Rapid Readouts: Results of Phase 3 DREAMseq Trial in Advanced Melanoma

Video

Michael Atkins, MD, shares data presented at the 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology Plenary Series regarding results from the phase 3 ECOG-ACRIN EA6134 trial, DREAMseq, evaluating the use of up-front dual immunotherapy in patients with BRAF V600–mutant advanced melanoma.

Michael B. Atkins, MD,discusses data from the following poster: “DREAMseq (Doublet, Randomized Evaluation in Advanced Melanoma Sequencing): a phase III trial—ECOG-ACRIN EA6134.” (Atkins MB, et al. ASCO 2021 Plenary Series, Abstract 356154).

Introduction

  • Combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors blocking PD-1 and CTLA4 or BRAF/MEK inhibitors have shown significant antitumor efficacy and overall survival (OS) benefit in patients with BRAF V600–mutant metastatic melanoma, leading to broad regulatory approval.
  • The objective of this presentation was to provide the results of the phase 3, DREAMseq trial, designed to compare the efficacy and toxicity of nivolumab-ipilimumab followed by dabrafenib-trametinib with the converse sequence.

Methods

  • Eligible patients with treatment-naïve BRAF V600–mutant metastatic melanoma were stratified by ECOG performance status 0 or 1 and lactate dehydrogenase level and randomized 1:1 to receive step 1 with either nivolumab-ipilimumab (Arm A) or dabrafenib-trametinib (Arm B).
  • At disease progression, patients were enrolled in step 2, receiving the alternative therapy, dabrafenib-trametinib (Arm C) or nivolumab-ipilimumab (Arm D), respectively.
  • Patients received 4 doses of nivolumab (1 mg/kg)–ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) every 3 weeks, followed by nivolumab 240 mg intravenously once every 2 weeks for up to 72 weeks (Arms A and D) or dabrafenib 150 mg orally twice daily and trametinib 2 mg orally once daily until disease progression (Arms B and C).
  • The primary end point was 2-year OS

Results

  • The overall grade 3+ toxicity was 60% in Arm A and 52% in Arm B. Grade 5 treatment-related adverse events included 2 on Arm A and 1 on Arm C.
  • The objective response rate to date is: Arm A, 46% (52/113); Arm B, 43% (49/114), Arm C, 48% (11/23); and Arm D, 30% (8/27). 37/42 assessed patients in Arm A and 19/37 in Arm B remain in response.
  • The median duration of response (DOR) for Arm A was not reached, and for Arm B it was 12.7 months (95% CI: 8.2, -) (P < .001). There were 100 deaths (Arm A to C, 38; Arm B to D, 62).
  • The 2-year OS rate for those starting with Arm A was 72% (95% CI: 62%-81%), and for Arm B it was 52% (95% CI: 42%-62%) (log-rank P = .0095).
  • The progression-free survival (PFS) showed a trend in favor of Arm A (log-rank P = .054). Both the PFS and OS curves show a biphasic pattern, with Arm B being above Arm A until 6 and 10 months, respectively.

Conclusion

  • For patients with advanced BRAF V600–mutant metastatic melanoma, the treatment sequence beginning with the immune checkpoint inhibitor combination of nivolumab-ipilimumab resulted in superior overall survival, which became evident at 10 months, with longer step 1 DOR and more ongoing responses than the treatment sequence beginning with dabrafenib-trametinib.
Related Videos
Daniel Olson, MD
Vishal Patel, MD, FAAD, FACMS, associate professor, Dermatology, George Washington (GW) School of Medicine & Health Sciences
Omid Hamid, MD, professor, medicine, Cedars-Sinai; director, Clinical Research and Immunotherapy, director, Cutaneous Oncology and Melanoma, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute
John M. Kirkwood, MD, Distinguished Service Professor of Medicine, Sandra and Thomas Usher Professor of Medicine, Dermatology & Translational Science, coleader, Melanoma and Skin Cancer Program, Division of Hematology/Oncology, the University of Pittsburgh
Daniel Olson, MD
Omid Hamid, MD
Michael R. Migden, MD