TRANSPLANTATION
`
`CTLA4 blockade with ipilimumab to treat relapse of malignancy after allogeneic
`hematopoietic cell transplantation
`Asad Bashey,1,2 Bridget Medina,1 Sue Corringham,1 Mildred Pasek,2 Ewa Carrier,1 Linda Vrooman,2 Israel Lowy,3
`Scott R. Solomon,2 Lawrence E. Morris,2 H. Kent Holland,2 James R. Mason,4 Edwin P. Alyea,5 Robert J. Soiffer,5 and
`Edward D. Ball1
`
`1Division of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, University of California, San Diego Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla; 2Blood and Marrow Transplant Group of
`Georgia at Northside Hospital, Atlanta; 3Medarex, Bloomsbury, NJ; 4BMT, Scripps Clinic, La Jolla, CA; and 5Hematologic Malignancies, Dana-Farber Cancer
`Institute, Boston, MA
`
`Relapse of malignancy after allogeneic
`hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-
`HCT) remains a therapeutic challenge.
`Blockade of the CTLA4 molecule can ef-
`fectively augment antitumor immunity me-
`diated by autologous effector T cells. We
`have assessed the safety and prelimi-
`nary efficacy of a neutralizing, human
`anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibody, ipili-
`mumab, in stimulating the graft-versus-
`malignancy (GVM) effect after allo-HCT.
`Twenty-nine patients with malignancies
`that were recurrent or progressive after
`allo-HCT, received ipilimumab as a single
`Introduction
`
`infusion at dose cohorts between 0.1
`and 3.0 mg/kg. Dose-limiting toxicity
`was not encountered, and ipilimumab
`did not
`induce graft-versus-host dis-
`ease (GVHD) or graft rejection. Organ-
`specific immune adverse events (IAE)
`were seen in 4 patients (grade 3 arthri-
`tis, grade 2 hyperthyroidism, recurrent
`grade 4 pneumonitis). Three patients
`with lymphoid malignancy developed
`objective disease responses following
`ipilimumab: complete remission (CR) in
`2 patients with Hodgkin disease and
`partial remission (PR) in a patient with
`
`refractory mantle cell lymphoma. At the
`3.0 mg/kg dose, active serum concentra-
`tions of ipilimumab were maintained for
`more than 30 days after a single infu-
`sion.
`Ipilimumab, as administered in
`this clinical trial, does not induce or
`exacerbate clinical GVHD, but may cause
`organ-specific IAE and regression of
`malignancy. This study is registered at
`http://clinicaltrials.gov under NCI proto-
`col
`ID P6082.
`(Blood.
`2009;113:
`1581-1588)
`
`Adoptive immunotherapy in the form of allogeneic hematopoietic
`cell
`transplantation (allo-HCT) can cure several hematologic
`malignancies. However, relapse or progression of malignancy
`(RM) is an important cause of treatment failure and mortality after
`allo-HCT.1,2 RM may be a particularly challenging problem in
`patients with advanced malignancies who underwent transplanta-
`tion and in patients who underwent transplantation using reduced-
`intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens.2 Inadequate costimulation
`of T cells may be one mechanism underlying failure of adoptive
`immunotherapy after allo-HCT. Expression of CTLA4 is induced
`on T cells upon activation. It competes with costimulatory receptor
`CD28 for the B7 ligands CD80 and CD86 on antigen-presenting
`cells. Through this and other mechanisms, CTLA4 functions as an
`important negative regulator of the duration and intensity of
`antigen-specific T-cell responses.3,4 CTLA4 is an important media-
`tor of peripheral self-tolerance and tolerance to tumor antigens.
`Mice genetically devoid of CTLA4 develop fatal lymphoprolifera-
`tion and autoimmunity.5 Antibody-mediated blockade of CTLA4 in
`murine models can result
`in tumor regression and seems to
`augment the efficacy of antitumor vaccines.6,7
`Ipilimumab is a fully human immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1)
`monoclonal antibody that antagonizes CTLA4 (Medarex, Blooms-
`bury, NJ, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, Wallingford, CT). Human
`clinical trials of this antibody in several solid tumors, especially in
`advanced melanoma have demonstrated regression of malignancy
`
`that can be durable.8-20 These responses often occur in conjunction
`with organ-specific autoimmune phenomena (immune adverse
`events [IAE]). Tumor regressions seen can be very delayed and
`may even be preceded by initial disease progression, emphasizing
`the immune mechanism underlying the responses seen.
`T cell–replete allo-HCT relies predominantly upon antigen-
`specific T-cell responses to generate a graft-versus-malignancy
`(GVM) effect. CTLA4 blockade in this context could potentially
`augment the GVM effect and reverse or prevent RM. Further-
`more, the existence of differences in histocompatibility antigens
`between donor and recipient may result in greater efficacy for
`this strategy than in the autologous setting. However, immune
`complications unique to allo-HCT (eg, graft-versus-host disease
`[GVHD] and graft rejection) may potentially also be stimulated.
`In a murine model of major histocompatibility complex (MHC)
`disparate allogeneic transplantation, the use of an antagonistic
`anti-CTLA4 antibody early in the course of the transplantation
`led to increased GVHD or graft rejection depending upon the
`intensity of conditioning. However, the delayed administration
`of the same antibody produced only limited GVHD, while
`resulting in a powerful enhancement of
`the graft-versus-
`leukemia effect against host-derived acute myeloid leukemia
`(AML) cells.21
`To assess the efficacy of ipilimumab as a means of augmenting
`GVM reactions, it is first important to establish a safe dose of the
`
`Submitted July 18, 2008; accepted October 11, 2008. Prepublished online as Blood
`First Edition paper, October 30, 2008; DOI 10.1182/blood-2008-07-168468.
`
`payment. Therefore, and solely to indicate this fact, this article is hereby
`marked ‘‘advertisement’’ in accordance with 18 USC section 1734.
`
`The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge
`
`© 2009 by The American Society of Hematology
`
`BLOOD, 12 FEBRUARY 2009 䡠 VOLUME 113, NUMBER 7
`
`1581
`
`PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit 1011 Page 1 of 9
`
`

`
`PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit 1011 Page 2 of 9
`
`

`
`BLOOD, 12 FEBRUARY 2009 䡠 VOLUME 113, NUMBER 7
`
`IPILIMUMAB FOR RELAPSE AFTER ALLOTRANSPLANTATION
`
`1583
`
`Table 2. Adverse events by grade and dose level
`
`Toxicity grade
`
`Dose level, mg/kg
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`Arthritis*, pneumonitis
`
`Anemia, thrombocytopenia, pneumonia,
`neutropenia/fever
`
`Infection, hip fracture
`
`Anemia
`
`Elevated AST/ALT
`
`Neutropenia (transient)*
`
`Leucocytosis, fever, neutropenic fever,
`dyspnea, mucositis
`
`Pneumonitis*
`
`0.1
`
`0.33
`
`0.66
`
`1.0
`
`3.0
`
`Leucocytosis, diarrhea, shoulder pain,
`bronchitis (2), vaginosis
`Blurring of vision, abdominal
`pain/constipation, hypercalcemia,
`hyperglycemia, knee swelling
`Hyperthyroidism*, cellulitis, bone pain,
`cough, pneumonia (2)
`Hypotension, urinary retention
`
`Fatigue (2), Fever (2 ⫹ 1)*, sweats*,
`insomnia, pruritis*,
`rash/desquamation*, abdominal
`pain, backache*, arthritis*,
`headache, sensory neuropathy,
`cough, dyspnea, pneumonia,
`anxiety
`
`Pharyngitis, eyelid blisters, tachycardia,
`dizziness, headache
`Palpitations, chest pain, diarrhea (2),
`nausea, cough
`
`Hypothyroidism, elevated AST,
`hyperglycemia, acute GVHD (skin)
`Anemia, thrombocytopenia, elevated
`ALT/AST, elevated alkaline
`phosphatase
`Chills, fatigue (2), fever (2)*, night
`sweats, anemia, thrombocytopenia,
`petichiae, skin dryness, rash,
`hypercalcemia, hypocalcemia,
`hypokalemia, hypernatremia,
`hyponatremia, muscle cramps*,
`dizziness (2)*, headache, insomnia,
`photophobia, colitis*, diarrhea*,
`elevated alk. phos., elevated
`AST/ALT*, nausea (2), vomiting*,
`increased creatinine, vaginosis,
`pharyngitis*, agitation
`
`*Events that the investigator felt were at least possibly related to ipilimumab.
`
`and an MTD was not reached with a single dose up to 3.0 mg/kg
`(one patient who developed a ⬎grade 3 IAE did so after retreat-
`ment with ipilimumab). Although multiple grade 1 and 2 toxicities
`were recorded, in almost all cases no clear relationship to the study
`agent was evident. Thus, 15 patients in all were treated at the
`originally planned highest dose (3.0 mg/kg).
`
`GVHD
`
`No patients developed grade 3 or 4 acute GVHD after ipilimumab
`alone. Three patients developed minor ocular dryness and erythema
`at 2, 6, and 8 months from a single ipilimumab infusion without
`subsequent DLI. They did not require systemic therapy. Two
`patients with preexisting minor active chronic GVHD not requiring
`immunosuppressive therapy at baseline (1 oral, 1 ocular) showed
`no exacerbation of symptoms after ipilimumab infusion. One
`patient developed no GVHD after ipilimumab, but developed grade
`1 skin GVHD after DLI given at 2 months after ipilimumab for
`progressive disease.
`
`Organ-specific IAE
`
`Four patients developed IAE distinct from GVHD that were
`potentially attributable to ipilimumab.
`Patient 0102 (age 52, Hispanic female, AML, dose level
`0.1 mg/kg) developed grade 3 polyarthropathy with nodules clini-
`cally consistent with rheumatoid arthritis 3 months after a single
`infusion of ipilimumab. The episode occurred approximately
`4 weeks after DLI given for RM (3 months after ipilimumab);
`therefore, the role of ipilimumab versus DLI in the etiology of this
`episode is difficult
`to distinguish. The patient responded to
`corticosteroid therapy with a complete regression of her symptoms.
`Pre-ipilimumab serum was retrospectively analyzed and found to
`be positive for rheumatoid factor at a titer of 1:640. The patient had
`no prior history of rheumatoid arthritis.
`
`Patient 0311 (age 48, white male, chronic lymphocytic leuke-
`mia [CLL], dose level 0.66 mg/kg) developed laboratory evidence
`of hyperthyroidism associated with the production of thyroid-
`stimulating hormone (TSH) receptor stimulating antibody within
`4 weeks of a single ipilimumab infusion. The patient was referred
`to endocrinology and was monitored without therapy for the next
`month. He demonstrated laboratory evidence of progressive hyper-
`thyroidism associated with rising titers of anti-TSH receptor
`antibodies at 2 months after infusion. The patient was then treated
`with methimazole, which resulted in improvement of his serum-
`free T4 and T3 levels by 4 months after ipilimumab infusion. He
`never developed clinical symptoms of hyperthyroidism. Assess-
`ment of baseline thyroid function on blood drawn immediately
`before ipilimumab infusion revealed normal T4, TSH, and
`a borderline level of TSH-receptor receptor antibody.
`Patient 2521 (white male, age 45, HD, dose level 3.0 mg/kg)
`complained of dyspnea on exertion 10 weeks after a single dose of
`ipilimumab. Computed tomography (CT) scan showed no new
`abnormalities, but pulmonary function resting revealed an obstruc-
`tive defect that responded to inhaled corticosteroids. No infectious
`etiology was identified.
`Patient 3520 (white male, age 35, HD, dose level 3.0) had
`demonstrated clinical and radiologic regression of malignancy
`followed later by disease progression after his first infusion of
`3.0 mg/kg ipilimumab. He was retreated with the same dose of
`ipilimumab 4 months after his first infusion. He was noted to have
`new bilateral ground glass opacification in bilateral upper lung
`fields on a routine reassessment CT scan at 4 weeks after the second
`infusion. Bronchoscopy revealed no infective etiology except
`␤-hemolytic Streptococcus from a single culture and transbronchial
`biopsy showed inflammatory changes. The infiltrates worsened
`despite antimicrobial therapy. He was commenced on methylpred-
`nisolone with marked radiologic improvement at 2- and 4-week
`reassessments (Figure 1). Complete tapering of the patient’s
`
`PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit 1011 Page 3 of 9
`
`

`
`1584
`
`BASHEY et al
`
`BLOOD, 12 FEBRUARY 2009 䡠 VOLUME 113, NUMBER 7
`
`Table 3. Objective disease responses
`Patient
`(dose level, mg/kg)
`
`Age
`
`Sex
`
`0414 (1.0)
`2517 (3.0)
`3520 (3.0)
`
`64
`21
`40
`
`M
`M
`M
`
`Diagnosis
`
`NHL (mantle cell)
`HD
`HD
`
`Prior
`DLI
`
`Yes (⫻2)
`Yes
`No
`
`Response to
`ipilimumab
`
`GVHD after
`ipilimumab
`
`PR
`CR
`CR*
`
`No
`No
`No
`
`Other toxicity
`
`Transient neutropenia
`No
`Grade 4 pneumonitis*
`
`*Negative effect observed after retreatment with ipilimumab.
`
`corticosteroid therapy over the next month was associated with
`significant exacerbation of pulmonary infiltrates and dyspnea
`leading to intubation while radiologic evidence of his HD resolved
`completely. Repeat transbronchial biopsy showed acute and chronic
`inflammatory changes only. Reinstitution of corticosteroids accom-
`panied by infliximab (single dose 10 mg/kg) resulted in rapid
`improvement and eventual complete resolution of dyspnea and
`pulmonary infiltrates. However, despite a much slower taper,
`discontinuation of corticosteroid therapy was associated with
`recurrence of grade 4 pneumonitis. The patient responded com-
`pletely to treatment with methylprednisone accompanied with a
`4-week course of infliximab (10 mg/kg per week) and mycopheny-
`late mofetil. Slow tapering of corticosteroid therapy followed by
`maintenance therapy with low-dose methylprednisolone and myco-
`phenylate mofetil has prevented subsequent recurrence of the
`patient’s pneumonitis.
`
`Regression of malignancy
`
`Three patients demonstrated objective disease responses after
`ipilimumab alone (summarized in Table 3).
`Patient 0414 had failed prior therapy for multiply relapsed
`mantle cell NHL before undergoing matched unrelated donor
`allo-HCT. Upon RM after allo-HCT, he received 2 DLI without
`evidence of disease response. He had rapidly growing left parotid
`and right axillary masses before enrollment on study. Administra-
`tion of ipilimumab was followed approximately 4 weeks later with
`a febrile illness that was associated with significant clinical and
`radiologic regression of his lymphoma resulting in a partial
`
`remission (PR) that was persistent at 2 months after ipilimumab
`(Figure 2). At 3 months after ipilimumab, the responses in the
`parotid and axillary masses were maintained, but
`the patient
`developed a new positron emission tomography (PET)–avid lesion
`within the abdomen. The patient was then taken off the study to
`pursue alternative therapeutic options.
`Patient 2517 had failed a prior autologous transplantation for
`primary refractory HD before undergoing a matched related donor
`allo-HCT. His disease relapsed within 6 months of the transplanta-
`tion. He was treated with gemcitabine monotherapy followed by
`DLI. However, there was evidence of disease progression within
`2 months of DLI. The patient had evidence of PET-avid right hilar
`adenopathy immediately before receiving ipilimumab at 3.0 mg/kg.
`CR was achieved on the 1-month reassessment after ipilimumab
`(Figure 3). The CR has been durable for 37 months at the time of
`this report.
`Patient 3520 had a history of relapsed HD and had previously
`failed autologous transplantation. Matched related donor allo-HCT
`did not achieve CR, and there was frank malignant progression
`6 months after transplantation. The patient was treated with
`ipilimumab at the 3.0 mg/kg dose and developed partial regression
`of PET-avid disease at 1- and 2-month evaluations following
`ipilimumab. However, disease progression was evident at
`the
`3-month evaluation following ipilimumab, and he was retreated
`with 3.0 mg/kg ipilimumab approximately 4 months after the first
`infusion. The second infusion was associated with a corticosteroid-
`responsive noninfectious pneumonitis, which progressed to grade 4
`severity when the corticosteroids were tapered and discontinued
`
`Figure 1. Pneumonitis after retreatment with ipilimumab. CT scans of the chest from patient 3520 (dose level 3.0 mg/kg). Scans show (A) an extensive inflammatory
`infiltrate that developed approximately 6 weeks after retreatment with ipilimumab and (B) complete resolution of changes after corticosteroid therapy.
`
`PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit 1011 Page 4 of 9
`
`

`
`BLOOD, 12 FEBRUARY 2009 䡠 VOLUME 113, NUMBER 7
`
`IPILIMUMAB FOR RELAPSE AFTER ALLOTRANSPLANTATION
`
`1585
`
`Figure 2. Regression of malignancy in a patient with
`mantle cell lymphoma. CT scans from patient 0414 (dose
`level 1.0 mg/kg) showing left parotid (A,B), and right axillary
`(C,D) nodal masses before (A,C) and 1 month after (B,D)
`ipilimumab infusion.
`
`(see section on IAE above). However, by 3 months after the second
`infusion, the patient achieved a CR that was durable for 9 months
`thereafter.
`Two additional patients with HD treated at the highest dose
`level (3.0 mg/kg) who had evidence of rapid disease progression
`before ipilimumab achieved disease stabilization for 3 and 6 months,
`respectively, after the infusion.
`
`DLI
`
`Nine patients received at least one DLI in the study after showing
`persistence or progression of malignancy after ipilimumab (first
`DLI, 0.5 ⫻ 107 CD3⫹ cells/kg; 2 at dose ipilimumab cohort
`0.1 mg/kg, 2 at 0.66 mg/kg, 2 at 1.0 mg/kg, and 3 at 3.0 mg/kg).
`The first DLI was administered at a median of 2 months after
`ipilimumab (range, 2-4 months). Three patients also received a
`second DLI (1.0 ⫻ 107 CD3⫹ cells/kg) at a median of 4 months
`(range, 4-9 months) after ipilimumab. No patient who received DLI
`after failing ipilimumab demonstrated an objective disease response.
`
`Survival
`
`A Kaplan-Meier plot of estimated overall survival of all 29 patients
`treated in the study is shown in Figure 4. Median overall survival
`from the time of ipilimumab therapy was 24.7 months.
`
`Pharmacokinetics
`
`The concentration of ipilimumab at various time points after single
`infusion at the dose levels assessed is shown in Figure 5. All doses
`used achieved a peak concentration of ipilimumab greater than
`1 ␮g/mL. At the highest dose studied (3.0 mg/kg), ipilimumab
`levels remained at concentrations above 10 ␮g/mL for at least
`30 days and above 1 ␮g/mL for 60 days.
`
`Discussion
`
`This report documents the results of the first clinical trial to use
`CTLA4 blockade as a means of augmenting the GVM effect after
`allo-HCT. We show that a single infusion of ipilimumab at doses up
`to 3 mg/kg can be administered safely to patients who have RM
`after allo-HCT. In particular, ipilimumab did not result in stimula-
`tion or exacerbation of acute or chronic GVHD in these patients.
`No patient developed typical clinical features of acute or chronic
`GVHD after ipilimumab alone. The eligibility criteria of the trial
`may have limited the risk of severe GVHD. Specifically, patients
`were required to have not experienced prior grade 3 or 4 acute
`GVHD and were required to have tolerated discontinuation of all
`immunosuppressive medications for a minimum of 4 to 6 weeks
`before study entry. It is unclear whether ipilimumab would also not
`induce or exacerbate GVHD in patients who had experienced prior
`severe acute GVHD or those patients who were still on immunosup-
`pressive therapy at the time of treatment. It is notable, however, that
`several patients treated in this study had experienced some prior
`acute and/or chronic GVHD before ipilimumab therapy, and all
`patients had at least 50% donor T-cell chimerism at the time of
`ipilimumab infusion (median, 100%). The lack of GVHD as a
`complication of ipilimumab therapy in this trial cannot be ex-
`plained by subtherapeutic dosing. Ipilimumab is a fully human
`monoclonal antibody and has a relatively prolonged half-life in
`vivo.8,11,15 Serial estimation of serum ipilimumab concentrations in
`our patients demonstrated that at doses greater than 1.0 mg/kg,
`serum ipilimumab levels remained above 10 ␮g/mL for several
`days (more than 30 days after a dose of 3.0 mg/kg). Small et al
`observed similar levels of ipilimumab were seen after a single dose
`of ipilimumab at 3.0 mg/kg.15 Serum ipilimumab levels greater
`
`PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit 1011 Page 5 of 9
`
`

`
`1586
`
`BASHEY et al
`
`BLOOD, 12 FEBRUARY 2009 䡠 VOLUME 113, NUMBER 7
`
`Figure 3. Regression of malignancy in a patient with HD. CT scans (A,B) and PET scans (C,D) from patient 2517 (dose level 3.0 mg/kg) showing right hilar adenopathy
`before (A,C) and 2 months after (B,D) ipilimumab infusion.
`
`than 0.1 ␮g/mL have been shown to saturate binding sites on
`recombinant CTLA4 in ELISA studies, and levels greater than
`2 ␮g/mL achieve binding saturation for CTLA4 expressed through
`transfection on a T-cell hybridoma.22 Maximal inhibition of the
`binding of CTLA4 expressed upon these cells to CD80 and CD86
`can be achieved by concentrations of ipilimumab as low as 6 and
`1 ␮g/mL, respectively.22 CTLA4 molecules are heavily overex-
`pressed on such transduced cell lines compared with that seen on
`T cells after activation in vivo. Thus it is likely that ipilimumab
`levels achieved in our patients at the higher dose cohorts would
`induce complete blockade of the CTLA4 expressed on their T cells
`in vivo after antigen-induced activation. Furthermore, clinical
`effects other than GVHD, namely clinical regression of malignancy
`and organ-specific IAEs were induced at these dose levels in our
`trial. It is possible that ipilimumab did not initiate or exacerbate
`GVHD in our study because of the required separation between the
`last infusion of donor cells and ipilimumab administration (mini-
`mum 90 days, median 366 days). The etiology of the clinical
`
`syndrome of GVHD is complex.23 Available data suggest that the
`presence of both recipient-derived antigen-presenting cells and
`possibly cytokine release associated with regimen-related toxicity
`may be components that participate in the generation of clinical
`acute GVHD.23 The lack of one or both of these components due to
`the relatively prolonged time between last donor-cell infusion and
`ipilimumab administration may have contributed to the lack of
`clinical acute GVHD seen after ipilimumab despite the other
`immune effects observed. Delayed administration of anti-CTLA4
`antibody was associated with augmentation of the GVM effect
`without exacerbation of lethal GVHD in a murine model of
`MHC-mismatched allo-HCT.21 In a recent study of a murine model
`of minor histocompatibility antigen-mismatched allo-HCT,24 early
`CTLA4 blockade induced acute GVHD. However, delayed CTLA4
`blockade did not result in GVHD, but resulted instead in potentially
`lethal host-derived autoimmune effects, as well as significant
`augmentation of resistance to challenge with syngeneic leukemia
`cells. Both autoimmune effects and antileukemia activity were
`mediated by host-derived T cells in this model. However, these
`effects were dependent upon the coexistence of donor-derived
`T cells, as neither effect was seen after syngeneic hematopoietic
`transplantation. These findings seen in experimental animal models
`of allo-HCT are consistent with the observations in our clinical
`
`Figure 4. Kaplan-Meier plot of overall survival from the time of ipilimumab
`therapy for all patients (n ⴝ 29).
`
`Figure 5. Serum ipilimumab levels after a single infusion of doses from 0.1 to
`3.0 mg/kg.
`
`PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit 1011 Page 6 of 9
`
`

`
`BLOOD, 12 FEBRUARY 2009 䡠 VOLUME 113, NUMBER 7
`
`IPILIMUMAB FOR RELAPSE AFTER ALLOTRANSPLANTATION
`
`1587
`
`trial. However, it is unlikely that the organ-specific IAE or the
`objective responses seen in patients treated on our study were
`mediated exclusively by host-derived T cells. All patients demon-
`strating these effects had greater than 80% donor T-cell chimerism
`on the date of ipilimumab therapy, and in only 2 patients were any
`host-derived T cells detectable. Furthermore, only one of the
`patients demonstrating IAEs or objective responses had any
`increase in host-derived chimerism on serial assessment after
`ipilimumab upon development of the immune effect (patient 0102).
`These findings would argue against the possibility that the immune
`phenomena observed in our trial were effected solely by host-
`derived T cells, but
`the possibility cannot be excluded with
`certainty.
`Organ-specific IAEs were seen in 4 of 29 (14%) patients treated
`in our study. Such IAEs have been described in trials of use of
`ipilimumab and another anti-CTLA4 antibody in patients with
`cancer who had not undergone allo-HCT.8-17,19,20 As in those
`reports, the IAEs seen in our study were highly responsive to
`immunosuppressive therapy, although prolonged therapy and mul-
`tiple immunosuppressive agents were required in one patient. IAEs
`have been found to be more common in trials using repeated dosing
`of ipilimumab, and their occurrence is associated with regression of
`malignancy. Consistent with those findings, the most severe IAE in
`our study occurred in a patient after he was retreated with
`ipilimumab. He also experienced a durable CR in his malignancy
`after the second infusion. The frequency of the IAEs seen in
`patients in our study does not appear to differ significantly from
`other trials in which primarily a single dose of ipilimumab up to
`3 mg/kg has been studied. All patients treated in this study had
`greater than 50% donor T-cell chimerism at the time of ipilimumab
`infusion. Therefore, these data imply that despite the presence of
`disparity in minor histocompatibility antigens between donor and
`recipient, the frequency of and severity of IAE after ipilimumab
`may not be significantly greater in patients after allo-HCT than in
`patients who have not undergone allo-HCT.
`Objective responses were encountered in 3 patients treated on
`our protocol (17% of the 18 patients treated at ⬎1 mg/kg). The
`objective responses seen in our study occurred in patients with
`lymphoid malignancies and included 2 durable CRs in patients
`with HD. This finding may be attributable to chance, as HD was the
`most frequent malignancy treated on our study, and the total
`number of patients with each diagnosis in our study was small.
`
`References
`
`However, objective responses have been reported in patients with
`lymphoma18 in a trial where the antibody was used after failure of
`idiotype vaccination. Further investigation of ipilimumab in pa-
`tients receiving allo-HCT in HD and NHL is warranted. Once the
`safety of ipilimumab after allo-HCT is fully established, its efficacy
`in the prophylaxis of relapse in high-risk patients may be explored.
`Thus,
`in conclusion, our study suggests that
`the use of
`ipilimumab up to 3 mg/kg as administered in our study is safe and
`can produce antitumor responses. It forms a platform for the
`exploration of true efficacy when used after allo-HCT through
`formal phase 2 studies in specific malignancies. Furthermore,
`repeated dosing and higher dosing may also now be explored as
`strategies to increase the efficacy of the antibody in this setting.
`
`Acknowledgments
`
`We acknowledge the contribution of Howard Streicher, MD,
`Pharmaceutical Management Branch, National Cancer Institute
`(NCI; Bethesda, MD) during the design and analysis of the study.
`Minya Pu and Karen Messer from the Biostatistics Core at the
`Moores Cancer Center, University of California, San Diego helped
`with the statistical analysis.
`This study was supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH)
`award RO1 CA 9389-01A1 (A.B.).
`
`Authorship
`
`Contribution: A.B. designed and performed research, analyzed
`data, and wrote the paper; B.M., S.C., and L.V. performed research
`and analyzed data; M.P., E.C., S.R.S., L.E.M., H.K.H., J.R.M., and
`E.P.A. performed research; I.L. contributed investigational agent;
`R.J.S. performed research, analyzed data, and contributed to
`manuscript; and E.D.B. helped design research, performed re-
`search, and contributed to the manuscript.
`Conflict-of-interest disclosure: I.L. is employed by and owns
`stock in Medarex, Inc. E.D.B. owns stock in Medarex, Inc. The
`other authors declare no competing financial interests.
`Correspondence: Asad Bashey, Blood and Marrow Transplant
`Group of Georgia at Northside Hospital, 5670 Peachtree Dun-
`woody Road NE, Suite 1000, Atlanta, GA 30342; e-mail:
`abashey@bmtga.com.
`
`1. Giralt SA, van Besien K. Treatment of relapse
`after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation.
`Cancer Treat Res. 1996;84:279-290.
`2. Kahl C, Storer BE, Sandmaier BM, et al. Relapse
`risk in patients with malignant diseases given al-
`logeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation after
`nonmyeloablative conditioning. Blood. 2007;110:
`2744-2748.
`3. Salomon B, Bluestone JA. Complexities of CD28/
`B7: CTLA-4 costimulatory pathways in autoimmu-
`nity and transplantation. Annu Rev Immunol.
`2001;19:225-252.
`4. Korman AJ, Peggs KS, Allison JP. Checkpoint
`blockade in cancer immunotherapy. Adv Immu-
`nol. 2006;90:297-339.
`5. Tivol EA, Borriello F, Schweitzer AN, Lynch WP,
`Bluestone JA, Sharpe AH. Loss of CTLA-4 leads
`to massive lymphoproliferation and fatal multior-
`gan tissue destruction, revealing a critical nega-
`tive regulatory role of CTLA-4. Immunity. 1995;3:
`541-547.
`6. Leach DR, Krummel MF, Allison JP. Enhance-
`
`ment of antitumor immunity by CTLA-4 blockade
`[see comments]. Science. 1996;271:1734-1736.
`7. van Elsas A, Hurwitz AA, Allison JP. Combination
`immunotherapy of B16 melanoma using anticyto-
`toxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4
`(CTLA-4) and granulocyte/macrophage colony-
`stimulating factor (GM-CSF)-producing vaccines
`induces rejection of subcutaneous and metastatic
`tumors accompanied by autoimmune depigmen-
`tation. J Exp Med. 1999;190:355-366.
`8. Phan GQ, Yang JC, Sherry RM, et al. Cancer re-
`gression and autoimmunity induced by cytotoxic
`T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 blockade in
`patients with metastatic melanoma. Proc Natl
`Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100:8372-8377.
`9. Attia P, Phan GQ, Maker AV, et al. Autoimmunity
`correlates with tumor regression in patients with
`metastatic melanoma treated with anticytotoxic
`T-lymphocyte antigen-4. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:
`6043-6053.
`10. Maker AV, Phan GQ, Attia P, et al. Tumor regres-
`sion and autoimmunity in patients treated with
`
`cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4
`blockade and interleukin 2: a phase I/II study. Ann
`Surg Oncol. 2005;12:1005-1016.
`11. Sanderson K, Scotland R, Lee P, et al. Autoimmu-
`nity in a phase I trial of a fully human anticytotoxic
`T-lymphocyte antigen-4 monoclonal antibody with
`multiple melanoma peptides and Montanide ISA
`51 for patients with resected stages III and IV
`melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:741-750.
`12. Beck KE, Blansfield JA, Tran KQ, et al. Enteroco-
`litis in patients with cancer after antibody block-
`ade of cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen
`4. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2283-2289.
`13. Cranmer LD, Hersh E. The role of the CTLA4
`blockade in the treatment of malignant mela-
`noma. Cancer Invest. 2007;25:613-631.
`14. Downey SG, Klapper JA, Smith FO, et al. Prog-
`nostic factors related to clinical response in pa-
`tients with metastatic melanoma treated by CTL-
`associated antigen-4 blockade. Clin Cancer Res.
`2007;13:6681-6688.
`15. Small EJ, Tchekmedyian NS, Rini BI, Fong L,
`
`PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit 1011 Page 7 of 9
`
`

`
`1588
`
`BASHEY et al
`
`BLOOD, 12 FEBRUARY 2009 䡠 VOLUME 113, NUMBER 7
`
`Lowy I, Allison JP. A pilot trial of CTLA-4 blockade
`with human anti-CTLA-4 in patients with hor-
`mone-refractory prostate cancer. Clin Cancer
`Res. 2007;13:1810-1815.
`16. Weber J. Review: anti-CTLA-4 antibody ipili-
`mumab: case studies of clinical response and
`immune-related adverse events. Oncologist.
`2007;12:864-872.
`17. Yang JC, Hughes M, Kammula U, et al. Ipili-
`mumab (anti-CTLA4 antibody) causes regression
`of metastatic renal cell cancer associated with
`enteritis and hypophysitis. J Immunother. 2007;
`30:825-830.
`18. O’Mahony D, Morris JC, Quinn C, et al. A pilot
`study of CTLA-4 blockade after cancer vaccine
`
`failure in patients with advanced malignancy. Clin
`Cancer Res. 2007;13:958-964.
`19. Hodi FS, Butler M, Oble DA, et al. Immunologic
`and clinical effects of antibody blockade of cyto-
`toxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 in previ-
`ously vaccinated cancer patients. Proc Natl Acad
`Sci U S A. 2008;105:3005-3010.
`20. Saenger YM, Wolchok JD. The heterogeneity of
`the kinetics of response to ipilimumab in meta-
`static melanoma: patient cases. Cancer Immun.
`2008;8:1.
`21. Blazar BR, Taylor PA, Panoskaltsis-Mortari A,
`Sharpe AH, Vallera DA. Opposing roles of
`CD28:B7 and CTLA-4:B7 pathways in regulating
`in vivo alloresponses in murine recipients of MHC
`
`22.
`
`disparate T cells. J Immunol. 1999;162:6368-
`6377.
`Investigator Brochure for Ipilimumab. Wallingford,
`CT: Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research
`Institute and Bloomsbury, NJ: Medarex, Inc; 2007.
`23. Sprangers B, Fevery S, Van Wijmeersch B, De
`Somer L, Waer M, Billiau AD. Can graft-versus-
`leukemia reactivity be dissociated from graft-ver-
`sus-host disease? Front Biosci. 2007;12:4568-
`4594.
`24. Fevery S, Billiau AD, Sprangers B, et al. CTLA-4
`blockade in murine bone marrow chimeras in-
`duces a host-derived antileukemic effect without
`graft-versus-host disease. Leukemia. 2007;21:
`1451-1459.
`
`PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
`
`Exhibit 1011 Page 8 of 9
`
`

`
`From
`
`by guest
`www.bloodjournal.org
`
`
`
`
`For personal use only.on August 31, 2015.
`
`2009(cid:160)113: 1581-1588
`doi:10.1182/blood-2008-07-168468
` originally published
`online October 30, 2008
`
`CTLA4 blockade with ipilimumab to treat relapse of malignancy after
`llogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation
`
`(cid:160)a
`
`Asad Bashey, Bridget Medina, Sue Corringham, Mildred Pasek, Ewa Carrier, Linda Vrooman, Israel
`Lowy, Scott R. Solomon, Lawrence E. Morris, H. Kent Holland, James R. Mason, Edwin P. Alyea