A randomized, phase 2/3 clinical trial investigating RP2 plus nivolumab vs ipilimumab plus nivolumab in immune checkpoint inhibitor–naïve patients with metastatic uveal melanoma.

M Marlana M. Orloff (Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA) J Justin C. Moser A Alexander Shoushtari (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY) A Allison Betof (Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA) D Diwakar Davar (Department of Malignant Hematology and Medical Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA) S Sunandana Chandra (Northwestern University, Chicago, IL) A Alexandra Ikeguchi (The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX) A April K.S. Salama (Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University, Durham, NC) R Ryan J. Sullivan (Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center Boston Massachusetts USA) S Shaheer Khan (Northwell Health Cancer Institute, New Hyde Park, NY) S Sapna Pradyuman Patel (UCHealth, University of Colorado Hospital, Aurora, CO) A Anthony M. Joshua (Immunology Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research) J Jessica Cecile Hassel (Department of Dermatology and NCT, Heidelberg University, Medical Faculty, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany) M Mayowa Agbaje-Williams (Replimune, Inc., Woburn, MA) M Mark Navarro (Replimune, Inc., Woburn, MA) R Rahul Marpadga (Replimune, Inc., Woburn, MA) G Giuseppe Gullo (Replimune, Inc., Woburn, MA) J Joseph J. Sacco

Abstract

TPS9598 Background: Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary intraocular malignancy, accounting for ~90% of ocular melanomas and 5% of all melanomas. Half of patients with UM develop metastases, most commonly in the liver (~90%). The prognosis for patients with metastatic UM (mUM) is poor, with a median overall survival (OS) of ~1 year. Effective treatment options for mUM are limited, as it responds poorly to single-agent immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs; <10% response rate). Response rates are slightly higher with combination therapies (12%–18%), but these often have increased toxicity. Tebentafusp is FDA-approved for mUM based on survival benefit but is restricted to patients who are HLA-A*02:01 positive, and only ~10% of patients achieve an objective response. RP2 is a selectively replication-competent herpes simplex virus type 1–based oncolytic immunotherapy expressing GM-CSF, a fusogenic glycoprotein (GALV-GP-R − ), and an anti–CTLA-4 antibody-like molecule. Prior preliminary clinical data of intratumoral RP2 as monotherapy or in combination with nivolumab demonstrated a promising safety profile and anti-tumor activity with an overall response rate (ORR) of 29.4% and disease control rate of 58.8% in 17 patients with mUM, most of whom had received prior ICIs. This study will assess the efficacy and safety of RP2 + nivolumab vs ipilimumab + nivolumab in patients with ICI-naïve mUM. Methods: This is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, phase 2/3 study (NCT06581406; RP2-202). Key eligibility criteria include age ≥18 years and confirmed unresectable mUM with at least 1 lesion amenable to injection; up to 1 prior line of therapy in the metastatic setting is allowed. Patients with prior exposure to ICIs since the time of mUM diagnosis, >50% liver involvement, or previous selected liver-directed therapies are not eligible. Enrolled patients (N = ~280) will be randomized 1:1 to receive either RP2 + nivolumab or ipilimumab + nivolumab. In the RP2 + nivolumab arm, RP2 will be given intratumorally initially at 1 × 10 6 plaque-forming units (PFU)/mL, then every 2 weeks (Q2W) at 1 × 10 7 PFU/mL for 7 doses in combination with intravenous (IV) nivolumab (240 mg). In the ipilimumab + nivolumab arm, patients will receive IV ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) and IV nivolumab (1 mg/kg) Q3W for 4 doses. Patients in both arms may then receive IV nivolumab at 240 mg Q2W or 480 mg Q4W for up to 2 years. The co-primary endpoints are OS and progression-free survival by independent central review using RECIST 1.1. Secondary endpoints are ORR, duration of response, disease control rate, clinical benefit rate, duration of clinical benefit, and safety, including incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and immune-mediated AEs. Clinical trial information: NCT06581406 .

Article Details

Volume / Issue Vol. 44, Issue 16_suppl
Published June 01, 2026
ISSN 0732-183X
Publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Journal Info

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

ISSN: 0732-183X Health Sciences

Authors (18)

M

Marlana M. Orloff

Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA

J

Justin C. Moser

A

Alexander Shoushtari

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY

A

Allison Betof

Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA

D

Diwakar Davar

Department of Malignant Hematology and Medical Oncology, UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA

S

Sunandana Chandra

Northwestern University, Chicago, IL

A

Alexandra Ikeguchi

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX

A

April K.S. Salama

Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University, Durham, NC

R

Ryan J. Sullivan

Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center Boston Massachusetts USA

S

Shaheer Khan

Northwell Health Cancer Institute, New Hyde Park, NY

S

Sapna Pradyuman Patel

UCHealth, University of Colorado Hospital, Aurora, CO

A

Anthony M. Joshua

Immunology Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research

J

Jessica Cecile Hassel

Department of Dermatology and NCT, Heidelberg University, Medical Faculty, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

M

Mayowa Agbaje-Williams

Replimune, Inc., Woburn, MA

M

Mark Navarro

Replimune, Inc., Woburn, MA

R

Rahul Marpadga

Replimune, Inc., Woburn, MA

G

Giuseppe Gullo

Replimune, Inc., Woburn, MA

J

Joseph J. Sacco