A Randomized Phase 2 Study of Ipilimumab, Nivolumab, and Brentuximab Vedotin in Patients with Relapsed Hodgkin Lymphoma

The Phase 1/2 Intergroup study E4412 (NCT01896999; ClinicalTrials.gov) investigated checkpoint blockade with nivolumab (Nivo) and ipilimumab (Ipi) in relapsed/refractory (R/R) classic Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) while concurrently targeting CD30+ Hodgkin Reed Sternberg cells with the antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin (BV). 147 patients ≥12 years were randomized between BV/Nivo and BV/Ipi/Nivo; 132 patients are included in primary efficacy analysis. The primary endpoint, complete response (CR) rate, was 64.7% (52.2, 75.9) for BV/Nivo and 70.3% (57.6, 81.1) for BV/Ipi/Nivo (one-sided p=0.29). The median survival follow-up is 38.0 months (interquartile range 32.6-48.1). Progression-free survival (PFS) did not significantly differ between the two arms (HR=0.78, CI 0.39-1.57, one-sided p=0.24). Treatment-related grade 3+ toxicities in the adult cohort, excluding rash, was similar between both arms (38.5% BV/Nivo and 39.3% BV/Ipi/Nivo); there was higher frequency of grade 3 rash with BV/Ipi/Nivo (24.6%) compared to BV/Nivo (9.2%). We compared PFS by stem cell transplantation (SCT) status in a planned post-hoc comparison; 58 patients received SCT; 36-month PFS (from SCT) was greater than 90% for both arms. Sixty-six patients were alive and progression free after the first scan (disease evaluation) and did not undergo SCT. The 36-month PFS (from first scan) was 73.0% (54.5, 85.0) for BV/Ipi/Nivo compared to 45.8% (26.3, 63.4) for BV/Nivo (HR=0.45, CI 0.19-1.08, one-sided p=0.03). The study did not meet its primary endpoint of superior CR rate for the triplet, but it supports the use of checkpoint-ADC induction prior to auto SCT, and there is an intriguing signal of disease control for patients wishing to defer or avoid SCT for the triplet of BV/Ipi/Nivo.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Blood
Published
2026-02-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.2025029546
Primary Topic
Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Randomized Phase 2 Study of Ipilimumab, Nivolumab, and Brentuximab Vedotin in Patients with Relapsed Hodgkin Lymphoma

Yasodha Natkunam, Catherine Diefenbach, Sami Ibrahimi, Sachdev Thomas et al.
Blood
Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
article

A Randomized Phase 2 Study of Ipilimumab, Nivolumab, and Brentuximab Vedotin in Patients with Relapsed Hodgkin Lymphoma

Yasodha Natkunam, Catherine Diefenbach, Sami Ibrahimi, Sachdev Thomas, Fenghai Duan, Neha Mehta-Shah, Peter D. Cole, Brad S. Kahl, Jennifer E. Amengual, Michael J. Robertson, Jonathon B. Cohen, Christian Steidl, Gaurav Goyal, Opeyemi A Jegede, Richard F Ambinder, Victoria Wang, Nancy L. Bartlett, Kara M Kelly, Ranjana H Advani, Stephen M. Ansell, Kevin A. David, David W. Scott, Christopher Jon Forlenza, Lale Kostakoglu
article en

Abstract

The Phase 1/2 Intergroup study E4412 (NCT01896999; ClinicalTrials.gov) investigated checkpoint blockade with nivolumab (Nivo) and ipilimumab (Ipi) in relapsed/refractory (R/R) classic Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) while concurrently targeting CD30+ Hodgkin Reed Sternberg cells with the antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin (BV). 147 patients ≥12 years were randomized between BV/Nivo and BV/Ipi/Nivo; 132 patients are included in primary efficacy analysis. The primary endpoint, complete response (CR) rate, was 64.7% (52.2, 75.9) for BV/Nivo and 70.3% (57.6, 81.1) for BV/Ipi/Nivo (one-sided p=0.29). The median survival follow-up is 38.0 months (interquartile range 32.6-48.1). Progression-free survival (PFS) did not significantly differ between the two arms (HR=0.78, CI 0.39-1.57, one-sided p=0.24). Treatment-related grade 3+ toxicities in the adult cohort, excluding rash, was similar between both arms (38.5% BV/Nivo and 39.3% BV/Ipi/Nivo); there was higher frequency of grade 3 rash with BV/Ipi/Nivo (24.6%) compared to BV/Nivo (9.2%). We compared PFS by stem cell transplantation (SCT) status in a planned post-hoc comparison; 58 patients received SCT; 36-month PFS (from SCT) was greater than 90% for both arms. Sixty-six patients were alive and progression free after the first scan (disease evaluation) and did not undergo SCT. The 36-month PFS (from first scan) was 73.0% (54.5, 85.0) for BV/Ipi/Nivo compared to 45.8% (26.3, 63.4) for BV/Nivo (HR=0.45, CI 0.19-1.08, one-sided p=0.03). The study did not meet its primary endpoint of superior CR rate for the triplet, but it supports the use of checkpoint-ADC induction prior to auto SCT, and there is an intriguing signal of disease control for patients wishing to defer or avoid SCT for the triplet of BV/Ipi/Nivo.

Blood
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US), Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (US), Mayo Clinic (US), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US), Johns Hopkins University (US), Emory University (US), Washington University in St. Louis (US), Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US), Johns Hopkins Medicine (US), University of Alabama at Birmingham (US), NYU Langone Health (US), Virginia Cancer Institute (US), Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US), Kaiser Permanente Vallejo Medical Center (US), Oklahoma State University Oklahoma City (US), Providence Center (US), Rutgers Cancer Institute (US), Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis (US), University of Oklahoma (US), Stanford University (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.