Prolonged Survival in Stage III Melanoma with Ipilimumab Adjuvant Therapy

Diagnostic and therapeutic applications of miRNA-based strategies to cancer immunotherapy

Cancer immunotherapy has shown impressive clinical results in the last decade, improving both solid and hematologic cancer patients' overall survival. Nevertheless, most of the molecular aspects underlying the response to this approach are still under investigation. miRNAs in particular have been described as regulators of a plethora of different immunologic processes and thus have the potential to be key in the future developments of immunotherapy. In this review, we summarize and discuss the emerging role of miRNAs in the diagnosis and therapeutics of the four principal cancer immunotherapy approaches: immune checkpoint blockade, adoptive cell therapy, cancer vaccines, and cytokine therapy. In particular, this review is focused on potential roles for miRNAs to be adjuvants in soluble factor- and cell-based therapies, with the aim of helping to increase specificity and decrease toxicity, and on the potential for rationally identified miRNA-based diagnostic approaches to aid in precision clinical immunooncology.

Time to reconsider the role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma

The Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trials indicate that there are no overall or melanoma-specific survival advantages to performing sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) followed by immediate completion lymph node dissection compared with wide excision and observation for patients with positive sentinel nodes. These results make SLNB solely a staging procedure. The role of SLNB in the management of patients with melanoma deserves reappraisal. The potential marginal benefit of SLNB beyond the clinical and pathologic features of the melanoma has not been well studied. The use of sentinel lymph node status alone to accept and stratify patients into trials or to receive adjuvant treatment is not rational.

Guidance of sentinel lymph node biopsy decisions in patients with T1–T2 melanoma using gene expression profiling

Aim: Can gene expression profiling be used to identify patients with T1–T2 melanoma at low risk for sentinel lymph node (SLN) positivity? Patients & methods: Bioinformatics modeling determined a population in which a 31-gene expression profile test predicted <5% SLN positivity. Multicenter, prospectively-tested (n = 1421) and retrospective (n = 690) cohorts were used for validation and outcomes, respectively. Results: Patients 55–64 years and ≥65 years with a class 1A (low-risk) profile had SLN positivity rates of 4.9% and 1.6%. Class 2B (high-risk) patients had SLN positivity rates of 30.8% and 11.9%. Melanoma-specific survival was 99.3% for patients ≥55 years with class 1A, T1–T2 tumors and 55.0% for class 2B, SLN-positive, T1–T2 tumors. Conclusion: The 31-gene expression profile test identifies patients who could potentially avoid SLN biopsy.

Prognostic and Predictive Immunohistochemistry-Based Biomarkers in Cancer and Immunotherapy

Immunotherapy has drastically improved the prognosis of many patients with cancer, but it can also lead to severe immune-related adverse events. Biomarkers, which are molecular markers that indicate a patient's disease outcome or a patient's response to treatment, are therefore crucial to helping clinicians weigh the potential benefits of immunotherapy against its potential toxicities. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) has thus far been a powerful technique for discovery and use of biomarkers such as CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. However, IHC has limited reproducibility. Thus, if more IHC-based biomarkers are to reach the clinic, refinement of the technique using multiplexing or automation is key.

Cutaneous Melanoma, Version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Cutaneous melanoma have been significantly revised over the past few years in response to emerging data on immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies and BRAF-targeted therapy. This article summarizes the data and rationale supporting extensive changes to the recommendations for systemic therapy as adjuvant treatment of resected disease and as treatment of unresectable or distant metastatic disease.

Patient-reported outcomes in patients with resected, high-risk melanoma with BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutations treated with adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib (COMBI-AD): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

In the phase 3 COMBI-AD study, patients with resected, stage III melanoma with BRAF^V600E or BRAF^V600K mutations received adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib or placebo. The primary analysis showed that dabrafenib plus trametinib significantly improved relapse-free survival at 3 years. These results led to US Food and Drug Administration approval of dabrafenib plus trametinib as adjuvant treatment for patients with resected stage III melanoma with BRAF^V600E or BRAF^V600K mutations. Here, we report the patient-reported outcomes from COMBI-AD.

METHODS

COMBI-AD was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study done at 169 sites in 25 countries. Study participants were aged 18 years or older and had complete resection of stage IIIA (lymph node metastases >1 mm), IIIB, or IIIC cutaneous melanoma as per American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition criteria, with BRAF^V600E or BRAF^V600K mutations, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system, stratified by mutation type and disease stage, to receive oral dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily) plus oral trametinib (2 mg once daily) or matching placebos for 12 months. Patients, physicians, and the investigators who analysed the data were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival, reported elsewhere. Health-related quality of life, reported here, was a prespecified exploratory endpoint, and was assessed with the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions 3-Levels (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire in the intention-to-treat population. We used a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis to assess differences in health-related quality of life between groups. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01682083. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer recruiting participants.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 31, 2013, and Dec 11, 2014, 870 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib (n=438) or matching placebos (n=432). Data were collected until the data cutoff for analyses of the primary endpoint (June 30, 2017). The median follow-up was 34 months (IQR 28-39) in the dabrafenib plus trametinib group and 33 months (20·5-39) in the placebo group. During the 12-month treatment phase, there were no significant or clinically meaningful changes from baseline between groups in EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) or utility scores. During treatment, there were no clinically meaningful differences in VAS scores or utility scores in the dabrafenib plus trametinib group between patients who did and did not experience the most common adverse events. During long-term follow-up (range 15-48 months), VAS and utility scores were similar between groups and did not differ from baseline scores. At recurrence, there were significant decreases in VAS scores in both the dabrafenib plus trametinib group (mean change -6·02, SD 20·57; p=0·0032) and the placebo group (-6·84, 20·86; p<0·0001); the mean change in utility score also differed significantly at recurrence for both groups (dabrafenib plus trametinib -0·0626, 0·1911, p<0·0001; placebo -0·0748, 0·2182, p<0·0001).

INTERPRETATION

These findings show that dabrafenib plus trametinib did not affect patient-reported outcome scores during or after adjuvant treatment, and suggest that preventing or delaying relapse with adjuvant therapy could be beneficial in this setting.

FUNDING

Novartis.

Harnessing immune checkpoints in myeloid lineage cells for cancer immunotherapy

Myeloid lineage immune cells, such as macrophages and dendritic cells, play important roles in the induction of antitumor immunity during the initial stage of the cancer-immunity cycle, eliciting antitumor adaptive immunity by phagocytosing cancer cells and processing cancer-specific antigens, and then presenting these antigens to T cells. During this process, cancer cell phagocytosis can be prevented by inhibitory signals, and the signaling cascades that elicit immune responses against cancer antigens can be inhibited by immunosuppressive myeloid cells in the tumor microenvironment. A number of therapeutic strategies for enhancing cancer cell phagocytosis and promoting antitumor immunity by targeting myeloid lineage cells have recently been developed. Here, we discuss recent advances in cancer immunotherapy that involve the targeting of myeloid lineage immune cells to induce effective antitumor immunity.

Treatment of melanoma of unknown primary in the era of immunotherapy and targeted therapy: A Dutch population-based study

Melanoma of unknown primary (MUP) may have a different biology to melanoma of known primary, but clinical trials of novel therapies (e.g., immune checkpoint or BRAF/MEK inhibitors) have not reported the outcomes in this population. We therefore evaluated the overall survival (OS) among patients with MUP in the era of novel therapy. Data for stage III or IV MUP were extracted from a nationwide database for the period 2003–2016, with classification based on the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer criteria. The population was divided into pre‐ (2003–2010) and post‐ (2011–2016) novel therapy eras. Also, OS in the post‐novel era was compared between patients with stage IV MUP by whether they received novel therapy. In total, 2028 of 65,110 patients (3.1%) were diagnosed with MUP. Metastatic sites were known in 1919 of 2028 patients, and most had stage IV disease (53.8%). For patients with stage III MUP, the 5‐year OS rates were 48.5% and 50.2% in the pre‐ and post‐novel eras, respectively (p = 0.948). For those with stage IV MUP, the median OS durations were unchanged in the pre‐novel era and post‐novel era when novel therapy was not used (both 4 months); however, OS improved to 11 months when novel therapy was used in the post‐novel era (p < 0.001). In conclusion, more than half of the patients with MUP are diagnosed with stage IV and the introduction of novel therapy appears to have significantly improved the OS of these patients.

What's new?

Melanoma of unknown primary (MUP) site may have a different biology to melanoma of known primary, but clinical trials of novel therapies (e.g., immune checkpoint or BRAF/MEK inhibitors) have not reported the outcomes in this population. Knowledge about outcomes could however aid clinical management of patients with MUP. In this nationwide study from 2003 to 2016, the authors show that the introduction of novel therapy has significantly improved the overall survival for patients with stage IV melanoma of unknown primary, who represented more than half of the patients diagnosed with MUP in the Netherlands.

Emerging Nano-/Microapproaches for Cancer Immunotherapy

Cancer immunotherapy has achieved remarkable clinical efficacy through recent advances such as chimeric antigen receptor-T cell (CAR-T) therapy, immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy, and neoantigen vaccines. However, application of immunotherapy in a clinical setting has been limited by low durable response rates and immune-related adverse events. The rapid development of nano-/microtechnologies in the past decade provides potential strategies to improve cancer immunotherapy. Advances of nano-/microparticles such as virus-like size, high surface to volume ratio, and modifiable surfaces for precise targeting of specific cell types can be exploited in the design of cancer vaccines and delivery of immunomodulators. Here, the emerging nano-/microapproaches in the field of cancer vaccines, immune checkpoint blockade, and adoptive or indirect immunotherapies are summarized. How nano-/microparticles improve the efficacy of these therapies, relevant immunological mechanisms, and how nano-/microparticle methods are able to accelerate the clinical translation of cancer immunotherapy are explored.

Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities, Version 1.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The aim of the NCCN Guidelines for Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities is to provide guidance on the management of immune-related adverse events resulting from cancer immunotherapy. The NCCN Management of Immunotherapy-Related Toxicities Panel is an interdisciplinary group of representatives from NCCN Member Institutions and ASCO, consisting of medical and hematologic oncologists with expertise in a wide array of disease sites, and experts from the fields of dermatology, gastroenterology, neuro-oncology, nephrology, emergency medicine, cardiology, oncology nursing, and patient advocacy. Several panel representatives are members of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC). The initial version of the NCCN Guidelines was designed in general alignment with recommendations published by ASCO and SITC. The content featured in this issue is an excerpt of the recommendations for managing toxicity related to immune checkpoint blockade and a review of existing evidence. For the full version of the NCCN Guidelines, including recommendations for managing toxicities related to chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, visitNCCN.org.

Cancer-associated fibroblasts: how do they contribute to metastasis?

Cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) are activated fibroblasts in the tumor microenvironment. They are one of the most prominent cell types in the stroma and produce large amounts of extracellular matrix molecules, chemokines, cytokines and growth factors. Importantly, CAFs promote cancer progression and metastasis by multiple pathways. This, together with their genetic stability, makes them an interesting target for cancer therapy. However, CAF heterogeneity and limited knowledge about the function of the different CAF subpopulations in vivo, are currently major obstacles for identifying specific molecular targets that are of value for cancer treatment. In this review, we discuss recent major findings on CAF development and their metastasis-promoting functions, as well as open questions to be addressed in order to establish successful cancer therapies targeting CAFs.

Early Recurrence in Completely Resected IIIB and IIIC Melanoma Warrants Restaging Prior to Adjuvant Therapy

Purpose

To evaluate the results of restaging completely resected stage IIIB/C melanoma prior to start of adjuvant therapy.

Patients and Methods

One hundred twenty patients with stage IIIB or IIIC (AJCC 2009) melanoma who underwent complete surgical resection were screened for inclusion in our trial investigating adjuvant dendritic cell therapy (NCT02993315). All patients underwent imaging to exclude local relapse or metastasis before entering the trial. The frequency of recurrent disease within 12 weeks after resection and the method of detection were investigated.

Results

Sixty-nine (58%) stage IIIB and 51 (43%) stage IIIC melanoma patients were screened. Median age was 54 (range 27–79) years. Twenty-two (18%) of 120 patients with completely resected stage IIIB/C melanoma had evidence of early recurrent disease, despite exclusion thereof by prior imaging. Median interval between resection and detection of relapse was 7.4 (range 4.3–10.7) weeks. Recurrence was asymptomatic in 17 (77%) patients, but metastasis was noticed by the patient or physician in 5 (23%). Eight patients with local relapse received local treatment with curative intent, and one was treated with systemic therapy. The remaining patients had distant metastasis, 1 of whom underwent resection of a solitary liver metastasis while 12 patients received systemic treatment.

Conclusions

Patients with completely resected stage IIIB/C melanoma have high risk of early recurrence before start of adjuvant therapy. Restaging should be considered for high-risk melanoma patients before start of adjuvant therapy.

Timing of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in relation to surgery is crucial for outcome

Adjuvant immunotherapies targeting CTLA4 or PD-1 recently demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of earlier stages of human cancer. We previously demonstrated using mouse spontaneous metastasis models that neoadjuvant immunotherapy and surgery was superior, compared to surgery and adjuvant immunotherapy, in eradicating the lethal metastatic disease. However, the optimal scheduling between neoadjuvant immunotherapy and surgery and how it impacts on efficacy and development of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) remains undefined. Using orthotopic 4T1.2 and E0771 mouse models of spontaneously metastatic mammary cancer, we varied the schedule and duration of neoadjuvant immunotherapies and surgery and examined how it impacted on long-term survival. In two tumor models, we demonstrated that a short duration (4-5 days) between first administration of neoadjuvant immunotherapy and resection of the primary tumor was necessary for optimal efficacy, while extending this duration (10 days) abrogated immunotherapy efficacy. However, efficacy was also lost if neoadjuvant immunotherapy was given too close to surgery (2 days). Interestingly, an additional 4 adjuvant doses of treatment following a standard 2 doses of neoadjuvant immunotherapy, did not significantly improve overall tumor-free survival regardless of the combination treatment (anti-PD-1+anti-CD137 or anti-CTLA4+anti-PD-1). Furthermore, biochemical immune-related adverse events (irAEs) increased in tumor-bearing mice that received the additional adjuvant immunotherapy. Overall, our data suggest that shorter doses of neoadjuvant immunotherapy scheduled close to the time of surgery may optimize effective anti-tumor immunity and reduce severe irAEs.

Prospective cohort study of ultrasound surveillance of regional lymph nodes in patients with intermediate-risk cutaneous melanoma

Background

For patients with intermediate‐thickness melanoma, surveillance of regional lymph node basins by clinical examination alone has been reported to result in a larger number of lymph nodes involved by melanoma than if patients had initial sentinel node biopsy and completion dissection. This may result in worse regional control. A prospective study of both regular clinical examination and ultrasound surveillance was conducted to assess the effectiveness of these modalities.

Methods

Between 2010 and 2014, patients with melanoma of thickness 1·2–3·5 mm who had under‐gone wide local excision but not sentinel node biopsy were recruited to a prospective observational study of regular clinical and ultrasound nodal surveillance. The primary endpoint was nodal burden within a dissected regional lymph node basin. Secondary endpoints included locoregional or distant relapse, progression‐free and overall survival.

Results

Ninety patients were included in the study. After a median follow‐up of 52 months, ten patients had developed nodal relapse as first recurrence, four had locoregional disease outside of an anatomical nodal basin as the first site of relapse and six had relapse with distant disease. None of the patients who developed relapse within a nodal basin presented with unresectable nodal disease. The median number of involved lymph nodes in patients undergoing lymphadenectomy for nodal relapse was 1 (range 1–2; mean 1·2).

Conclusion

This study suggests that ultrasound surveillance of regional lymph node basins is safe for patients with melanoma who undergo a policy of nodal surveillance.

Checkpoint Inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Treatment with checkpoint inhibitors such as anti-programmed death-1 (anti-PD-1), anti-PD-ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1), and anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (anti-CTLA-4) antibodies can prolong the survival of cancer patients, but it also induces autoimmune side effects in 86-96% of patients by activating the immune system. In 17-59% of patients, these are severe or even life-threatening.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent articles retrieved by a search in PubMed and on an evaluation of a side-effect registry.

RESULTS

Checkpoint-inhibitor-induced autoimmune side effects manifest themselves in all organ systems, most commonly as skin lesions (46-62%), autoimmune colitis (22-48%), autoimmune hepatitis (7-33%), and endocrinopathies (thyroiditis, hypophysitis, adrenalitis, diabetes mellitus; 12-34%). Rarer side effects include pneumonitis (3-8%), nephritis (1-7%), cardiac side effects including cardiomyositis (5%), and neurological side effects (1-5%). Severe (sometimes lethal) side effects arise in 17-21%, 20-28%, and 59% of patients undergoing anti-PD-1 and anti- CTLA-4 antibody treatment and the approved combination therapy, respectively. With proper monitoring, however, these side effects can be recognized early and, usually, treated with success. Endocrine side effects generally require long-term hormone substitution. Patients who have stopped taking checkpoint inhibitors because of side effects do not show a poorer response of their melanoma or shorter survival in comparison to patients who continue to take checkpoint inhibitors.

CONCLUSION

The complex management of checkpoint-inhibitor-induced side effects should be coordinated in experienced centers. The creation of an interdisciplinary "tox team" with designated experts for organ-specific side effects has proven useful. Prospective registry studies based on structured documentation of side effects in routine clinical practice are currently lacking and urgently needed.

Reprogramming lymphocytes for the treatment of melanoma: From biology to therapy

This decade has introduced drastic changes in melanoma therapy, predominantly due to the materialization of the long promise of immunotherapy. Cytotoxic T cells are the chief component of the immune system, which are targeted by different strategies aimed to increase their capacity against melanoma cells. To this end, reprogramming of T cells occurs by T cell centered manipulation, targeting the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment or altering the whole patient. These are enabled by delivery of small molecules, functional monoclonal antibodies, different subunit vaccines, as well as living lymphocytes, native or genetically engineered. Current FDA-approved therapies are focused on direct T cell manipulation, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors blocking CTLA-4 and/or PD-1, which paves the way for an effective immunotherapy backbone available for combination with other modalities. Here we review the biology and clinical developments that enable melanoma immunotherapy today and in the future.

The eighth edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) melanoma staging system: implications for melanoma treatment and care

INTRODUCTION

The eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) melanoma staging system was implemented in the United States on 1 January 2018. Areas covered: This article provides an overview of important changes in the eighth edition AJCC staging system from the seventh edition based on analyses of a large international melanoma database. The clinical implications of these changes for melanoma treatment are also discussed. Expert commentary: A standardized and contemporary cancer staging system that facilitates accurate risk stratification is essential to guide patient treatment. The eighth edition of the AJCC staging system is currently the most widely accepted approach to melanoma staging and classification at initial diagnosis.

Immune Checkpoint Blockade across the Cancer Care Continuum

Four studies recently reported in the New England Journal of Medicine highlight advances in treatment with immune checkpoint blockade across the cancer care continuum. These findings demonstrate efficacy of these agents in the treatment of early and late-stage disease, as monotherapy or in combination, and in addition to-or in place of-standard front-line therapy.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced pancreatic injury

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-induced pancreatic injury (ICIPI) is not well documented in the literature. We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients who developed ICIPI.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients who had a confirmed diagnosis of ICIPI (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade ≥ 3 lipase elevation with or without clinical symptoms) from April 2011 through April 2018.

RESULTS

Among the 2,279 patients received ICI and had lipase values checked thereafter, 82 (4%) developed ICIPI. Overall, 65% of patients received inhibitors of programmed death protein-1 or its ligand. Compared with asymptomatic presentation, patients who had clinical symptoms of pancreatitis (n = 32) had higher levels of lipase (P = 0.032), more frequent imaging evidence of pancreatitis (P = 0.055), and more frequent hospitalization (P < 0.001) and received intravenous fluids (P < 0.001) and steroids more frequently (P = 0.008). Twelve patients (15%) developed long-term adverse outcomes of ICIPI; three had chronic pancreatitis, four had recurrence of ICIPI, and six had subsequent diabetes. Among 35 patients who resumed ICI therapy, four (11%) had recurrence of lipase elevation. Logistic regression revealed that smoking and hyperlipidemia were associated with increased risk for long-term adverse outcomes of ICIPI, and intravenous fluids were associated with reduced risk. Patients who resumed ICI therapy survived longer than patients who discontinued ICI therapy permanently, statistically not significant (P = 0.0559). Patients who developed long-term adverse outcomes of ICIPI survived significantly longer than those who did not (P = 0.0295). The highest proportion of patients (6/21, 29%) developed long-term adverse outcomes of ICIPI was among those without typical symptoms of pancreatitis, continued ICI therapy after ICIPI, and did not receive intravenous fluids.

CONCLUSION

ICIPI can present as typical acute pancreatitis, with risk of the development of a pseudocyst, diabetes, and chronic pancreatitis. ICI resumption after ICIPI may lead to recurrence of lipase elevation without increased risk of long-term adverse outcomes, and can increase survival duration. Intravenous fluids may prevent long-term adverse outcomes, but steroids do not appear to affect outcomes of ICIPI. Asymptomatic ICIPI presentation may lead to undertreatment of ICIPI owing to underestimation of its degree, and therefore, intravenous fluid administration could potentially could potentially be benificial to prevent long-term adverse outcomes even in asymptomatic patients.

A systematic review of adverse events in randomized trials assessing immune checkpoint inhibitors

The advent of immune checkpoint-inhibitors (CPI) has transformed treatment for several cancer types. This review was performed to assess the rate of adverse events (AEs) associated with the use of CPI, alone or in combinations. A review of AEs reporting quality was also performed. All publications of Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) assessing CPI published before December 2017 were included. To investigate the quality of AEs reporting, a set of items was defined based on the 2004 CONSORT harms extension statement. Rates of Grade 5, serious, and study-withdrawal related AEs were collected in each treatment category. Specific immune related AEs (irAEs) were also collected when available. Pooled estimates of adverse event rates were calculated by using generalized linear mixed model. A total of 35 RCTs including 16,485 patients were included. The overall quality of AEs reporting was satisfactory, but items pertaining to methods of data collection and analysis were infrequently reported. Grade ≥ 3 AEs were reported for 14% (95% CI 12-16) of patients treated with PD(L)-1 inhibitors, 34% (95% CI 27-42) of patients treated with CTLA-4 inhibitors, 55% (95% CI 51-59) of patients on CPI combinations and 46% (95% CI 40-53) of patients on immunotherapy-chemotherapy combination. The profile of irAEs was different among the treatment categories. The use of CPI, especially in combination, is associated with significant rates of Grade ≥ 3 AEs. Healthcare planning should anticipate the expected high number of patients presenting with irAEs in the future.

Revisiting the Clinical and Biologic Relevance of Partial PTEN Loss in Melanoma

The extent of PTEN loss that confers clinical and biological impact in melanoma is unclear. We evaluated the clinical and biologic relevance of PTEN dosage in melanoma and tested the postulate that partial PTEN loss is due to epigenetic mechanisms. PTEN expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry in a stage III melanoma cohort (n = 190) with prospective follow up. Overall, 21 of 190 (11%) tumors had strong PTEN expression, 51 of 190 (27%) had intermediate PTEN, 44 of 190 (23%) had weak PTEN, and 74 of 190 (39%) had absent PTEN. Both weak and absent PTEN expression predicted shorter survival in multivariate analyses (hazard ratio = 2.13, P < 0.01). We show a continuous negative correlation between PTEN and activated Akt in melanoma cells with titrated PTEN expression and in two additional independent tumor datasets. PTEN genomic alterations (deletion, mutation), promoter methylation, and protein destabilization did not fully explain PTEN loss in melanoma, whereas PTEN levels increased with treatment of melanoma cells with the histone deacetylase inhibitor LBH589. Our data indicate that partial PTEN loss is due to modifiable epigenetic mechanisms and drives Akt activation and worse prognosis, suggesting a potential approach to improve the clinical outcome for a subset of patients with advanced melanoma.

Stage III melanoma incidence and impact of transitioning to the 8th AJCC staging system: a US population-based study

Aim: To estimate incidence of stage III melanoma using the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging, 7th and 8th edition. Patients & methods: The SEER US cancer registry was analyzed (2010–2014). AJCC7 stages were recorded in the data; AJCC8 stages were inferred. Results: Of 106,195 melanoma patients, 7669 and 7342 had stage III melanoma by AJCC7 and AJCC8, respectively (95% overlap). Nearly 30% of patients with AJCC7 stage III melanoma were reclassified in a higher stage III group by AJCC8 versus 7% in lower stage group. Regardless of the AJCC edition, incidence of stage III melanoma has increased from 2010 to 2014 both overall and within each stage III group. Conclusion: Providing appropriate management to this growing population of high-risk patients is a priority.

Nivolumab and ipilimumab: immunotherapy for treatment of malignant melanoma

As recently as 10 years ago, a diagnosis of metastatic melanoma was considered fatal, with a prognosis of typically 6 months or less from diagnosis. The development of checkpoint inhibitors, such as ipilimumab and nivolumab, which modulate the effects of the CTLA-4 and PD-1, respectively, has revolutionized outcomes for these patients. Monotherapy improves metastatic disease survival, but dual therapy provides greater benefit with 58% of patients alive at 3 years. Combination immunotherapy is even active in brain metastases. In the adjuvant setting, data show that at 1 year over 70% patients remain disease-free with PD-1 blockade. Immunotherapy is generally safe and well tolerated. However, treatment-related endocrinopathies require long-term medications. Nowadays, advanced cutaneous melanoma is a more manageable disease.

Cytokine Therapy

The processes controlled by cytokines may be co-opted by pathologic states, contributing to processes that threaten host well-being. A nuanced understanding of this immense web of chemical communications will allow us to understand the mechanisms and limitations of current therapies and to enhance their therapeutic benefits while minimizing their toxicities. This article reviews the current state of cytokine science in malignancy, focusing on agents that are approved for therapy or are in late-stage development. Promising new directions, including novel engineered.

Targeted Therapy and Immunotherapy for Melanoma in Japan

OPINION STATEMENT

Melanoma has several clinically and pathologically distinguishable subtypes, which also differ genetically. Mutation patterns vary among different melanoma subtypes, and efficacy of immune-checkpoint inhibitors differs depending on the subtype of melanoma. In spite of the recent revolution of systemic therapies for advanced melanoma, access to innovative agents is still restricted in many countries. This review article aimed to describe the epidemiology and current status of systemic therapies for melanoma in Japan, where melanoma is rare, but access to innovative agents is available. Acral and mucosal melanomas, which are common in Asian populations, predominantly occur in sun-protected areas and share several biological features. Both the melanomas harbor KIT mutation in approximately 15% of the cases; BRAF or NRAS mutation is found in approximately 10-15% of acral melanoma, but these mutations are less frequent in mucosal melanoma. Combined use of BRAF and MEK inhibitors is one of the standards of care for patients with advanced BRAF-mutant melanoma. In patients with melanoma harboring KIT mutation in exon 11 or 13, KIT inhibitors can be a treatment option; however, none of them have been approved in Japan. Immune-checkpoint inhibitors are expected to be less effective against acral and mucosal melanomas because their somatic mutation burden is lower than those in non-acral cutaneous melanomas. A recently completed phase II trial of nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy in 30 Japanese patients with melanoma, including seven with acral and 12 with mucosal melanoma, demonstrated an objective response rate of 43%. Regarding oncolytic viruses, canerpaturev (C-REV, also known as HF10) and talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) are currently under review in early phase trials. In the adjuvant setting, dabrafenib plus trametinb combination, nivolumab monotherapy, and pembrolizumab monotherapy were approved in July, August, and December 2018 in Japan, respectively. However, most of the adjuvant phase III trials excluded patients with mucosal melanoma. A phase III trial of adjuvant therapy with locoregional interferon (IFN)-β versus surgery alone is ongoing in Japan (JCOG1309, J-FERON), in which IFN-β is injected directly into the site of the primary tumor postoperatively, so that it would be drained through the untreated lymphatic route to the regional node basin. After the recent approval of these new agents, the JCOG1309 trial will be revised to focus on patients with stage II disease. In conclusion, acral and mucosal melanomas have been treated based on the available medical evidence for the treatment of non-acral cutaneous melanomas. Considering the differences in genetic backgrounds and therapeutic efficacy of immunotherapy, specialized therapeutic strategies for these subtypes of melanoma should be established in the future.

A Comparison of Grade 4 Lymphopenia With Proton Versus Photon Radiation Therapy for Esophageal Cancer

Purpose

Grade 4 lymphopenia (G4L) during radiation therapy (RT) is associated with higher rates of distant metastasis and decreased overall survival in a number of malignancies, including esophageal cancer (EC). Through a reduction in integral radiation dose, proton RT (PRT) may reduce G4L relative to photon RT (XRT). The purpose of this study was to compare G4L in patients with EC undergoing PRT versus XRT.

Methods and materials

Patients receiving curative-intent RT and concurrent chemotherapy for EC were identified. Lymphocyte nadir was defined as the lowest lymphocyte count during RT. G4L was defined as absolute lymphocyte count <200/mm³. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses (MVA) were performed to assess patient and treatment factors associated with lymphopenia. A propensity-matched (PM) cohort was created using logistic regression, including baseline covariates.

Results

A total of 144 patients met the inclusion criteria. The median age was 66 years (range, 32-85 years). Of these patients, 79 received XRT (27% 3-dimensional chemo-RT and 73% intensity modulated RT) and 65 received PRT (100% pencil-beam scanning). Chemotherapy consisted of weekly carboplatin and paclitaxel (99%). There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the groups, except for age (median 4 years older in the PRT cohort). G4L was significantly higher in patients who received XRT versus those who received PRT (56% vs 22%; P < .01). On MVA, XRT (odds ratio [OR]: 5.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.35-11.18; P < .001) and stage III/IV (OR: 4.54; 95% CI, 1.87-11.00; P < .001) were associated with G4L. PM resulted in 50 PRT and 50 XRT patients. In the PM cohort, G4L occurred in 60% of patients who received XRT versus 24% of patients who received PRT. On MVA, XRT (OR: 5.28; 95% CI, 2.14-12.99; P < .001) and stage III/IV (OR: 3.77; 95% CI, 1.26-11.30; P = .02) were associated with G4L.

Conclusions

XRT was associated with a significantly higher risk of G4L in comparison with PRT. Further work is needed to evaluate a potential association between RT modality and antitumor immunity as well as long-term outcomes.

E3611-A Randomized Phase II Study of Ipilimumab at 3 or 10 mg/kg Alone or in Combination with High-Dose Interferon-α2b in Advanced Melanoma

PURPOSE

Interferon-α favors a Th1 shift in immunity, and combining with ipilimumab (ipi) at 3 or 10 mg/kg may downregulate CTLA4-mediated suppressive effects, leading to more durable antitumor immune responses. A study of tremelimumab and high-dose interferon-α (HDI) showed promising efficacy, supporting this hypothesis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

E3611 followed a 2-by-2 factorial design (A: ipi10+HDI; B: ipi10; C: ipi3+HDI; D: ipi3) to evaluate (i) no HDI versus HDI (across ipilimumab doses) and (ii) ipi3 versus ipi10 (across HDI status). We hypothesized that median progression-free survival (PFS) would improve from 3 to 6 months with HDI versus no HDI and with ipi10 versus ipi3.

RESULTS

For eligible and treated patients (N = 81) at a median follow-up time of 29.8 months, median PFS was 4.4 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.7-8.2] when ipilimumab was used alone and 7.5 months (95% CI, 5.1-11.0) when HDI was added. Median PFS was 3.8 months (95% CI, 2.6-7.5) with 3 mg/kg ipilimumab and 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.1-13.5) with 10 mg/kg. By study arm, median PFS was 8.0 months (95% CI, 2.8-20.2) in arm A, 6.2 months (95% CI, 2.7-25.7) in B, 5.7 months (95% CI, 1.5-11.1) in C, and 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.6-5.7) in D. The differences in PFS and overall survival (OS) did not reach statistical significance. Adverse events were consistent with the known profiles of ipilimumab and HDI and significantly higher with HDI and ipi10.

CONCLUSIONS

Although PFS was increased, the differences resulting from adding interferon-α or a higher dose of ipilimumab did not reach statistical significance and do not outweigh the added toxicity risks.

Revolutionizing treatment of advanced melanoma with immunotherapy

Until immunotherapy was developed, a diagnosis of metastatic melanoma was most often fatal. Programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) antibodies have been shown to work synergistically to treat metastatic disease throughout the body and brain. Today, over half of patients diagnosed with stage IV disease are alive after 3 years. In the adjuvant setting, 70% patients remain disease free with PD-1 blockade after 1 year. These treatments are generally safe and well tolerated. However, treatment-related endocrinopathies require long-term medications. With better therapies producing more durable responses, advanced cutaneous melanoma is dramatically more manageable now than ever before.

The evolving role of immuno-oncology for the treatment of head and neck cancer

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that target immune co‐signaling pathways have the potential to enable immune mediated tumor eradication. While early adoption of these agents for the treatment of advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) has produced some astounding clinical successes, the majority of patients fail to respond to therapy. The purpose of this review is to first provide a broad overview of the immuno‐oncology (I‐O) landscape and to then focus on the current status of mAb‐based I‐O (mAb:I‐O) for the treatment of SCCHN, with particular attention to the development of strategies for improving treatment responses.

5-(3,3-Dimethyle-1-Triazeno) Imidazole-4-Carboxamide and Interleukin-2 Adjuvant Therapy in Resected High-Risk Primary and Regionally Metastatic Melanoma

BACKGROUND

In the precheckpoint inhibitor era, high-dose interferon was the only approved adjuvant therapy for high-risk melanoma. In this manuscript, we analyze the recurrence-free survival, overall survival and toxicity profile of adjuvant treatment with interleukin-2 (IL-2) and 5-(3,3-dimethyle-1-triazeno) imidazole-4-carboxamide (DTIC) for resected high-risk melanoma patients.

METHODS

All patients with stage IIB, IIC or stage III melanoma who were treated with DTIC/IL-2 combination therapy at a single institution from 2000 to 2010 were identified from the University of Louisville Hospital medical record. Patients received 6 months of subcutaneous IL-2 (12 × 10⁶ units days 1-4) and intravenous DTIC (750 mg/m² day 1 of each cycle) every 28 days for 6 cycles. Individual medical records were accessed to collect the data.

RESULTS

Of the 112 patients treated, all underwent surgical resection and then received adjuvant treatment. A total of 58.7% of the patients were male, 42.2% female; 99% were Caucasian. A total of 79 (72.5%) of the patients were alive at the time of analysis and 57 (47.7%) patients were currently event free. A total of 69 (63.3%) patients completed all 6 months of adjuvant combination treatment with 13.8% of the patients requiring IL-2 and 21.1% of the patients requiring DTIC dose reduction. Five year overall survival was 75.57% with recurrence-free survival of 53.05%.

CONCLUSIONS

For several decades, there has not been an ideal adjuvant treatment for patients with resected high risk melanoma. Our retrospective analysis suggests that combination therapy with DTIC/IL-2 is beneficial and relatively well tolerated as an alternative adjuvant treatment for patients with high-risk melanoma.

Malignant Melanoma: Diagnostic and Management Update

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Summarize the changes to the American Joint Committee on Cancer Eighth Edition Melanoma Staging System. 2. List advances in genetic, molecular, and histopathologic melanoma diagnosis and prognostication. 3. Recommend sentinel lymph node biopsy and appropriate surgical margins based on individualized patient needs. 4. Recognize the currently available treatments for in-transit metastasis and advanced melanoma. 5. Describe current and future therapies for melanoma with distant visceral or brain metastases.

SUMMARY

Strides in melanoma surveillance, detection, and treatment continue to be made. The American Joint Committee on Cancer Eighth Edition Cancer Staging System has improved risk stratification of patients, introduced new staging categories, and resulted in stage migration of patients with improved outcomes. This review summarizes melanoma advances of the recent years with an emphasis on the surgical advances, including techniques and utility of sentinel node biopsy, controversies in melanoma margin selection, and the survival impact of time-to-treatment metrics. Once a disease manageable only with surgery, a therapeutic paradigm shift has given a more promising outlook to melanoma patients at any stage. Indeed, a myriad of novel, survival-improving immunotherapies have been introduced for metastatic melanoma and more recently in the high-risk adjuvant setting.

Melanom

Das Melanom ist der gefährlichste Hautkrebs mit der höchsten Sterblichkeitsrate, der schon bei jungen Menschen auftreten kann und seit Jahrzehnten steigende Inzidenz verzeichnet (Jemal et al. 2007; Little et al. 2012). Jährlich erkranken weltweit etwa 137.000 Menschen am Melanom und 37.000 versterben an der Erkrankung (Boyle et al. 2004). Die Inzidenz liegt weltweit jährlich bei 2,3–2,6/100.000 Einwohner (Pisani et al. 2002). In Deutschland beträgt die Inzidenz 19,2/100.000 Einwohner und es verstarben 2711 Betroffene im Jahre 2010 (Statistisches Bundesamt).

Incidence of Ipilimumab-Related Serious Adverse Events in Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background: Little is known about the incidence of ipilimumab-related serious adverse events (SAEs) across various tumor types, drug doses and treatment regimens.

Methods: PubMed database was searched up to November, 2017 to identify prospective clinical trials of ipilimumab therapy for adult patients with cancer. Comparisons of the incidence were based on the χ² test in univariate analysis and the logistic regression model in multivariate analysis.

Results: Twenty-four studies (4549 patients) with 35 independent study cohorts (21 melanoma, 6 prostate cancer, 5 NSCLC, and 3 SCLC cohorts) of ipilimumab were included in the meta-analysis. The overall incidence of SAEs during ipilimumab mono-therapy was 26.1% (95% CI, 21.1%-31.8%). SAEs were more frequent in the 10 mg/kg groups than in the 3 mg/kg groups (35.9% vs 17.3%; P < 0.001). Combination therapy showed significantly higher incidence than mono-therapy in melanoma (33.8% vs 25.0%; P = 0.002). After adjustment for potential confounders, multivariable analyses demonstrated lower odds of SAEs in NSCLC (odds ratio [OR] 0.52, 95% CI 0.40-0.69, P < 0.001) and SCLC (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.31-0.54, P < 0.001) compared with melanoma. The 10mg/kg cohort presented significantly higher odds than the 3mg/kg (OR 2.84, 95% CI 2.35-3.43, P < 0.001). The combination therapy showed significantly higher odds than the mono-therapy (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.11-1.71, P = 0.003).

Conclusions: The incidence of ipilimumab-related SAEs was higher in melanoma, the 10mg/kg group and during combination therapy. Clinicians should enhance awareness of these risk factors in clinical practice and carefully monitor patients.

Updates in adjuvant systemic therapy for melanoma

There has been a rapid increase in adjuvant therapies approved for treatment following surgical resection of stages III/IV melanoma. We review current indications for adjuvant therapy, which currently includes a heterogenous group of stages III and IV patients with melanoma. We describe several pivotal clinical trials of systemic immune therapies, targeted immune therapies, and adjuvant vaccine strategies. Finally, we discuss the evidence for selecting the most appropriate treatment regimen(s) for the individual patient.

Vulvar malignant melanoma: Pathogenesis, clinical behaviour and management: Review of the literature

Vulvar malignant melanoma (VMM) is a rare disease, accounting for 5% of all vulvar malignancies and is characterized by low survival and high recurrence rates. It is considered as a distinct entity of mucosal melanoma. Prognostic factors are higher age, advanced Breslow thickness, and lymph node involvement whilst central localization and ulceration status are still under debate. Surgery is the cornerstone for the treatment of primary VMM, however, it can be mutilating due to the anatomical location of the disease. Elective lymph node dissection is not part of standard care. The value of sentinel lymph node biopsy in VMM is still being studied. Radiation therapy and chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment do not benefit survival. Immunotherapy in cutaneous melanoma has shown promising results but clinical studies in VMM are scarce. In metastatic VMM, checkpoint inhibitors and in case of BRAF or KIT mutated metastatic VMM targeted therapy have shown clinical efficacy. In this review, we present an overview of clinical aspects, clinicopathological characteristics and its prognostic value and the latest view on (adjuvant) therapy and follow-up.

Re-examining the role of adjuvant radiation therapy

Previously important roles for adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) in melanoma patients included improved regional control after resection of high-risk nodal disease, to reduce local recurrence for desmoplastic, and other subtypes of melanoma with neurotropism, reducing in-brain relapse of brain metastases after surgery and other situations on a case-by-case basis. This review evaluates the integration of adjuvant RT into clinical practice at this time of rapidly evolving knowledge and improving outcomes from effective systemic therapy.