ライフサイエンスコーパス: ipilimumab

1 ivolumab plus ipilimumab, 37% nivolumab, 15% ipilimumab).

2 b plus ipilimumab compared with nivolumab or ipilimumab.

3 as a biomarker for first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab.

4 mbrolizumab in combination with reduced-dose ipilimumab.

5 1 of 44 patients escalated to anti-PD-1 plus ipilimumab.

6 ty without additional safety concerns versus ipilimumab.

7 e progression while receiving treatment with ipilimumab.

8 tastasis-free survival with nivolumab versus ipilimumab.

9 , and 59.2% (95% CI 51.7-66.8) for nivolumab/ipilimumab.

10 profile that is more tolerable than that of ipilimumab.

11 h metastatic malignant melanoma treated with ipilimumab.

12 tumor activity alone and in combination with ipilimumab.

13 for death with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.52; hazard ratio for death with nivolumab

14 for death with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.55 [P<0.001]; hazard ratio for death with

15 2; hazard ratio for death with nivolumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.63).

16 ]; hazard ratio for death with nivolumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.65 [P<0.001]).

17 oup fixed brentuximab vedotin 1.8 mg/kg with ipilimumab 1 mg/kg (cohort A) or 3 mg/kg (cohort B); in

18 received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg (N3I1), nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilim

19 511) to determine if nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg (NIVO3+IPI1) improves the safety prof

20 weeks, nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 12 weeks, or nivolumab 3 mg/kg

21 very 2 weeks (NIVO3), nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed

22 d (1:1) to open-label nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed

23 enous pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg plus intravenous ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, followe

24 eks, or nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks until disease progressi

25 receive nivolumab 1 mg/kg every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg every 6 weeks, nivolumab 3 mg/kg ever

26 cabozantinib 40 mg/d, nivolumab 3 mg/kg, and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg for CaboNivoIpi.

27 et therapy group fixed nivolumab 3 mg/kg and ipilimumab 1 mg/kg with brentuximab vedotin 1.2 mg/kg (c

28 label nivolumab (3 mg/kg intravenously) plus ipilimumab (1 mg/kg intravenously) every 3 weeks for fou

29 ients were enrolled and randomly assigned to ipilimumab 10 mg/kg (365 patients; 364 treated) or ipili

30 vival was 15.7 months (95% CI 11.6-17.8) for ipilimumab 10 mg/kg compared with 11.5 months (9.9-13.3)

31 atment-related grade 3-4 adverse events with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg compared with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in

32 volumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or intravenous ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, and th

33 ow-up was 14.5 months (IQR 4.6-42.3) for the ipilimumab 10 mg/kg group and 11.2 months (4.9-29.4) for

34 permuted block method using block size 4 to ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or 3 mg/kg, administered by intraven

35 ive voice response system, to receive either ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo every 3 weeks for four do

36 al, patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo every 3 weeks for up to f

37 Ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo maintenance therapy was a

38 ETATION: In patients with advanced melanoma, ipilimumab 10 mg/kg resulted in significantly longer ove

39 trial comparing the benefit-risk profile of ipilimumab 10 mg/kg versus 3 mg/kg.

40 icted mean TFS was longer for nivolumab plus ipilimumab (11.1 months) compared with nivolumab (4.6 mo

41 prostate-specific antigen response rate with ipilimumab (23%) than with placebo (8%).

42 umab 10 mg/kg (365 patients; 364 treated) or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (362 patients; all treated).

43 /kg compared with 11.5 months (9.9-13.3) for ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (hazard ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.70-0.99;

44 mumab 1 mg/kg (N3I1), nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (N1I3), or nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipi

45 ab 3 mg/kg (N1I3), or nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (N3I3) every 3 weeks for four doses f

46 Nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (NIVO1+IPI3) is approved for first-li

47 eeks (NIVO3+IPI1), or nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed

48 at least one dose of nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks x 4 and then nivolumab

49 r every 3 weeks or four doses of intravenous ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks.

50 Patients received nivolumab 1 mg/kg and ipilimumab 3 mg/kg for four cycles, followed by nivoluma

51 /kg group and 11.2 months (4.9-29.4) for the ipilimumab 3 mg/kg group.

52 vents with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg compared with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in patients with advanced melanoma.

53 gnificantly longer overall survival than did ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, but with increased treatment-related

54 patients who received nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, every 3 weeks for four doses, follow

55 TLA-4 plus anti-PD-1 (nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg; CheckMate 650, NCT02985957).

56 2 weeks) plus ipilimumab-matched placebo; or ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four dos

57 se of 1 mg per kilogram of body weight) plus ipilimumab (3 mg per kilogram) every 3 weeks for four do

58 Ipilimumab (3 mg/kg every 3 weeks; up to four doses) beg

59 initiating pembrolizumab (44.3%), nivolumab/ipilimumab (31.2%), and nivolumab (24.5%).

60 quent therapy initiation (47% nivolumab plus ipilimumab, 37% nivolumab, 15% ipilimumab).

61 h nivolumab and 50.9 months (36.2-52.3) with ipilimumab; 4-year recurrence-free survival was 51.7% (9

62 e, 6.5 months; 95% CI, 5.0 to 8.0 months) or ipilimumab (8.7 months; difference, 2.4 months; 95% CI,

63 heckpoint inhibitor), alone or combined with ipilimumab (a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 checkpoin

64 most patients during the induction phase of ipilimumab administration, overall HRQoL, as measured by

65 rolizumab continued to show superiority over ipilimumab after almost 5 years of follow-up.

66 e laherparepvec plus ipilimumab (n = 98), or ipilimumab alone (n = 100).

67 weeks; up to four doses) began week 1 in the ipilimumab alone arm and week 6 in the combination arm.

68 al and a higher objective response rate than ipilimumab alone in a phase 3 trial involving patients w

69 r progression-free and overall survival than ipilimumab alone in a trial involving patients with adva

70 imogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma in a

71 mumab alone, 42%), chills (combination, 53%; ipilimumab alone, 3%), and diarrhea (combination, 42%; i

72 alone, 3%), and diarrhea (combination, 42%; ipilimumab alone, 35%).

73 ts (AEs) included fatigue (combination, 59%; ipilimumab alone, 42%), chills (combination, 53%; ipilim

74 on-free survival compared with standard-dose ipilimumab alone, but increases toxicity.

75 r nivolumab alone than in those who received ipilimumab alone, with no apparent loss of quality of li

76 imogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone.

77 talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab or ipilimumab alone.

78 ipilimumab or with nivolumab alone than with ipilimumab alone.

79 Nivolumab and ipilimumab, alone or in combination, are widely used imm

80 ab and 202 to placebo; 399 were treated with ipilimumab and 199 with placebo.

81 r hundred patients were randomly assigned to ipilimumab and 202 to placebo; 399 were treated with ipi

82 07 (95% CI 4.35 to 15.80) for nivolumab plus ipilimumab and 6.40 (-1.36 to 14.16) for sunitinib (p=0.

83 ple of prostate cancer subjects treated with Ipilimumab and granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating

84 relapse showed significantly higher rates of ipilimumab and ipilimumab/anti-programmed death 1 use in

85 anoma who developed fatal myocarditis during ipilimumab and nivolumab combination immunotherapy; thes

86 Ipilimumab and nivolumab demonstrated antitumor activity

87 he safety and activity of the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients who have received p

88 We evaluated ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients with metastatic RCC

89 of 12 months, the objective response rate to ipilimumab and nivolumab was 20%.

90 he median progression-free survival while on ipilimumab and nivolumab was 4 months (range, 0.8-19 mon

91 Toxicity of ipilimumab and nivolumab was also assessed.

92 ted adverse events (irAEs) of any grade with ipilimumab and nivolumab were recorded in 29 (64%) of th

93 y-targeted therapy and subsequently received ipilimumab and nivolumab were reviewed.

94 He began systemic therapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab.

95 t-related AEs was higher with nivolumab plus ipilimumab and occurred earlier than historical experien

96 ndicating that direct steric overlap between ipilimumab and the B7 ligands is a major mechanistic con

97 [SD 17.05] for placebo vs 18.17 [28.35] for ipilimumab) and insomnia (15.17 [22.53] vs 25.60 [29.19]

98 Ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) or anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy

99 immune-related AE, were 8209 per 100 000 for ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4), 2542 per 100 000 for nivolumab

100 nivolumab (anti-PD-1) alone or combined with ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4).

101 ct was negated by co-blockade of CTLA-4 with ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4).

102 olumab (anti-programmed death-1 antibody) to ipilimumab (anti-cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-associated

103 significantly higher rates of ipilimumab and ipilimumab/anti-programmed death 1 use in the HDI arm ve

104 Nine (2%) deaths occurred in the ipilimumab arm due to treatment-related AEs; no deaths o

105 combination arm and 18 patients (18%) in the ipilimumab arm had an objective response (odds ratio, 2.

106 gression-free survival was 5.6 months in the ipilimumab arm versus 3.8 with placebo arm (hazard ratio

107 e combination arm and 23% of patients in the ipilimumab arm.

108 b nonresponders who converted to PR/CR after ipilimumab (arm B).

109 6 months of nivolumab received two doses of ipilimumab (arm B).

110 and efficacy results from the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arms of the study are presented.

111 Consideration of nivolumab + ipilimumab as an option for second-line therapy and thir

112 y and activity of combination nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line therapy for NSCLC.

113 ficacy and safety of nivolumab plus low-dose ipilimumab as first-line treatment of advanced/metastati

114 067 and 069 clinical trials of nivolumab and ipilimumab, as monotherapies or in combination, for pati

115 (OS) for high-dose interferon alfa (HDI) and ipilimumab at 10 mg/kg (ipi10).

116 E1609 evaluated the safety and efficacy of ipilimumab at 3 mg/kg (ipi3) and ipi10 versus HDI.

117 ose of 1 mg per kilogram of body weight plus ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks

118 per kilogram every 2 weeks plus placebo; or ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks

119 b and nivolumab (CaboNivo) and CaboNivo plus ipilimumab (CaboNivoIpi) in patients with metastatic uro

120 dvanced melanoma who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared with nivolumab or ipilimumab.

121 Investigator-reported toxic effects of ipilimumab consisted mainly of skin, gastrointestinal, e

122 This structure reveals that ipilimumab contacts the front beta-sheet of CTLA-4 and i

123 fficacy endpoints showed that nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to be superior to sunitinib in term

124 The combination regimen of nivolumab plus ipilimumab demonstrates activity in metastatic uveal mel

125 Conclusion Ipilimumab did not improve OS in patients with metastati

126 b than nivolumab (difference, 6.0 months) or ipilimumab (difference, 1.7 months).

127 The currently approved adjuvant ipilimumab dose (ipi10) was more toxic and not superior

128 atients received all four pembrolizumab plus ipilimumab doses; 64 (42%) remained on pembrolizumab mon

129 vanced cancers treated with nivolumab and/or ipilimumab, everolimus or docetaxel in phase 3 clinical

130 gned to receive nivolumab every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab every 12 weeks (n=38) or nivolumab every 2 we

131 izumab every 3 weeks (n=277), or intravenous ipilimumab every 3 weeks (ipilimumab for four doses; n=2

132 ab every 3 weeks plus 3 mg/kg of intravenous ipilimumab every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by 3 m

133 weeks (n=38) or nivolumab every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab every 6 weeks (n=40).

134 ts were reported in 12 (32%) patients in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 11 (28%) patients i

135 p times of 12.8 months (IQR 9.3-15.5) in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 11.8 months (6.7-15

136 events occurred in 14 (37%) patients in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 13 (33%) patients i

137 e achieved in 12 (57%) of 21 patients in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 13 (57%) of 23 pati

138 d in 18 (47% [95% CI 31-64]) patients in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 15 (38% [95% CI 23-

139 off on Jan 7, 2016, 29 (76%) patients in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort and 32 (82%) in the ipi

140 ients actually received treatment (38 in the ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort; 39 in the ipilimumab e

141 ab every-12-weeks cohort and 32 (82%) in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort had discontinued treatme

142 One patient in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort was excluded before trea

143 ipilimumab every-12-weeks cohort; 39 in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort).

144 eks cohort and 11.8 months (6.7-15.9) in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort.

145 ks cohort and 13 (57%) of 23 patients in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort.

146 and 15 (38% [95% CI 23-55]) patients in the ipilimumab every-6-weeks cohort; median duration of resp

147 combination with four doses of reduced-dose ipilimumab followed by standard-dose pembrolizumab has a

148 ry 2 weeks) or induction with nivolumab plus ipilimumab for 4 doses (every 3 weeks), followed by ever

149 ies evaluated durvalumab, and nivolumab plus ipilimumab for anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1-naive disease, an

150 7), or intravenous ipilimumab every 3 weeks (ipilimumab for four doses; n=278).

151 he same event and five (3%) who discontinued ipilimumab for one event and later discontinued pembroli

152 with pembrolizumab, nivolumab, or nivolumab/ipilimumab from January 2015 to August 2017.

153 igands is a major mechanistic contributor to ipilimumab function.

154 active, online system, to the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group (1 mg/kg of intravenous nivolumab every

155 nivolumab group and 41.2% (36.4-45.9) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71 [95% CI 0.60-0.

156 ab groups and 15.9 months (13.3-22.0) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73, 95% CI 0.61-0.

157 b group, as compared with 19.9 months in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for death with nivolumab

158 b group, as compared with 19.9 months in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for death with nivolumab

159 ab groups versus 3.4 months (2.9-4.2) in the ipilimumab group (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.48-0.67, p<0.0001).

160 b group and 16 (31.4%) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group (odds ratio, 3.28; 85% CI, 1.54 to infi

161 s (median not reached) in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and 36.9 months in the nivolumab group,

162 val at 5 years was 52% in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and 44% in the nivolumab group, as comp

163 e randomly assigned to treatment: 475 in the ipilimumab group and 476 in the placebo group.

164 ate at 3 years was 58% in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and 52% in the nivolumab group, as comp

165 s, ipilimumab was given every 6 weeks in the ipilimumab group and every 12 weeks in the triplet thera

166 Eight deaths in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and four deaths in the sunitinib group

167 CI 57-82) of patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and in 27% (16-40) of those in the nivo

168 l and overall survival in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and in the nivolumab group versus the i

169 l and overall survival in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and in the nivolumab group, as compared

170 patients were enrolled; two patients in the ipilimumab group and one patient in the nivolumab group

171 4 (62%) of 55 patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and seven (13%) of 56 in the nivolumab

172 l had not been reached in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and was 37.6 months in the nivolumab gr

173 sequentially into one of six cohorts: in the ipilimumab group fixed brentuximab vedotin 1.8 mg/kg wit

174 ee survival, was significantly longer in the ipilimumab group than in the placebo group.

175 ratio for recurrence for the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo group was 0.23 (97.5% CI

176 sly reported treatment-related deaths in the ipilimumab group were attributed to study drug toxicity

177 -related adverse events in the nivolumab and ipilimumab group were increased lipase (57 [10%] of 547)

178 olizumab 2 week group and 22 patients in the ipilimumab group withdrew consent and did not receive tr

179 D 19] in the placebo group vs 72 [22] in the ipilimumab group) and week 10 (77 [20] vs 70 [23]).

180 b group and 111 [25%] of 453 patients in the ipilimumab group) of 302 anticipated deaths observed (ab

181 rentuximab vedotin combined with ipilimumab (ipilimumab group), nivolumab (nivolumab group), or both

182 follow-up of 2.6 years (IQR 1.8-2.9) in the ipilimumab group, 2.4 years (2.2-2.6) in the nivolumab g

183 response rate was 57% (95% CI 34-78%) in the ipilimumab group, 61% (36-83%) in the nivolumab group, a

184 response rate was 76% (95% CI 53-92) in the ipilimumab group, 89% (65-99) in the nivolumab group, an

185 is 1.2 years (95% CI 1.7-not reached) in the ipilimumab group, but was not reached in the other two t

186 in 59% of the patients in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group, in 21% of those in the nivolumab group

187 In the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, recurrence-free survival at 1 year was

188 3-4 treatment related adverse events in the ipilimumab group, three (16%) in the nivolumab group, an

189 rvival was not reached in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, whereas median recurrence-free surviva

190 zumab groups and in 45 (18%) patients in the ipilimumab group.

191 nivolumab group, as compared with 26% in the ipilimumab group.

192 oup, 55% in the 3-week group, and 43% in the ipilimumab group.

193 nivolumab group, and in 28% of those in the ipilimumab group.

194 group and in the nivolumab group versus the ipilimumab group.

195 nivolumab group, as compared with 34% in the ipilimumab group.

196 mab group, and colitis (two patients) in the ipilimumab group.

197 in the nivolumab group, as compared with the ipilimumab group.

198 roups and in 50 (20%) of 256 patients in the ipilimumab group; the most common of these events were c

199 9 months in the nivolumab and nivolumab plus ipilimumab groups, respectively, with a PFI-stratified h

200 ETATION: In NSCLC, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab had a tolerable safety profile and showed enc

201 pembrolizumab group and was 16.0 months with ipilimumab (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.87 for

202 5) with nivolumab and 76.6% (72.2-80.3) with ipilimumab (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.66-1.14]; p=0.31).

203 phase 3, CheckMate 214 trial, nivolumab plus ipilimumab improved overall survival compared with sunit

204 nivolumab in combination with standard-dose ipilimumab improves objective response and progression-f

205 led to discontinuation of pembrolizumab and ipilimumab in 22 (14%) patients, including 17 (11%) who

206 We evaluated treatment with ipilimumab in asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic pati

207 elanoma who received nivolumab combined with ipilimumab in clinical trials discontinued treatment bec

208 ed the efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in combination, and nivolumab plus a tyrosine

209 umab alone, the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab in EOC resulted in superior response rate and

210 ss the efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients who discontinued treatment becaus

211 on-free survival and overall survival versus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma and is now

212 how the long-term benefits of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with previously untreated advance

213 his study was initiated, the clinical use of ipilimumab in refractory patients with unmet medical nee

214 tment with anti-PD-1 therapy with or without ipilimumab in relapsing patients.

215 ined recurrence-free survival benefit versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma indic

216 Adjuvant treatment with ipilimumab in this setting was approved in October, 2014

217 Drug Administration approved the first ICI, ipilimumab, in 2011 for the treatment of metastatic mela

218 with nivolumab alone or in combination with ipilimumab increased recurrence-free survival significan

219 Purpose Ipilimumab increases antitumor T-cell responses by bindi

220 ll repertoire to a limited number of clones, ipilimumab induced greater diversification in the T-cell

221 atory inhibitory pathway in parallel with an ipilimumab-induced increase in tumor-infiltrating T cell

222 concurrent therapy with nivolumab (NIVO) and ipilimumab (IPI) in patients with previously treated or

223 icities of brentuximab vedotin combined with ipilimumab (ipilimumab group), nivolumab (nivolumab grou

224 Ipilimumab is a fully human antibody targeting CTLA-4 th

225 Ipilimumab is the first-in-class immunotherapeutic for b

226 Nivolumab plus ipilimumab leads to fewer symptoms and better HRQoL than

227 lumab (3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks) plus ipilimumab-matched placebo; or ipilimumab (3 mg per kilo

228 of intravenous nivolumab every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab-matching placebo during weeks 1-12), or doubl

229 tandard-dose pembrolizumab plus reduced-dose ipilimumab might be a tolerable, efficacious treatment o

230 atients who received nivolumab combined with ipilimumab (n = 35, mucosal melanoma; n = 326, cutaneous

231 either nivolumab (n = 49), or nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n = 51), with PFI of < 6 months in 62%.

232 ly assigned to talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab (n = 98), or ipilimumab alone (n = 100).

233 ry 2 weeks, n=279; every 3 weeks, n=277), or ipilimumab (n=278).

234 risk and randomly assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=425) or sunitinib (n=422).

235 tients were assigned to nivolumab (n=453) or ipilimumab (n=453).

236 randomly assigned to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=56), nivolumab (n=59), or placebo (n=52).

237 Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, ipilimumab-naive histologically confirmed advanced melan

238 Patients and Methods Patients with ipilimumab-naive or -treated advanced/metastatic melanom

239 ected stage III MMel patients after adjuvant ipilimumab + nivolumab (but not nivolumab alone).

240 fter the advent of BRAF inhibitors and ICIs (ipilimumab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab).

241 12 (8%) patients discontinued ipilimumab only and 14 (9%) discontinued pembrolizumab o

242 1:1 to receive talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab or ipilimumab alone.

243 Nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone resulted in longer progres

244 tage of patients who received nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone than in those who received

245 fety and efficacy of adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab monotherapy versus a placebo in

246 the average score reported during induction (ipilimumab or placebo at a dose of 10 mg/kg, administere

247 nts were randomly assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab or sunitinib (550 vs 546 in the intention-to-

248 with combination therapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or with nivolumab alone than with ipilimumab

249 uring or after treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or with nivolumab alone.

250 To date, anti-CTLA-4 (ipilimumab) or anti-PD-1 (nivolumab) monotherapy has not

251 ons of brentuximab vedotin with nivolumab or ipilimumab, or both in patients with relapsed or refract

252 that the superior efficacy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab over sunitinib comes with the additional bene

253 that the superior efficacy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab over sunitinib was maintained in intermediate

254 0.53-0.86 for pembrolizumab every 3 weeks vs ipilimumab; p=0.0008).

255 0.53-0.87 for pembrolizumab every 2 weeks vs ipilimumab; p=0.0009 and 0.68, 0.53-0.86 for pembrolizum

256 We evaluated ipilimumab plus nivolumab compared with nivolumab alone

257 approval of nivolumab and the combination of ipilimumab plus nivolumab for the treatment of advanced

258 entiated effector CD8 T cells by combination ipilimumab plus nivolumab therapy.

259 brolizumab (anti-PD-1), 5556 per 100 000 for ipilimumab plus nivolumab, and 3740 per 100 000 among al

260 In the unresectable/metastatic setting, ipilimumab plus nivolumab, nivolumab alone, or pembroliz

261 e ratio 1.38, 95% CI 1.08-1.77) or nivolumab/ipilimumab (rate ratio 1.30, 95% CI 1.02-1.65) were more

262 Compared with sunitinib, nivolumab plus ipilimumab reduced risk of deterioration in FKSI-19 tota

263 ponse compared with chemotherapy regimens in ipilimumab-refractory patients with advanced melanoma.

264 afety profile of the approved nivolumab plus ipilimumab regimen.

265 Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab resulted in longer progression-free survival

266 is study, nivolumab followed by two doses of ipilimumab resulted in no CRs and a low PR/CR conversion

267 lts from this trial show that treatment with ipilimumab results in longer recurrence-free survival co

268 Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab seemed to have greater efficacy than either a

269 n intention-to-treat patients, nivolumab and ipilimumab showed improved efficacy compared with suniti

270 phase 3 CheckMate 214 trial, nivolumab plus ipilimumab showed superior efficacy over sunitinib in pa

271 s who had received anti-CTLA4 immunotherapy (ipilimumab) showed upregulation of an IFNG-response gene

272 thout toxicity was longer for nivolumab plus ipilimumab than nivolumab (difference, 6.0 months) or ip

273 ROs were more favourable with nivolumab plus ipilimumab than sunitinib throughout the first 103 weeks

274 rts enrolling 190 MMel patients treated with ipilimumab, that PD-L1 expression on peripheral T cells

275 Conclusion Nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy demonstrated manageable safety, notab

276 luate treatment response after completion of ipilimumab therapy.

277 inhibitory pathway in prostate tumors after ipilimumab therapy.

278 responsible for the selectivity exhibited by ipilimumab toward CTLA-4 relative to the homologous and

279 ed adverse event (AE) reported in >/= 10% of ipilimumab-treated patients.

280 microenvironment, we evaluated untreated and ipilimumab-treated tumors from patients in a presurgical

281 een patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab treatment because of AEs during the induction

282 g T cells, we examined in this study whether ipilimumab treatment leads to clonal expansion of tissue

283 Specifically, ipilimumab triggered increases in the numbers of clonoty

284 tients with metastatic melanoma treated with ipilimumab, tumor response according to PERCIST was asso

285 .00 (95% CI 1.91 to 6.09) for nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus -3.14 (-6.03 to -0.25) for sunitinib (

286 being 4.77 (1.73 to 7.82) for nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus -4.32 (-8.54 to -0.11) for sunitinib (

287 combination of talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with adva

288 ly higher with talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone.

289 long-term clinical benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in this setting.

290 e the benefit-risk profile of nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib.

291 domly assigned (1:1) to receive nivolumab or ipilimumab via an interactive voice response system and

292 (hazard ratio for death with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.52; hazard ratio for death

293 (hazard ratio for death with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.55 [P<0.001]; hazard ratio

294 atients treated with nivolumab combined with ipilimumab was 5.9 months (95% CI, 2.8 months to not rea

295 Nivolumab plus low-dose ipilimumab was effective and tolerable as a first-line t

296 otin and nivolumab were given every 3 weeks, ipilimumab was given every 6 weeks in the ipilimumab gro

297 Prostate-specific antigen responses to ipilimumab were also associated with increased T-cell di

298 y crystal structure of the complex formed by ipilimumab with its human CTLA-4 target.

299 EORTC 18071 phase 3 trial compared adjuvant ipilimumab with placebo in patients with stage III melan

300 to provide superior overall survival versus ipilimumab, with no difference between pembrolizumab dos