NCT02968303

Brief Summary

Rationale: The combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab induces relatively high response rates and promising response depth in late stage melanoma. Nevertheless, it takes time till responses occur and still a significant number of patients do not benefit from treatment, due to rapid progressive disease or resistance to therapy. In contrast to immunotherapies targeted therapies (BRAF or MEK inhibitors), can induce faster and higher response rates, but often of shorter duration, even when combined. Initial attempts of combining vemurafenib or dabrafenib + trametinib with ipilimumab failed due to toxicity. Patients with elevated levels of serum LDH are less likely to respond to immunotherapy compared to patients with normal LDH levels. This does not mean that such patients do not benefit at all from immunotherapy. This raises the question, whether response rates upon immunotherapy can be improved by upfront reduction of tumor burden and normalization of LDH. The investigators postulate that induction therapy with combined BRAF+MEK inhibition, and subsequent LDH normalization, can improve response rates to the rates seen in LDH normal patients. To address this question the investigators have setup a randomized phase 2 trial in metastatic melanoma patients with elevated serum LDH comparing the response rates upon ipilimumab + nivolumab versus ipilimumab + nivolumab preceded by 6 weeks of vemurafenib + cobimetinib induction. Furthermore, less than half of the patients treated with the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab received maintenance nivolumab, and approximately 40% of all patients discontinued treatment for toxicity. In 70% of patients responses were ongoing despite discontinuation of treatment due to toxicity. This raises the question, to what extent does maintenance therapy add clinical benefit to an ongoing immune response. Preclinical data indicate even that continuous restimulation of T cells can result in activation induced non-responsiveness (anergy). Therefore, a secondary objective of this trial will be, to test a response-driven nivolumab scheme Objectives: Primary Objective • To compare efficacy of induction vemurafenib + cobimetinib followed by ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm A) versus upfront ipilimumab + nivolumab treatment (Arm B). Secondary Objectives

  • To describe duration of response and overall survival induced by vemurafenib + cobimetinib followed by the combination of ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm A) as compared to ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm B)
  • To describe the rate and quality of toxicity observed in the two study arms
  • To describe the rate of ongoing responses upon response-driven flat dose (240mg q2w or 480mg q4w) nivolumab maintenance
  • To determine the immune-activating capacity of induction therapy with vemurafenib + cobimetinib followed by the combination of ipilimumab + nivolumab.
  • To evaluate the changes in systemic immune competence Study design: This is a two-arm phase 2 study consisting of 200 BRAFV600E/K mutation-positive late-stage melanoma patients with an elevated baseline LDH level (\> ULN, \< 3xULN) randomized 1:1 (stratified according to LDH) to receive either vemurafenib + cobimetinib directly followed by ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm A) or standard first line ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm B). Subsequently, patients in both arms will receive flat dose (240mg q2w or 480mg q4w) nivolumab maintenance in a response-driven manner. Study population: Stage IV, or unresectable stage III, BRAFV600E/K mutation positive melanoma patients, naïve for BRAF/MEK, PD-1/PD-L1 or CTLA-4 targeting therapy, 18 years and older. Intervention: Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive either 6 weeks vemurafenib 960 mg bid + cobimetinib 60 mg QD 21-day on, 7-day off (21/7) schedule, directly followed by 4 courses of ipilimumab 3mg/kg q3wk + nivolumab 1mg/kg q3wk (Arm A) or first line standard 4 courses of ipilimumab 3mg/kg q3wk + nivolumab 1mg/kg q3wk (Arm B). Subsequently, patients in both arms will receive nivolumab maintenance flat dose (240mg q2w or 480mg q4w) in a response-driven manner according to their response at week 18. Main study parameters/endpoints: Primary Endpoints
  • Compare the best overall response rate (BORR) according to RECIST 1.1 of both arms at week 18 from start of treatment. Secondary Endpoints
  • Progression-free survival (PFS) according to RECIST 1.1
  • Overall survival (OS)
  • Percentage of grade 3/4 toxicities according to CTCv4.03
  • Percentage of ongoing response, percentage of patients requiring re-induction, response percentage upon re-induction
  • Changes in tumor-specific T cell responses

Trial Health

43
At Risk

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Trial has exceeded expected completion date
Enrollment
200

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for phase_2

Timeline
Completed

Started Jan 2017

Longer than P75 for phase_2

Geographic Reach
1 country

13 active sites

Status
unknown

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

November 11, 2016

Completed
7 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

November 18, 2016

Completed
2 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

January 27, 2017

Completed
5.7 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

October 1, 2022

Completed
1 year until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

October 1, 2023

Completed
Last Updated

June 5, 2020

Status Verified

June 1, 2020

Enrollment Period

5.7 years

First QC Date

November 11, 2016

Last Update Submit

June 3, 2020

Conditions

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Best overall response rate (BORR) according to RECIST 1.1

    Week 18 from start of treatment

Secondary Outcomes (6)

  • Progression-free survival (PFS) according to RECIST 1.1

    1 and 2 years from start of treatment

  • Overall survival (OS)

    1 and 2 years from start of treatment

  • Grade 3/4 toxicities according to CTCv4.03

    Week 18 from start of treatment

  • Percentage of ongoing response

    1 and 2 years from start of treatment

  • Response percentage upon re-induction

    Week 18 from start of treatment

  • +1 more secondary outcomes

Study Arms (2)

Induction treatment

EXPERIMENTAL

Induction vemurafenib and cobimetinib (6 weeks) directly followed by ipilimumab and nivolumab

Drug: Vemurafenib and Cobimetinib

No induction treatment

NO INTERVENTION

Upfront ipilimumab and nivolumab without induction by vemurafenib and cobimetinib

Interventions

Combination of Vemurafenib with Cobimetinib in BRAF V600E/K mutated melanoma patients to normalize LDH and optimize immunotherapy with Nivolumab and Ipilimumab

Induction treatment

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Adults 18 years and older
  • World Health Organization (WHO) Performance Status 0-2
  • Histologically or cytologically confirmed Stage IV, or unresectable stage III, BRAF V600E/K mutated melanoma
  • Measurable disease according to RECIST 1.1
  • Signed and dated informed consent form
  • No prior immunotherapy targeting CTLA-4, PD-1 or PD-L1
  • No prior BRAFi and/ or MEKi therapy
  • No immunosuppressive medications
  • Screening laboratory values must meet the following criteria and should be obtained within 10 days prior to randomization:
  • WBC ≥ 2.0x109/L, Neutrophils ≥ 1.0x109/L, Platelets ≥ 100 x109/L, Hemoglobin ≥ 5.0 mmol/L
  • Creatinine ≤ 2x ULN or creatinine clearance (CrCl) ≥ 40 ml/min
  • AST, ALT ≤ 3.0 x ULN (≤5 x ULN for patients with liver metastases)
  • Bilirubin ≤ 2.0 x ULN (except subjects with Gilbert Syndrome, who can have total bilirubin \< 3.0 mg/dL )
  • LDH \> ULN, \< 5.0 x ULN
  • No symptomatic brain metastases (asysmptomatic brain metastases, accidentally found during screening can be included)
  • +10 more criteria

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (13)

The Netherlands Cancer Institute

Amsterdam, 1066 CX, Netherlands

RECRUITING

Vrije Universiteit Medisch Centrum

Amsterdam, Netherlands

NOT YET RECRUITING

Amphia Ziekenhuis Breda

Breda, Netherlands

RECRUITING

Maxima MC

Eindhoven, Netherlands

RECRUITING

Medisch Spectrum Twente

Enschede, Netherlands

NOT YET RECRUITING

Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen

Groningen, Netherlands

RECRUITING

Zuyderland Medisch Centrum Heerlen

Heerlen, Netherlands

RECRUITING

Leids Universitair Medisch Centrum

Leiden, Netherlands

RECRUITING

Maastricht UMC+

Maastricht, Netherlands

RECRUITING

Radboudumc

Nijmegen, 6525GA, Netherlands

RECRUITING

Erasmus MC

Rotterdam, Netherlands

NOT YET RECRUITING

UMC Utrecht

Utrecht, Netherlands

RECRUITING

Isala

Zwolle, 8025 AB, Netherlands

RECRUITING

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Sarcoma, Clear Cell

Interventions

Vemurafenibcobimetinib

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Neoplasms, Connective TissueNeoplasms, Connective and Soft TissueNeoplasms by Histologic TypeNeoplasmsSarcoma

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

SulfonamidesAmidesOrganic ChemicalsSulfonesSulfur CompoundsIndolesHeterocyclic Compounds, 2-RingHeterocyclic Compounds, Fused-RingHeterocyclic Compounds

Central Study Contacts

Rutger HT Koornstra, MD

CONTACT

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
phase 2
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Medical Oncologist

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

November 11, 2016

First Posted

November 18, 2016

Study Start

January 27, 2017

Primary Completion

October 1, 2022

Study Completion

October 1, 2023

Last Updated

June 5, 2020

Record last verified: 2020-06

Locations