A Phase IIb Randomized Controlled Trial of the TLPLDC Vaccine as Adjuvant Therapy After Surgical Resection of Stage III/IV Melanoma: A Primary Analysis

Timothy J Vreeland, Guy T Clifton, Diane F Hale, Robert C Chick, Annelies T Hickerson, Jessica L Cindass, Alexandra M Adams, Phillip M Kemp Bohan, Robert H I Andtbacka, Adam C Berger, James W Jakub, Jeffrey J Sussman, Alicia M Terando, Thomas Wagner, George E Peoples, Mark B Faries, Timothy J Vreeland, Guy T Clifton, Diane F Hale, Robert C Chick, Annelies T Hickerson, Jessica L Cindass, Alexandra M Adams, Phillip M Kemp Bohan, Robert H I Andtbacka, Adam C Berger, James W Jakub, Jeffrey J Sussman, Alicia M Terando, Thomas Wagner, George E Peoples, Mark B Faries

Abstract

Background: Melanoma therapy has changed dramatically over the last decade with improvements in immunotherapy, yet many patients do not respond to current therapies. This novel vaccine strategy may prime a patient's immune system against their tumor and work synergistically with immunotherapy against advanced-stage melanoma.

Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIb trial of the tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine administered to prevent recurrence in patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma. Patients were enrolled and randomized 2:1 to the TLPLDC vaccine or placebo (empty yeast cell wall particles and autologous dendritic cells). Both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per treatment (PT) analyses were predefined, with PT analysis including patients who remained disease-free through the primary vaccine/placebo series (6 months).

Results: A total of 144 patients were randomized (103 vaccine, 41 control). Therapy was well-tolerated with similar toxicity between treatment arms; one patient in each group experienced related serious adverse events. While disease-free survival (DFS) was not different between groups in ITT analysis, in PT analysis the vaccine group showed improved 24-month DFS (62.9% vs. 34.8%, p = 0.041).

Conclusions: This phase IIb trial of TLPLDC vaccine administered to patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma shows TLPLDC is well-tolerated and improves DFS in patients who complete the primary vaccine series. This suggests patients who do not recur early benefit from TLPLDC in preventing future recurrence from melanoma. A phase III trial of TLPLDC + checkpoint inhibitor versus checkpoint inhibitor alone in patients with advanced, surgically resected melanoma is under development.

Trial registration: NCT02301611.

Conflict of interest statement

This clinical study was sponsored by Elios Therapeutics, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Perseus Holdings, USA. which provided funding to the institution of Dr. Robert Andtbacka; Dr. James Jakub is a Advisory Board Member of a Melanoma Surgical Advisory Board, Norvartis Oncology; Dr. Thomas Wagner is an employee of Orbis Health Solutions; Dr. George Peoples is a part-time employeed of Orbis Health Solutions, has consulted for a number of companies broadly in the cancer vaccine space (none working in melanoma or with autologous DC-based vaccines), and has multiple patents for different versions of cancer vaccines, mostly peptide-based vaccines; Dr. Wagner is the inventor on several patents on the technology of the study. Timothy J. Vreeland, Guy T. Clifton, Diane F. Hale, Robert C. Chick, Annelies T. Hickerson, Jessica L. Cindass, Alexandra M. Adams, Phillip M. Kemp Bohan, Adam C. Berger, Jeffrey J. Sussman, Alicia M. Terando, and Mark B. Faries have no conflicts of interest to declare.

© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CONSORT diagram demonstrating patient flow through screening, randomization, treatment, and follow-up. ITT intention-to-treat, TLPLDC tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell, PT per treatment
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Kaplan–Meier curves demonstrating 24- and 36-month disease-free survival comparing TLPLDC versus placebo in the (a) ITT analysis and (b) PT analysis. A summary of the survival table is included beneath each Kaplan–Meier curve. TLPLDC tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell, ITT intention-to-treat, PT per treatment
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Kaplan–Meier curve demonstrating 24-month overall survival comparing TLPLDC versus placebo in the ITT analysis. A summary of the survival table is included beneath the Kaplan–Meier curve. TLPLDC tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell, ITT intention-to-treat

References

    1. Callahan MK, Kluger H, Postow MA, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma: updated survival, response, and safety data in a phase I dose-escalation study. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(4):391–398. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.72.2850.
    1. Wolchok JD, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, et al. Overall survival with combined nivolumab and ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(14):1345–1356. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1709684.
    1. Long GV, Eroglu Z, Infante J, et al. Long-term outcomes in patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma who received dabrafenib combined with trametinib. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36(7):667–673. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.1025.
    1. Eggermont AM, Chiarion-Sileni V, Grob JJ, et al. Prolonged survival in stage III melanoma with ipilimumab adjuvant therapy. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(19):1845–1855. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1611299.
    1. Eggermont AMM, Blank CU, Mandala M, et al. Adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected stage III melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(19):1789–1801. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1802357.
    1. Weber J, Mandala M, Del Vecchio M, et al. Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage III or IV melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(19):1824–1835. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1709030.
    1. Wahid M, Jawed A, Mandal RK, et al. Recent developments and obstacles in the treatment of melanoma with BRAF and MEK inhibitors. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2018;125:84–88. doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2018.03.005.
    1. Long GV, Stroyakovskiy D, Gogas H, et al. Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition versus BRAF inhibition alone in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(20):1877–1888. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1406037.
    1. Kantoff PW, Higano CS, Shore ND, et al. Sipuleucel-T immunotherapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(5):411–422. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1001294.
    1. Bol K, Bloemendal M, van Willigen W, et al. MIND-DC: A randomized phase III trial to assess the efficacy of adjuvant dendritic cell vaccination in comparison to placebo in stage IIIB and IIIC melanoma patients. Ann Oncol. 2020;31:S732. doi: 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.08.1202.
    1. Hale DF, Vreeland TJ, Peoples GE. Arming the immune system through vaccination to prevent cancer recurrence. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2016;35:e159–167. doi: 10.1200/EDBK_158946.
    1. Schadendorf D, Ugurel S, Schuler-Thurner B, et al. Dacarbazine (DTIC) versus vaccination with autologous peptide-pulsed dendritic cells (DC) in first-line treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma: a randomized phase III trial of the DC study group of the DeCOG. Ann Oncol. 2006;17(4):563–570. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdj138.
    1. Ozao-Choy J, Lee DJ, Faries MB. Melanoma vaccines. Surg Clin N Am. 2014;94(5):1017–1030. doi: 10.1016/j.suc.2014.07.005.
    1. Van Willigen WW, Bloemendal M, Gerritsen WR, Schreibelt G, De Vries IJM, Bol KF. Dendritic cell cancer therapy: vaccinating the right patient at the right time. Front Immunol. 2018;9:2265. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2018.02265.
    1. Vreeland TJ, Clifton GT, Herbert GS, et al. Gaining ground on a cure through synergy: combining checkpoint inhibitors with cancer vaccines. Expert Rev Clin Immunol. 2016;12(12):1347–1357. doi: 10.1080/1744666X.2016.1202114.
    1. Greene JM, Schneble EJ, Jackson DO, et al. A phase I/IIa clinical trial in stage IV melanoma of an autologous tumor-dendritic cell fusion (dendritoma) vaccine with low dose interleukin-2. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2016;65(4):383–392. doi: 10.1007/s00262-016-1809-6.
    1. Herbert GS, Vreeland TJ, Clifton GT, et al. Initial phase I/IIa trial results of an autologous tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine in patients with solid tumors. Vaccine. 2018;36(23):3247–3253. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2018.04.078.
    1. Rosenberg SA, Yang JC, Sherry RM, et al. Durable complete responses in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic melanoma using T-cell transfer immunotherapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17(13):4550–4557. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0116.
    1. June CH, O’Connor RS, Kawalekar OU, Ghassemi S, Milone MC. CAR T cell immunotherapy for human cancer. Science. 2018;359(6382):1361–1365. doi: 10.1126/science.aar6711.
    1. Klingemann HG. Cellular therapy of cancer with natural killer cells-where do we stand? Cytotherapy. 2013;15(10):1185–1194. doi: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2013.03.011.
    1. Ascierto PA, Del Vecchio M, Robert C, et al. Ipilimumab 10 mg/kg versus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(5):611–622. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30231-0.
    1. Robert C, Schachter J, Long GV, et al. Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(26):2521–2532. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1503093.
    1. Larkin J, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, et al. Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab or monotherapy in untreated melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(1):23–34. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1504030.
    1. Small EJ, Schellhammer PF, Higano CS, et al. Placebo-controlled phase III trial of immunologic therapy with sipuleucel-T (APC8015) in patients with metastatic, asymptomatic hormone refractory prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(19):3089–3094. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.5252.
    1. Stein WD, Gulley JL, Schlom J, et al. Tumor regression and growth rates determined in Five Intramural NCI Prostate Cancer Trials: the growth rate constant as an indicator of therapeutic efficacy. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17(4):907–917. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1762.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonner