The information on this site is not intended or implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Content within the patient forum is user-generated and has not been reviewed by medical professionals. Other sections of the Melanoma Research Foundation website include information that has been reviewed by medical professionals as appropriate. All medical decisions should be made in consultation with your doctor or other qualified medical professional.

Durable cancer regression….anti-PD-1 Antibody

Forums General Melanoma Community Durable cancer regression….anti-PD-1 Antibody

  • Post
    lou2
    Participant

      Durable Cancer Regression Off-Treatment and Effective Reinduction Therapy With an Anti-PD-1 Antibody

      Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Nov 20;[Epub Ahead of Print], EJ Lipson, WH Sharfman, CG Drake, et al

      TAKE-HOME MESSAGE

      Patients with treatment-refractory solid tumors who responded to the anti–programmed death-1 (PD-1) antibody BMS-936558 had remarkably durable remissions, including continued tumor regression off therapy and, in a melanoma patient, successful reinduction therapy after delayed progression.

      EXPERT COMMENTARY

      Lee S. Schwartzberg, MD, FACP

      Immunotherapy as a treatment for cancer is one of the oldest systemic modalities, well predating chemotherapy. Our previous rudimentary understanding of the complex immune system, which can either tolerate or reject tumor cells based on a host of conditions, has limited the practical application of immune-based therapy to a few specific examples. This situation is now rapidly changing. Critical immune pathways, such as the programmed death receptor (PD-1) and ligand (PD-1L) interaction, can be manipulated to broadly treat a variety of cancers. A PD-1 antibody has generated great excitement by demonstrating in the clinic that modulation of this pathway can reduce cancer immunosuppression and lead to clinical responses.

      We are still at the very beginning of understanding how best to utilize immunotherapy. As the current study in Clinical Cancer Research demonstrates, treatment with anti-PD-1 antibody can lead to prolonged, unmaintained remissions, which are very different than the response to chemotherapy or other biologicals. Moreover, retreatment with the antibody in progressors can be associated with a second prolonged response, suggesting that intrinsic resistance does not develop in all patients after initial pathway alteration. These exciting results remind us that a tremendous amount of clinical research will be required to optimize immunotherapy added to the other aspects of our armamentarium of cancer therapeutics.

      SUMMARY

      OncologySTAT Editorial Team

      The programmed death-1 (PD-1) pathway plays an important role in the down-modulation of anti-tumor immunity. Immune checkpoint blockade with anti-PD-1 therapy has the potential to reverse cancer immunosuppression and “reset” the equilibrium between tumor and the host immune system.

      In the first-in-human phase I trial of the anti-PD-1 antibody BMS-936558, 3 of 39 patients with treatment-refractory solid tumors had an objective response to an intermittent dosing regimen. Lipson et al report long-term follow-up of these three patients.

      A man with metastatic colorectal cancer had received multiple chemotherapy regimens with only temporary responses. In the current trial, the patient had a partial response to a single dose of anti-PD-1 and received five doses over the next 9 months. He ultimately achieved a complete response (CR), which is ongoing at 3 years off therapy.

      Immunohistochemical studies of archived tissue from the patient’s primary tumor 4 years before anti-PD-1 therapy showed cell surface expression of PD-L1 (a PD-1 ligand) by infiltrating macrophages and lymphocytes and by rare tumor cells. This suggests a correlation between tumor cell surface PD-L1 expression and the likelihood of response to anti-PD-1 therapy, but further study is required.

      The second patient, with metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma, had disease progression despite numerous systemic therapies. In the current study, the patient had a mixed response to a single dose of anti-PD-1: pulmonary, lymph node, and intramuscular metastases were regressing, but lesions in the pancreas and bone were growing. After two more doses, the patient achieved a partial response (PR). The pancreatic lesion had disappeared and the bone metastasis was slowly resolving. A year later a brain lesion was removed, but showed no evidence of tumor, consistent with a resolved lesion. The metastatic lesions continued to regress off therapy, and 2 years later, a CR was documented. The patient remains in CR more than 4 years after discontinuing anti-PD-1 therapy.

      The third patient had metastatic melanoma that progressed despite therapy. In 8 weeks after a single dose of anti-PD-1, the patient had a mixed response, with some lesions regressing and others growing. Two more doses given over the next year also produced a mixed response. After another year of anti-PD-1 therapy, a PR was documented, and therapy was discontinued.

      When the melanoma again progressed, biopsy showed intense surface tumor cell expression of PD-L1. The protocol was modified to allow this patient to receive reinduction therapy with anti-PD-1. After two doses, she had a new PR. She continues to receive anti-PD-1 and remains in PR 16 months after reinduction. The successful repeat application of PD-1 blockade in this patient suggests a potential role for “maintenance” immunotherapy, with anti-PD-1 given on an intermittent schedule after an initial response.

      The mixed responses seen in the patients with renal cell cancer and melanoma highlight the importance of developing new immune-related RECIST criteria to assess the often unconventional response patterns seen with immune checkpoint blockade.

      Recently reported results of a larger phase I trial using biweekly anti-PD-1 showed durable responses in non–small cell lung cancer, melanoma, and renal cell cancer with 1 year or more of follow-up. This trial may help form the basis of future studies combining immunotherapy approaches for synergistic effect.

    Viewing 5 reply threads
    • Replies
        NYKaren
        Participant
          Thanks for posting, Lou. I was going to try but you beat me to it. Quite encouraging.
          Karen
          NYKaren
          Participant
            Thanks for posting, Lou. I was going to try but you beat me to it. Quite encouraging.
            Karen
              lou2
              Participant

                Well I don't know what to make of this.  Doesn't seem like getting a response from 3 of 39 patients is all that good.

                lou2
                Participant

                  Well I don't know what to make of this.  Doesn't seem like getting a response from 3 of 39 patients is all that good.

                  NYKaren
                  Participant
                    Hm, you’re right. I was looking at the re-induction part.
                    What are folks saying now about Anti-pd1 FDA approval estimates?
                    Now that I’m on Zel, I have no more measurable tumors for an Anti pd1 trial. Maybe I wouldn’t respond anyway, given that I’ve been unable to get into a trial!
                    Take care,
                    Karen
                    NYKaren
                    Participant
                      Hm, you’re right. I was looking at the re-induction part.
                      What are folks saying now about Anti-pd1 FDA approval estimates?
                      Now that I’m on Zel, I have no more measurable tumors for an Anti pd1 trial. Maybe I wouldn’t respond anyway, given that I’ve been unable to get into a trial!
                      Take care,
                      Karen
                      chrisannca
                      Participant

                        HI Karen:  I am on Zel now for 4 months…last months scans showed no new activity and the tumors went from cm to mm.  I was wondering how long you have had no new measurable tumors?

                        I have had terrible side effects from the Zel and still can't tolerate a full dose.

                        Would enjoy communicating directly. ChrisAnn

                        [email protected]

                        chrisannca
                        Participant

                          HI Karen:  I am on Zel now for 4 months…last months scans showed no new activity and the tumors went from cm to mm.  I was wondering how long you have had no new measurable tumors?

                          I have had terrible side effects from the Zel and still can't tolerate a full dose.

                          Would enjoy communicating directly. ChrisAnn

                          [email protected]

                          chrisannca
                          Participant

                            HI Karen:  I am on Zel now for 4 months…last months scans showed no new activity and the tumors went from cm to mm.  I was wondering how long you have had no new measurable tumors?

                            I have had terrible side effects from the Zel and still can't tolerate a full dose.

                            Would enjoy communicating directly. ChrisAnn

                            [email protected]

                            NYKaren
                            Participant
                              Hm, you’re right. I was looking at the re-induction part.
                              What are folks saying now about Anti-pd1 FDA approval estimates?
                              Now that I’m on Zel, I have no more measurable tumors for an Anti pd1 trial. Maybe I wouldn’t respond anyway, given that I’ve been unable to get into a trial!
                              Take care,
                              Karen
                              audgator
                              Participant

                                My working life was spent fitting hearing aids. I went to a convention session back in the 90's where a panel of experts were discussing the research literature on the first two systems of commercially available digital hearing aids. It was a wasted hour as I was already fitting the next generation.  It takes so long to get anything published that I think what's really happening in most disciplines is well beyond the literature. Those of us having good responses to PD1 will be reflected in some future article.     Dan

                                audgator
                                Participant

                                  My working life was spent fitting hearing aids. I went to a convention session back in the 90's where a panel of experts were discussing the research literature on the first two systems of commercially available digital hearing aids. It was a wasted hour as I was already fitting the next generation.  It takes so long to get anything published that I think what's really happening in most disciplines is well beyond the literature. Those of us having good responses to PD1 will be reflected in some future article.     Dan

                                  audgator
                                  Participant

                                    My working life was spent fitting hearing aids. I went to a convention session back in the 90's where a panel of experts were discussing the research literature on the first two systems of commercially available digital hearing aids. It was a wasted hour as I was already fitting the next generation.  It takes so long to get anything published that I think what's really happening in most disciplines is well beyond the literature. Those of us having good responses to PD1 will be reflected in some future article.     Dan

                                    lou2
                                    Participant

                                      Well I don't know what to make of this.  Doesn't seem like getting a response from 3 of 39 patients is all that good.

                                    NYKaren
                                    Participant
                                      Thanks for posting, Lou. I was going to try but you beat me to it. Quite encouraging.
                                      Karen
                                      JerryfromFauq
                                      Participant

                                        NO, this is not an END POINT!  It is just an very interesting starting point.  It  is important bpth from the re-introduction point, the lack of melanoma so far finding a workaround for the succesful cases and the longivity of the possible responses. Good article.  I like it!

                                         Please note that this was a Phase ONE trial.  Phase 1 trials are not for success at defeating a disease.   They are to determine how much of a treatment a person can take without killing them. Pricipal end point is SAFETY.

                                        JerryfromFauq
                                        Participant

                                          NO, this is not an END POINT!  It is just an very interesting starting point.  It  is important bpth from the re-introduction point, the lack of melanoma so far finding a workaround for the succesful cases and the longivity of the possible responses. Good article.  I like it!

                                           Please note that this was a Phase ONE trial.  Phase 1 trials are not for success at defeating a disease.   They are to determine how much of a treatment a person can take without killing them. Pricipal end point is SAFETY.

                                          JerryfromFauq
                                          Participant

                                            NO, this is not an END POINT!  It is just an very interesting starting point.  It  is important bpth from the re-introduction point, the lack of melanoma so far finding a workaround for the succesful cases and the longivity of the possible responses. Good article.  I like it!

                                             Please note that this was a Phase ONE trial.  Phase 1 trials are not for success at defeating a disease.   They are to determine how much of a treatment a person can take without killing them. Pricipal end point is SAFETY.

                                        Viewing 5 reply threads
                                        • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
                                        About the MRF Patient Forum

                                        The MRF Patient Forum is the oldest and largest online community of people affected by melanoma. It is designed to provide peer support and information to caregivers, patients, family and friends. There is no better place to discuss different parts of your journey with this cancer and find the friends and support resources to make that journey more bearable.

                                        The information on the forum is open and accessible to everyone. To add a new topic or to post a reply, you must be a registered user. Please note that you will be able to post both topics and replies anonymously even though you are logged in. All posts must abide by MRF posting policies.