@article{WeberGlutschGeissingeretal.2020,
  author    = {Weber, J. and Glutsch, V. and Geissinger, E. and Haug, L. and Lock, J.F. and Schneider, F. and Kneitz, H. and Goebeler, M. and Schilling, B. and Gesierich, A.},
  title     = {Neoadjuvant immunotherapy with combined ipilimumab and nivolumab in patients with melanoma with primary or in transit disease},
  series = {British Journal of Dermatology},
  volume    = {183},
  journal   = {British Journal of Dermatology},
  number    = {3},
  doi       = {10.1111/bjd.18739},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-213520},
  pages     = {559-563},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {The introduction of new therapeutic agents has revolutionized the treatment of metastatic melanoma. The approval of adjuvant anti-programmed death-1 monotherapy with nivolumab or pembrolizumab, and dabrafenib plus trametinib has recently set a new landmark in the treatment of stage III melanoma. Now, clinical trials have shown that immune checkpoint blockade can be performed in a neoadjuvant setting, an approach established as a standard therapeutic approach for other tumour entities such as breast cancer. Recent studies suggest that a pathological response achieved by neoadjuvant immunotherapy is associated with long-term tumour control and that short neoadjuvant application of checkpoint inhibitors may be superior to adjuvant therapy. Most recently, neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab in stage III melanoma was reported. With two courses of dose-optimized ipilimumab (1 mg kg-1) combined with nivolumab (3 mg kg-1), pathological responses were observed in 77\% of patients, while only 20\% of patients experienced grade 3 or 4 adverse events. However, the neoadjuvant trials employing combined immune checkpoint blockade conducted so far have excluded patients with in transit metastases, a common finding in stage III melanoma. Here we report four patients with in transit metastases or an advanced primary tumour who have been treated with neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab according to the OpACIN-neo trial scheme (arm B). All patients achieved radiological disease control and a pathological response. None of the patients has relapsed so far.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{StoevesandtHofmannHainetal.2013,
  author    = {Stoevesandt, Johanna and Hofmann, Bernd and Hain, Johannes and Kerstan, Andreas and Trautmann, Axel},
  title     = {Single venom-based immunotherapy effectively protects patients with double positive tests to honey bee and Vespula venom},
  series = {Allergy, Asthma \& Clinical Immunology},
  journal   = {Allergy, Asthma \& Clinical Immunology},
  doi       = {10.1186/1710-1492-9-33},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-96808},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Background Referring to individuals with reactivity to honey bee and Vespula venom in diagnostic tests, the umbrella terms "double sensitization" or "double positivity" cover patients with true clinical double allergy and those allergic to a single venom with asymptomatic sensitization to the other. There is no international consensus on whether immunotherapy regimens should generally include both venoms in double sensitized patients. Objective We investigated the long-term outcome of single venom-based immunotherapy with regard to potential risk factors for treatment failure and specifically compared the risk of relapse in mono sensitized and double sensitized patients. Methods Re-sting data were obtained from 635 patients who had completed at least 3 years of immunotherapy between 1988 and 2008. The adequate venom for immunotherapy was selected using an algorithm based on clinical details and the results of diagnostic tests. Results Of 635 patients, 351 (55.3\%) were double sensitized to both venoms. The overall re-exposure rate to Hymenoptera stings during and after immunotherapy was 62.4\%; the relapse rate was 7.1\% (6.0\% in mono sensitized, 7.8\% in double sensitized patients). Recurring anaphylaxis was statistically less severe than the index sting reaction (P = 0.004). Double sensitization was not significantly related to relapsing anaphylaxis (P = 0.56), but there was a tendency towards an increased risk of relapse in a subgroup of patients with equal reactivity to both venoms in diagnostic tests (P = 0.15). Conclusions Single venom-based immunotherapy over 3 to 5 years effectively and long-lastingly protects the vast majority of both mono sensitized and double sensitized Hymenoptera venom allergic patients. Double venom immunotherapy is indicated in clinically double allergic patients reporting systemic reactions to stings of both Hymenoptera and in those with equal reactivity to both venoms in diagnostic tests who have not reliably identified the culprit stinging insect.},
  language  = {en}
}