Ipilimumab In The Real World: The Uk Expanded Access Programme (Eap) Experience In Advanced Melanoma.

3018 Background: Since publication of the registration trial in 2010 (Hodi et al, NEJM 2010;363:711-23), real world use of ipilimumab (Ipi) in previously treated advanced melanoma patients has extended beyond the specific trial entry criteria of ECOG PS 0-1. We undertook a review of UK patients (pts) treated in the international EAP prior to European licensing of Ipi in August 2011, to compare real world survival outcomes. Methods: UK clinicians registered in the EAP provided anonymised data using pre-specified variable fields for all pts. The EAP stipulated pts should have previously treated, unresectable stage III or IV metastatic melanoma and receive Ipi 3 mg/kg, 3 weekly IV, for up to 4 cycles. Response using RECIST criteria was assessed 12 weekly. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) using CTCAE v3.0 were collected. Results: To date, information on 162 pts has been received from 16 UK sites. Primary sites were: 78% cutaneous, 4% ocular, 1% mucosal, 17% unknown. 78% pts had M1c disease, 14% had brain metastases. No prior therapies ranged from 0-4, 72% pts received 1 prior therapy. Median age was 60 years, men>women (1.6:1). ECOG PS was: 38% 0, 47% 1, 14% 2, 1% 3. BRAF status was known in 38% cases and WT in 75% of these. 19% pts were on steroids at baseline. No cycles delivered was 4 in 52%, 3 in 13%, 2 in 16%, 1 in 17% pts. Most frequent reason for stopping early was clinical evidence of disease progression (71%), death (16%) or unacceptable AE (12%). 32% pts experienced a grade ≥3 AE, the most common being diarrhoea (13%) and fatigue (8%). Complete and partial responses were reported in 1% and 21% of treated pts. At median follow-up of 17 months, median progression free survival and overall survival (OS) were 2.8 and 5.7 months, 1 year OS was 30%. Comparing outcomes of various pt subgroups, the strongest prognostic factor for OS was ECOG PS at the start of treatment (p<0.0001). For pts with PS 0 or 1, median OS was 8.8 months (compared with 10 months in the registration trial). More detailed safety and efficacy data on pt subgroups will be presented. Conclusions: This review, representing the largest Ipi EAP UK dataset, reports overall poorer survival outcomes than in the registration trial, but pts with similar characteristics to the trial population lived longer.