Skip to main content
. 2014 Feb 12;2014:307059. doi: 10.1155/2014/307059

Table 2.

A comparison between CTLA-4 inhibitor monotherapy studies and the combination study of ipilimumab and nivolumab.

Drug + target Study
(author, date)
Patient number Phase Regimen + drugs (doses) Response rate (%) (CR or PR) Response duration Drug related toxicity
G3/4 AEs
Treatment related mortality PFS (months) OS (months)
Ipilimumab
CTLA-4
Hodi et al., 2010 [12]
Previously treated
676 3 Ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) versus ipilimumab + gp100 versus gp100 10.9
5.7
1.5
60% >26.5 months
17% >27.9 months
0% >2 years
22.9%
17.4%
11.4%
3.1%
2.1%
1.5%
2.86
2.76
2.76
10.1
10.0
6.4

Robert et al., 2011 [13]
Previously untreated
502 3 Ipilimumab (10 mg/kg) + dacarbazine versus dacarbazine 15.2
10.3
19.3 months (median)
8.1 months (median)
56.3%
27.5%
NR <3
<3
11.2
9.1

Lambrolizumab
CTLA-4
Hamid et al., 2013 [14] 655 1 Lambrolizumab 38 81% still responding at 11-month follow-up 13% NR >7 Not reached

Ipilimumab + nivolumab
CTLA-4 + PD-1
Wolchok et al., 2013 [15] 86 1 Ipilimumab + nivolumab (concurrent or sequenced therapy) 40a
20b
90.5% of patients with a response had an ongoing response at time of analysis (6.1 to 72.1 weeks) 53%a
18%b
Nil
Nil
NR NR

aConcurrent therapy; bSequenced therapy; NR: not reported.