH have not been quantified nor directly isolated and studied. We isolated GLUT1‐positive and GLUT1‐negative endothelial cells from IH specimens and characterized their proliferation, differentiation, and response to propranolol, a first‐line therapy for IH, and to rapamycin, an mTOR pathway inhibitor used to treat an increasingly wide array of proliferative disorders. Although freshly isolated GLUT1‐positive cells, selected using anti‐GLUT1 magnetic beads, expressed endothelial markers CD31, VE‐Cadherin, and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2, they converted to a mesenchymal phenotype after 3 weeks in culture. In contrast, GLUT1‐negative endothelial cells exhibited a stable endothelial phenotype in vitro. GLUT1‐selected cells were clonogenic when plated as single cells and could be induced to redifferentiate into endothelial cells, or into pericytes/smooth muscle cells or into adipocytes, indicating a stem cell‐like phenotype. These data demonstrate that, although they appear and function in the tumor as bona fide endothelial cells, the GLUT1‐positive endothelial cells display properties of facultative stem cells. Pretreatment with rapamycin for 4 days significantly slowed proliferation of GLUT1‐selected cells, whereas propranolol pretreatment had no effect. These results reveal for the first time the facultative nature of GLUT1‐positive endothelial cells in IH. Stem Cells 2015;33:133–145
Efficacy of pembrolizumab for advanced/metastatic melanoma: a meta-analysis

Qi Zhang,Geng-wei Huo,Hong-zhen Zhang,Ying Song

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/med-2020-0110

2020-01-01

Open Medicine

Abstract:This study evaluates the efficacy of pembrolizumab for the treatment of advanced/metastatic melanoma. The literature search was conducted in electronic databases for studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab either alone or in combination with other treatments advanced/metastatic melanoma patients. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to achieve pooled effect sizes of response and survival rates. The overall objective response rate (ORR) was 34.2% [95% confidence interval (CI): 30.4, 38.0]. However, ORR differed with respect to the history of prior systemic therapy. ORR was lower in studies with over 50% patients with prior therapy (25.5% [22.4, 28.5]) than in studies with under 50% patients with prior therapy (40.1% [34.1, 46.1]). ORR was higher in pembrolizumab monotherapy (32.9% [28.1, 37.7]) than in pembrolizumab-ipilimumab combination (27.6% [24.0, 31.2]). Overall ORR was inversely associated with visceral metastasis and prior systemic therapy. With pembrolizumab treatment, either alone or in combination, the progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.73 months; 12-, 24-, and 60-month PFS rate were 44%, 27%, and 25%, respectively; and 12-, 24-, and 60-month overall survival rates were 65%, 50%, and 41%, respectively. The percentage of AEs that led to treatment discontinuation was 13%. Pembrolizumab monotherapy is a valuable option for the treatment of advanced/metastatic melanoma patients.
Nivolumab and pembrolizumab as immune-modulating monoclonal antibodies targeting the PD-1 receptor to treat melanoma

Elnaz Faghfuri,Mohammad Ali Faramarzi,Shekoufeh Nikfar,Mohammad Abdollahi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1586/14737140.2015.1074862

2015-07-30

Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy

Abstract:Malignant melanoma is an important issue in oncology due to its high incidence, high mortality, and resistance to systemic therapy; however, targeted immunotherapy has noticeably improved the survival rates of melanoma patients. Promising targeted immunotherapies for malignant melanoma include the blockade of immune checkpoints with antibodies targeting cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 and the programmed cell death protein 1 pathway. The US FDA-approved antibody ipilimumab targets cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4; however, it was limited by toxicity and a low response. Nivolumab and pembrolizumab (formerly lambrolizumab), the two FDA-approved anti-programmed death-1 monoclonal antibodies, show highly durable response rates and long-term safety, validating the importance of the programmed cell death protein 1 pathway blockade for treatment of malignant melanoma.

oncology
Antitumor activity of ipilimumab or BRAF ± MEK inhibition after pembrolizumab treatment in patients with advanced melanoma: analysis from KEYNOTE-006

G V Long,A Arance,L Mortier,P Lorigan,C Blank,P Mohr,J Schachter,J-J Grob,M Lotem,M R Middleton,B Neyns,N Steven,A Ribas,E Walpole,M S Carlino,C Lebbe,M Sznol,E Jensen,M A Leiby,N Ibrahim,C Robert

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2021.10.010

Abstract:Background: Antitumor activity of ipilimumab or BRAF ± MEK inhibitors (BRAFi ± MEKi) following pembrolizumab administration in melanoma is poorly characterized. Patients and methods: In the phase III KEYNOTE-006 study, patients with unresectable stage III/IV melanoma received pembrolizumab (10 mg/kg) once every 2 or 3 weeks (Q3W) or ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) Q3W. The current post hoc analysis evaluates outcomes with ipilimumab or BRAFi ± MEKi as first subsequent systemic therapy after pembrolizumab administration and includes patients who completed or discontinued pembrolizumab after one or more dose. Pembrolizumab arms were pooled. Results: At data cut-off (4 December 2017), median follow-up was 46.9 months. Of 555 pembrolizumab-treated patients, first subsequent therapy was ipilimumab for 103 (18.6%) and BRAFi ± MEKi for 59 (10.6%) [33 received BRAFi + MEKi, 26 BRAFi alone; 37 (62.7%) were BRAFi ± MEKi naïve]. In the subsequent ipilimumab group, ORR with previous pembrolizumab was 17.5% [1 complete response (CR); 17 partial response (PR)]; 79.6% had discontinued pembrolizumab due to progressive disease (PD); median overall survival (OS) was 21.5 months. ORR with subsequent ipilimumab was 15.5%; 11/16 responses (8 CRs; 3 PRs) were ongoing. ORR with subsequent ipilimumab was 9.7% for patients with PD as best response to pembrolizumab. Median OS from ipilimumab initiation was 9.8 months. In the subsequent BRAFi ± MEKi group, ORR with previous pembrolizumab was 13.5% (8 PR); 76.3% had discontinued pembrolizumab due to PD; median OS was 17.9 months. ORR with subsequent BRAFi ± MEKi was 30.5%, 7/18 responses (4 CR, 3 PR) were ongoing. Median OS from BRAFi ± MEKi initiation was 12.9 months. ORR for BRAFi ± MEKi-naïve patients who received subsequent BRAFi ± MEKi was 43.2%; 6/16 were ongoing (3 CR, 3 PR). Conclusions: Ipilimumab and BRAFi ± MEKi have antitumor activity as first subsequent therapy after pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma.

Hospitalized pediatric burns in North China: a 10-year epidemiologic review.

Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab or Monotherapy in Untreated Melanoma.

Final, 10-Year Outcomes with Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma

Mineral trioxide aggregate pulpotomy of a primary second molar in a patient with agenesis of the permanent successor.

Slime production by coagulase-negative staphylococci in the infected pulps.

Standard-dose pembrolizumab in combination with reduced-dose ipilimumab for patients with advanced melanoma (KEYNOTE-029): an open-label, phase 1b trial

Pooled Long-Term Outcomes With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab or Nivolumab Alone in Patients With Advanced Melanoma

Safety profile of pembrolizumab monotherapy based on an aggregate safety evaluation of 8937 patients

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy with Nivolumab vs. Pembrolizumab in Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review

Re: Immunogenicity and safety of a strain-specific MenB OMV vaccine delivered to under 5 year olds in New Zealand, Oster P, O'Hallahan J, Aaberge I, Tilman S, Ypma E, Martin D. Vaccine 2007;25(16):3075-9.

Overall Survival with Combined Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma

Adjuvant Nivolumab versus Ipilimumab in Resected Stage III or IV Melanoma

Immunotherapy after progression to double immunotherapy: pembrolizumab and lenvatinib versus conventional chemotherapy for patients with metastatic melanoma after failure of PD-1/CTLA-4 inhibition

Systematic review and meta-analysis efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced melanoma patients with anti-PD-1 progression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Desoxyribonuclease activity of rat mammary gland during pregnancy and lactation.

Development of immunity-related adverse events correlates with baseline clinical factors, survival and response to anti-PD-1 treatment in patients with inoperable or metastatic melanoma

Inhibition of Na+-stimulated glucose transport function and perturbation of intestinal microvillus membrane vesicles by ethanol and acetaldehyde.

Glucose Transporter 1‐Positive Endothelial Cells in Infantile Hemangioma Exhibit Features of Facultative Stem Cells

Efficacy of pembrolizumab for advanced/metastatic melanoma: a meta-analysis

Nivolumab and pembrolizumab as immune-modulating monoclonal antibodies targeting the PD-1 receptor to treat melanoma

Antitumor activity of ipilimumab or BRAF ± MEK inhibition after pembrolizumab treatment in patients with advanced melanoma: analysis from KEYNOTE-006