R

Ramona F. Swaby

Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States)

Publishes on Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers, Head and Neck Cancer Studies, CAR-T cell therapy research. 124 papers and 6k citations.

124Publications
6kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

Pembrolizumab With or Without Chemotherapy in Recurrent or Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Updated Results of the Phase III KEYNOTE-048 Study
Kevin J. Harrington, Barbara Burtness, Richard Greil et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2022
Cited by 480Open Access

PURPOSE: Pembrolizumab and pembrolizumab-chemotherapy demonstrated efficacy in recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma in KEYNOTE-048. Post hoc analysis of long-term efficacy and progression-free survival on next-line therapy (PFS2) is presented. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to pembrolizumab, pembrolizumab-chemotherapy, or cetuximab-chemotherapy. Efficacy was evaluated in programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 20, CPS ≥ 1, and total populations, with no multiplicity or alpha adjustment. RESULTS: The median study follow-up was 45.0 months (interquartile range, 41.0-49.2; n = 882). At data cutoff (February 18, 2020), overall survival improved with pembrolizumab in the PD-L1 CPS ≥ 20 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.81) and CPS ≥ 1 populations (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.89) and was noninferior in the total population (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.97). Overall survival improved with pembrolizumab-chemotherapy in the PD-L1 CPS ≥ 20 (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.84), CPS ≥ 1 (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.78), and total (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.85) populations. The objective response rate on second-course pembrolizumab was 27.3% (3 of 11). PFS2 improved with pembrolizumab in the PD-L1 CPS ≥ 20 (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.84) and CPS ≥ 1 (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.95) populations and with pembrolizumab-chemotherapy in the PD-L1 CPS ≥ 20 (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.86), CPS ≥ 1 (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.81), and total (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.88) populations. PFS2 was similar after pembrolizumab and longer after pembrolizumab-chemotherapy on next-line taxanes and shorter after pembrolizumab and similar after pembrolizumab-chemotherapy on next-line nontaxanes. CONCLUSION: With a 4-year follow-up, first-line pembrolizumab and pembrolizumab-chemotherapy continued to demonstrate survival benefit versus cetuximab-chemotherapy in recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Patients responded well to subsequent treatment after pembrolizumab-based therapy.

Pembrolizumab Monotherapy for Recurrent or Metastatic Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Single-Arm Phase II Trial (KEYNOTE-629)
Jean‐Jacques Grob, René González, Nicole Basset‐Séguin et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2020
Cited by 285Open Access

PURPOSE: Treatment options are limited for patients with recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC); mortality rates exceed 70% in patients with distant metastases. Here, we present the first interim analysis of the R/M cSCC cohort from the 2-cohort-locally advanced and R/M-phase II KEYNOTE-629 study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with R/M cSCC not amenable to surgery or radiation received pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. The primary end point was objective response rate per RECIST v1.1. Secondary end points were duration of response, disease control rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: At data cutoff (April 8, 2019), median follow-up of 105 enrolled patients in the R/M cohort was 11.4 months (range, 0.4 to 16.3 months). Objective response rate was 34.3% (95% CI, 25.3% to 44.2%; 4 complete responses, 32 partial responses), and disease control rate was 52.4% (95% CI, 42.4% to 62.2%). Median duration of response was not reached (range, 2.7 to 13.1+ months; '+' refers to ongoing response at data cutoff). Median progression-free survival was 6.9 months (95% CI, 3.1 months to 8.5 months). Median overall survival was not reached (95% CI, 10.7 months to not reached). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 66.7% of patients (n = 70), the most common of which were pruritus (n = 15; 14.3%), asthenia (n = 14; 13.3%), and fatigue (n = 13; 12.4%). Grade 3 to 5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 5.7% (n = 6) of patients. One patient died of treatment-related cranial nerve neuropathy. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab demonstrated effective antitumor activity; clinically meaningful, durable responses; and acceptable safety in primarily elderly patients with R/M cSCC, supporting its use in clinical practice. Pembrolizumab adverse events in this study were consistent with its established safety profile.

CEREBEL (EGF111438): A Phase III, Randomized, Open-Label Study of Lapatinib Plus Capecitabine Versus Trastuzumab Plus Capecitabine in Patients With Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2–Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer
Xavier Pivot, Alexey Manikhas, Zurawski Bogdan et al.|Journal of Clinical Oncology|2015
Cited by 251Open Access

PURPOSE: CEREBEL compared the incidence of CNS metastases as first site of relapse in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive metastatic breast cancer receiving lapatinib-capecitabine or trastuzumab-capecitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients without baseline CNS metastases were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive lapatinib-capecitabine (lapatinib 1,250 mg per day; capecitabine 2,000 mg/m(2) per day on days 1 to 14 every 21 days) or trastuzumab-capecitabine (trastuzumab loading dose of 8 mg/kg followed by an infusion of 6 mg/kg every 3 weeks; capecitabine 2,500 mg/m(2) per day on days 1 to 14 every 21 days). The primary end point was incidence of CNS metastases as first site of relapse. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: The study was terminated early with 540 enrolled patients (271 received lapatinib-capecitabine, and 269 received trastuzumab-capecitabine). Incidence of CNS metastases as first site of relapse was 3% (eight of 251 patients) for lapatinib-capecitabine and 5% (12 of 250 patients) for trastuzumab-capecitabine (treatment differences, -1.6%; 95% CI, -2% to 5%; P = .360). PFS and OS were longer with trastuzumab-capecitabine versus lapatinib-capecitabine (hazard ratio [HR] for PFS, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.64; HR for OS, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.64). Serious adverse events were reported in 13% (34 of 269 patients) and 17% (45 of 267 patients) of patients in the lapatinib-capecitabine and trastuzumab-capecitabine arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: CEREBEL is inconclusive for the primary end point, and no difference was detected between lapatinb-capecitabine and trastuzumab-capecitabine for the incidence of CNS metastases. A better outcome was observed with trastuzumab-capecitabine in the overall population. However, lapatinib-capecitabine efficacy may have been affected by previous exposure to a trastuzumab regimen and/or when treatment was given as first- or second-line therapy in the metastatic setting.