Table 3.
Summary of trials utilising tebentafusp.
| Trial | Phase | Year | Number of patients (UM/CM) | Therapeutic agent(s) | mPFS (m) (95% CI) | mOS (m) (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tebentafusp (ImmTAC) | ||||||
| IMCgp100-01 (Middleton et al.41) | I | 2016 | 61 CM, 19 UM | IMCgp100 (tebentafusp) | NA | 33.4 (13.9–47.2) |
| IMCgp100-102 (Carvajal et al.42 ) | I/II | 2020 | 127 UM | IMCgp100 (tebentafusp) | 2.8 (2–3.7) | 16.8 (12.9–21.3) |
| IMCgp100-202 (Nathan et al.33) | III | 2021 | 252 UM versus 126 UM | Tebentafusp (T) versus Investigator choice SOC (dacarbazine, ipilimumab or pembrolizumab) | T: 3.3 (3.0–5.0) versus SOC: 2.9 (2.8–3.0) | T: 21.7 (18.6-28.6) versus. SOC: 16 (9.7–18.4) |
CI, confidence interval; CM, cutaneous melanoma; ImmTAC, immune mobilising monoclonal T-cell receptors against cancer; m, months; mOS, median overall survival; mPFS, median progression-free survival; NA, not available; SOC, standard of care; UM, uveal melanoma.