Adjuvant Dabrafenib plus Trametinib in Stage III BRAF-Mutated Melanoma

Considering adjuvant therapy for stage II melanoma

Melanoma is among the few cancers that demonstrate an increasing incidence over time. Simultaneously, this trend has been marked by an epidemiologic shift to earlier stage at diagnosis. Before 2011, treatment options were limited for patients with metastatic disease, and the median overall survival was less than 1 year. Since then, the field of melanoma therapeutics has undergone major changes. The use of anti–CTLA‐4 and anti‐PD1 immune checkpoint inhibitors and combination BRAF/MEK inhibitors for patients with BRAF V600 mutations has significantly extended survival and allowed some patients to remain in durable disease remission off therapy. It has now been confirmed that these classes of agents have a benefit for patients with stage III melanoma after surgical resection, and anti‐PD1 and BRAF/MEK inhibitors are standards of care in this setting. Some patients with stage II disease (lymph node‐negative; American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IIB and IIC) have worse melanoma‐specific survival relative to some patients with stage III disease. Given these results, expanding the population of patients who are considered for adjuvant therapy to include those with stage II melanoma has become a priority, and randomized phase 3 clinical trials are underway. Moving into the future, the validation of patient risk‐stratification and treatment‐benefit prediction models will be important to improve the number needed to treat and limit exposure to toxicity in the large population of patients with early stage melanoma.

Adjuvant therapy has improved outcomes in patients with stage III melanoma and is being explored in those with stage II melanoma. Stage III data as well as risk‐stratification tools and clinical considerations for the lymph node‐negative population are reviewed.

Adjuvant bevacizumab for melanoma patients at high risk of recurrence: survival analysis of the AVAST-M trial

Background

Bevacizumab is a recombinant humanised monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor shown to improve survival in advanced solid cancers. We evaluated the role of adjuvant bevacizumab in melanoma patients at high risk of recurrence.

Patients and methods

Patients with resected AJCC stage IIB, IIC and III cutaneous melanoma were randomised to receive either adjuvant bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg i.v. 3 weekly for 1 year) or standard observation. The primary end point was detection of an 8% difference in 5-year overall survival (OS) rate; secondary end points included disease-free interval (DFI) and distant metastasis-free interval (DMFI). Tumour and blood were analysed for prognostic and predictive markers.

Results

Patients (n=1343) recruited between 2007 and 2012 were predominantly stage III (73%), with median age 56 years (range 18–88 years). With 6.4-year median follow-up, 515 (38%) patients had died [254 (38%) bevacizumab; 261 (39%) observation]; 707 (53%) patients had disease recurrence [336 (50%) bevacizumab, 371 (55%) observation]. OS at 5 years was 64% for both groups [hazard ratio (HR) 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82–1.16, P = 0.78). At 5 years, 51% were disease free on bevacizumab versus 45% on observation (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.74–0.99, P = 0.03), 58% were distant metastasis free on bevacizumab versus 54% on observation (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.78–1.07, P = 0.25). Forty four percent of 682 melanomas assessed had a BRAF^V600 mutation. In the observation arm, BRAF mutant patients had a trend towards poorer OS compared with BRAF wild-type patients (P = 0.06). BRAF mutation positivity trended towards better OS with bevacizumab (P = 0.21).

Conclusions

Adjuvant bevacizumab after resection of high-risk melanoma improves DFI, but not OS. BRAF mutation status may predict for poorer OS untreated and potential benefit from bevacizumab.

Clinical Trial Information

ISRCTN 81261306; EudraCT Number: 2006-005505-64

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for melanoma. Part 2: Treatment - Update 2019

A unique collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Dermatology Forum, the European Association of Dermato-Oncology and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed to make recommendations on cutaneous melanoma diagnosis and treatment, based on systematic literature reviews and the experts' experience. Cutaneous melanomas are excised with 1- to 2-cm safety margins. Sentinel lymph node dissection shall be performed as a staging procedure in patients with tumour thickness ≥1.0 mm or ≥0.8 mm with additional histological risk factors, although there is as yet no clear survival benefit for this approach. Therapeutic decisions in stage III/IV patients should be primarily made by an interdisciplinary oncology team ("Tumor Board"). Adjuvant therapies in stage III/IV patients are primarily anti-PD-1, independent of mutational status, or dabrafenib plus trametinib for BRAF-mutant patients. In distant metastasis, either resected or not, systemic treatment is indicated. For first-line treatment, particularly in BRAF wild-type patients, immunotherapy with PD-1 antibodies alone or in combination with CTLA-4 antibodies shall be considered. In particular scenarios for patients with stage IV melanoma and a BRAF-V600 E/K mutation, first-line therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors can be offered as an alternative to immunotherapy. In patients with primary resistance to immunotherapy and harbouring a BRAF-V600 E/K mutation, this therapy shall be offered in second-line. Systemic therapy in stage III/IV melanoma is a rapidly changing landscape, and it is likely that these recommendations may change in the near future.

Correlation of Tumor Burden in Sentinel Lymph Nodes with Tumor Burden in Nonsentinel Lymph Nodes and Survival in Cutaneous Melanoma

PURPOSE

In patients with cutaneous melanoma, metastasis in a nonsentinel lymph node (non-SLN) is a strong independent adverse prognostic factor. However, patients with a tumor-involved SLN no longer routinely undergo completion lymph node dissection (CLND). We hypothesized that SLN tumor burden may predict non-SLN tumor burden.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

We compared tumor burden parameters between SLN and non-SLN in patients with cutaneous melanoma who underwent SLN biopsy with a positive SLN during 2003 to 2008 at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

RESULTS

We identified 336 eligible patients with a positive SLN. Of these, 308 (92%) underwent CLND, and 35 (10%) had non-SLN metastasis. The median follow-up time was 6.0 years. For patients with maximum diameter of tumor in the SLN ≤2.0 mm, >2.0-5.0 mm, and >5.0 mm, non-SLN metastasis was detected in 5 of 200 patients (3%), 10 of 63 patients (16%), and 20 of 57 patients (35%), and the mean maximum diameters of the non-SLN tumor deposits were 0.09, 1.56, and 2.71 mm, respectively (P < 0.0001). The percentage of patients with both subcapsular and intraparenchymal non-SLN tumor was higher for patients with SLN tumor in both locations than for patients with SLN tumor in only one location (P < 0.0001). Extranodal extension in a non-SLN was more common in patients with extranodal extension in an SLN (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with cutaneous melanoma who undergo CLND, SLN tumor burden predicts non-SLN tumor burden. SLN tumor burden parameters provide accurate prognostic stratification independent of non-SLN status and should be considered for incorporation into future staging systems and integrated risk models.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Was Associated With Favorable Survival Outcomes For Patients With Clinically Node-Negative Asian Melanoma

Purpose

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is the standard management for clinically node-negative cutaneous melanoma patients. This study aimed to evaluate the role of SLNB in Taiwanese melanoma patients and in particular, patients with acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM).

Patients and methods

We retrospectively analyzed the clinicopathological characteristics and survival outcomes of the patients who underwent primary surgery followed by either SLNB or nodal observation at the Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital from January 2000 to December 2011.

Results

Among the total of 209 patients, 127 underwent SLNB and 51 underwent nodal observation only after primary surgery. There were no significant differences in clinicopathological features between the two groups except that patients who underwent SLNB were older and had a higher rate of ALM than those under nodal observation. The median follow-up time was 43.5 months until July 2013. The patients who underwent SLNB had significantly better disease-free survival (DFS) (57.1 vs 18.7 months, p < 0.01) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) (112.4 vs 45.2 months, p < 0.01) than those under observation. Improvement in DFS (HR: 0.51, p < 0.01) and MSS (HR: 0.60, p = 0.03) was observed even after adjusting for age and disease pathology by multivariate analysis. This benefit of clinical outcomes persisted in patients with ALM, Breslow thickness ≤2 mm, or no ulceration, but not in patients with non-ALM, Breslow thickness >2 mm, or ulceration.

Conclusion

SLNB was associated with favorable outcomes in patients with clinically node-negative cutaneous melanoma, particularly in Taiwanese patients with ALM, Breslow thickness ≤2 mm, and nonulcerated melanoma.

Thick melanomas without lymph node metastases: A forgotten group with poor prognosis

INTRODUCTION

Although adjuvant therapy is available for melanoma patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN) metastases (pN+), this is not the case for thick melanomas without SLN involvement (pN-).

OBJECTIVES

We assessed overall and relative survival (OS, RS) in patients with >4.0 mm Breslow thickness (BT) pN- and pN + melanomas and ≤4.0  mm pN+ patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinicopathological data were retrieved from a cohort of >4.0 mm thick and/or pN + melanoma patients in The Netherlands from 2000 to 2014. OS and RS was compared using Kaplan-Meier-curves. A Cox-regression-model was developed to assess determinants of OS in >4.0 mm pN- patients.

RESULTS

In 54 645 patients, 3940 (7.2%) had >4.0 mm thick melanomas. SLN biopsy was performed in 1150 (29.2%) patients. Five-year OS was 70.5% for >4.0 mm pN- and 48.1% for >4.0  mm pN+ patients (p < 0.001), with a decreasing trend in OS for every mm BT. Five-year OS in 1877 ≤ 4.0  mm pN+ patients was 71.5%, which was not different from >4.0 mm pN- (p = 0.24). Higher age, higher BT category, ulceration and male gender were significantly associated with poor survival in >4.0 mm pN- patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Thick pN- melanomas have a poor prognosis, comparable to that of less thick pN + melanomas, which is not accounted for in current guidelines. We encourage including these high-risk patients in adjuvant trials.

Preferences of Canadian patients and physicians for adjuvant treatments for melanoma

Background

Past research suggests that patients with early- and late-stage melanoma will endure adverse events and inconvenient treatment regimens for improved survival. Evidence about the preferences of Canadian patients and physicians for novel adjuvant treatments for melanoma is unavailable.

Methods

Patient and physician preferences for adjuvant treatments for melanoma were assessed in an online discrete choice experiment (dce). Treatment alternatives were characterized by 8 attributes with respect to dosing regimen, efficacy, and toxicities, with levels corresponding to those for dabrafenib-trametinib, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and interferon. For patients, the effects of melanoma on quality of life and ability to work and perform activities of daily living were also assessed. Patients were recruited by Canadian melanoma patient advocacy groups through e-mail and social media. Physicians were recruited by e-mail.

Results

Of 94 patients who started the survey, 51 completed 1 or more dce questions. Of 166 physicians sent the e-mail invitation, 18 completed 1 or more dce questions. For patients, an increased probability of remaining cancer-free over 21 months was the most important attribute. For physicians, an increased chance of the patient's remaining alive over 36 months was the most important attribute. Patients and physicians chose active treatment over no treatment 85% and 86% of the time respectively and a treatment with attributes consistent with dabrafenib-trametinib 71% and 67% of the time respectively. A substantial proportion of patients reported worrying about future diagnostic tests and their cancer coming back.

Conclusions

Canadian patients and physicians are generally concordant in their preferences for adjuvant melanoma treatments, preferring active treatment to no treatment and dabrafenib-trametinib to other options.

Impact of Effective Systemic Therapy on Metastasectomy in Stage IV Melanoma: A Matched-Pair Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although resection historically played a prominent role in the treatment of metastatic melanoma, recent advances have altered the therapeutic landscape, and potentially the role of surgery. We examined surgical selection and metastasectomy outcomes before and after the onset of the effective drug therapy era.

METHODS

Patients with stage IV melanoma were identified and characterized by treatment era (either 1965-2007 or 2008-2015) and by systemic therapy agents. BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors, as well as checkpoint inhibitors, were included as modern agents. Selection factors for metastasectomy were examined by era. A matched-pair analysis of outcomes of surgical and non-surgical patients receiving modern systemic agents was performed.

RESULTS

Among 2353 eligible patients, 1065 (45.2%) underwent surgical treatment. Factors associated with selection for metastasectomy in the early era included female sex, no prior stage III disease, single-organ involvement, and M1a (vs. M1c) disease (all p < 0.007). In the current era, the proportion of surgically treated patients increased modestly (54.5% vs. 44.7%, p = 0.02) and age was the only independent selection factor (p < 0.01). Surgery followed by modern therapy in 47 matched pairs was associated with higher 5-year melanoma-specific survival (MSS) versus modern therapy alone (58.8% vs. 38.9%, p = 0.049). Multivariable regression showed single-organ involvement (hazard ratio [HR] 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21-0.90, p = 0.02) and first-line surgery (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.23-0.98, p = 0.04), as well as use of modern agents (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.21-0.40, p < 0.001), were independently associated with improved MSS.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

While modern systemic agents have improved outcomes in stage IV melanoma, metastasectomy remains associated with favorable survival. Resection remains a viable therapeutic approach, possibly worthy of prospective evaluation.

Cost-effectiveness of dabrafenib and trametinib in combination as adjuvant treatment of BRAF V600E/K mutation-positive melanoma from a US healthcare payer perspective

Objective: The COMBI-AD trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of dabrafenib and trametinib in combination vs placebo as adjuvant treatment of patients with BRAF V600E/K mutation-positive resected Stage IIIA (lymph node metastasis >1 mm), IIIB, or IIIC melanoma. This analysis evaluated the cost-effectiveness of dabrafenib and trametinib vs observation from a US healthcare payer perspective.Methods: This evaluation employed a non-homogeneous, semi-Markov, cohort model with health states for relapse-free survival (RFS), post-locoregional recurrence (LR), post-distant recurrence (DR) receiving first-line treatment, and post-DR receiving second-line treatment. A 50-year modeling time horizon was used. Transition probabilities were estimated based on individual patient data (IPD) from the COMBI-AD trial. Health-state utilities were estimated using EuroQol (EQ-5D) index values from COMBI-AD and published sources. Direct medical costs associated with treatment of melanoma were considered, including costs of BRAF mutation testing, medication and administration costs for adjuvant and metastatic treatments, costs of treating recurrence, and costs of adverse events. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were discounted at 3.0% annually.Results: Compared with observation, adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib was estimated to result in a gain of 2.15 QALYs at an incremental cost of $74,518. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated to be $34,689 per QALY. In deterministic sensitivity analyses, the ICER was sensitive to the cost of dabrafenib and trametinib and the distribution used for projecting RFS beyond the end of follow-up in the COMBI-AD trial. At a cost-effectiveness threshold of $100,000 per QALY, the probability that dabrafenib and trametinib is cost-effective was estimated to be 92%.Conclusions: Given generally-accepted cost-effectiveness threshold values in the US, dabrafenib plus trametinib is likely to be a cost-effective adjuvant therapy for patients with BRAF mutation positive melanoma. These results may be useful for policy-makers in their deliberations regarding reimbursement and access to this treatment.

Adjuvant Treatment of Melanoma: Recent Developments and Future Perspectives

Surgical excision is the treatment of choice for early stage melanoma, and this strategy is initially curative for the vast majority of patients. However, only approximately 40-60% of high-risk patients who undergo surgery alone will be disease-free at 5 years. These patients will ultimately experience loco-regional relapse or relapse at distant sites. The main aim of adjuvant therapies is to reduce the recurrence rate of radically operated patients at high risk and to potentially improve survival. Recent practice changing results with immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies have been published in stage III/IV melanoma patients, after surgical complete resection, and have dramatically improved the landscape of adjuvant therapy. Interferon-α, ipilimumab, and more recently anti-programmed cell death protein-1 antibodies and BRAF inhibitors plus MEK inhibitors have been approved in the adjuvant setting by the US Food and Drug Administration; similarly, the same drugs are approved by the European Medicines Agency with the exception of ipilimumab. A completely new scenario is emerging in the neoadjuvant setting as well: in locally advanced or metastatic disease, patients may partially respond to neoadjuvant therapy and become virtually resectable with systemic control of disease. This review summarizes the current state of the field and describes new strategies tracing the history of adjuvant therapy in melanoma, with a view on future projects.

Challenges of targeting BRAF V600E mutations in adult primary brain tumor patients: a report of two cases

Aim: Therapeutic targeting of BRAF alterations in primary brain tumor patients has demonstrated clinical activity in case reports and early trials; however, there is limited high-level evidence of the efficacy. Patients & results: Targeting BRAF V600E mutations with concurrent dabrafenib and trametinib in anaplastic pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma resulted in a transient radiographic and clinical response and no therapeutic benefit in a patient with an epithelioid glioblastoma. Conclusion:BRAF/MEK inhibition did not produce a durable treatment effect in glioblastoma or pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma with BRAF V600E alterations. Heterogenicity of related cases in the literature makes an evaluation of efficacy BRAF targeting therapies in gliomas difficult and requires additional investigation.

Carbon-ion radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy for head and neck mucosal melanoma: Prospective observational study

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of carbon-ion radiotherapy in combination with chemotherapy using dacarbazine, nimustine, and vincristine (DAV therapy) in mucosal melanoma. Twenty-one patients with clinically localized mucosal melanoma of the head and neck were enrolled. The primary endpoint was 3-year overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included local control, progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse event occurrence. Carbon-ion radiotherapy with a dose of 57.6-64.0 Gy (relative biological effectiveness) in 16 fractions was delivered concurrently with DAV therapy, and 2 cycles of adjuvant DAV therapy were administered every 6 weeks. The median follow-up periods were 15.5 months for all patients, and 31.2 months for 12 surviving patients. All patients had locally advanced T4a or T4b disease in the rhino-sinus area. In 16 patients (76.2%), 3 cycles of planned DAV therapy were completed. The 3-year OS and PFS rates were 49.2% and 37.0% respectively. The 3-year local control rate was 92.3%. Eleven patients (52%) developed distant metastasis, which was the most frequent pattern of the first failure. Commonly presenting acute grade 2-3 toxicities associated with radiotherapy and chemotherapy were mucositis (11 patients [53%]) and leukopenia (9 patients [43%]), which improved with conservative therapy. None of the patients developed grade 3 or greater late toxicities. Carbon-ion radiotherapy in combination with DAV therapy led to excellent local control for advanced mucosal melanoma within acceptable toxicities. The efficacy of additional DAV therapy in improving survival was weaker than expected as distant metastases still occurred frequently. Trial registration no. UMIN000007939.

Identification of targetable BRAF ΔN486_P490 variant by whole-genome sequencing leading to dabrafenib-induced remission of a BRAF-mutant pancreatic adenocarcinoma

The tumor genome of a patient with advanced pancreatic cancer was sequenced to identify potential therapeutic targetable mutations after standard of care failed to produce any significant overall response. Matched tumor-normal whole-genome sequencing revealed somatic mutations in BRAF, TP53, CDKN2A, and a focal deletion of SMAD4 The BRAF variant was an in-frame deletion mutation (ΔN486_P490), which had been previously demonstrated to be a kinase-activating alteration in the BRAF kinase domain. Working with the Novartis patient assistance program allowed us to treat the patient with the BRAF inhibitor, dabrafenib. The patient's overall clinical condition improved dramatically with dabrafenib. Levels of serum tumor marker dropped immediately after treatment, and a subsequent CT scan revealed a significant decrease in the size of both primary and metastatic lesions. The dabrafenib-induced remission lasted for 6 mo. Preclinical studies published concurrently with the patient's treatment showed that the BRAF in-frame mutation (ΔNVTAP) induces oncogenic activation by a mechanism distinct from that induced by V600E, and that this difference dictates the responsiveness to different BRAF inhibitors. This study describes a dramatic instance of how high-level genomic technology and analysis was necessary and sufficient to identify a clinically logical treatment option that was then utilized and shown to be of clinical value for this individual.

Comparative efficacy and safety of dabrafenib in combination with trametinib versus competing adjuvant therapies for high-risk melanoma

Aim To conduct a systematic literature review of high-risk resectable cutaneous melanoma adjuvant therapeutics and compare safety and efficacy. Methods: The systematic literature review included randomized controlled trials investigating: dabrafenib plus trametinib (DAB + TRAM), nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, vemurafenib, chemotherapy and interferons. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival and safety. All outcomes were synthesized using Bayesian network meta-analysis. Results: Across relapse-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival and OS, DAB + TRAM had the lowest estimated hazards of respective events relative to all other treatments (exception relative to nivolumab in OS). Differences were significant relative to placebo, chemotherapy, interferons and ipilimumab. Conclusion: DAB + TRAM has improved efficacy over historical treatment options (ipilimumab, interferons and chemotherapy) and comparable efficacy with other targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Primary ovarian insufficiency associated with pazopanib therapy in a breast angiosarcoma patient: A CARE-compliant case report

RATIONAL

The growing population of young cancer survivors and a trend toward postponing pregnancy until later years in life are leading to a deeper attention towards understanding treatment-induced sequelae, and, in particular, the effects of cancer and/or treatment on fertility. Nowadays, the infertility risks potentially associated with molecular targeted therapies are not established, and clinical reports are sparse. Moreover, the increasing use of molecular targeted drugs in the adjuvant setting and in diseases with better prognosis makes preservation of fertility a major topic in current research.

PATIENT'S CONCERNS

Here, we report the case of an 18-year-old woman, with a 3-cm superficial lump of the right breast, who had no remarkable family or medical history. Menarche had occurred at the age of 14 years, with normal regular periods.

DIAGNOSIS

High-grade angiosarcoma, with metastatic progression and multiple relapse, was diagnosed.

INTERVENTIONS

After diagnosis, right radical mastectomy was carried out with no evidence of residual disease. No adjuvant treatment was delivered. Lymph node metastasis were found later and chemotherapy with doxorubicin 25 mg/m/day and ifosfamide 1 g/m/day (both on days 1-3) every 21 days was administered. During treatment, the patient reported menstrual irregularities but no amenorrhea. Due to further local relapse a few years later, the patient was treated for progressive metastatic disease with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m on days 1 and 8 every 21 days for 6 cycles, and underwent surgery, followed by pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, 50 mg/m on day 1 every 28 days. After further disease progression 5 years after first diagnosis, pazopanib was administered at a dose of 800 mg daily for 10 months.

OUTCOMES

The patient experienced a transient ovarian insufficiency possibly due to pazopanib. Since amenorrhea developed within 2 months from the initiation of pazopanib treatment and menses returned regularly only after discontinuation of the treatment itself.

LESSONS

This is the first case report that strongly suggests a correlation between pazopanib exposure and development of ovarian insufficiency. Our case tantalizes to inspire additional preclinical and clinical research on the true incidence, possible dose dependence, and reversibility of pazopanib (and other TKIs) -induced ovarian failure.

Use of circulating tumoral DNA to guide treatment for metastatic melanoma

The management of metastatic cutaneous melanoma is conditioned by the identification of BRAF-activating mutations in tumor DNA. Tumor genotyping is usually performed on DNA extracted from tissue samples. However, these invasive samples are rarely repeated during follow-up, and their analysis requires a sample pre-treatment which may take several weeks. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), released into blood by cancer cells, is a good alternative to tissue sampling. ctDNA is not subject to tumor heterogeneity, and can be analyzed rapidly, making possible the detection of mutations in emergency or in patients whose tumor cannot be sampled. ctDNA can also be analyzed repeatedly during follow-up, for postresection minimal residual disease assessment, for therapeutic response monitoring and for early relapse detection.

Tumor-intrinsic signaling pathways: key roles in the regulation of the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment

Immunotherapy is a currently popular treatment strategy for cancer patients. Although recent developments in cancer immunotherapy have had significant clinical impact, only a subset of patients exhibits clinical response. Therefore, understanding the molecular mechanisms of immunotherapy resistance is necessary. The mechanisms of immune escape appear to consist of two distinct tumor characteristics: a decrease in effective immunocyte infiltration and function and the accumulation of immunosuppressive cells in the tumor microenvironment. Several host-derived factors may also contribute to immune escape. Moreover, inter-patient heterogeneity predominantly results from differences in somatic mutations between cancers, which has led to the hypothesis that differential activation of specific tumor-intrinsic pathways may explain the phenomenon of immune exclusion in a subset of cancers. Increasing evidence has also shown that tumor-intrinsic signaling plays a key role in regulating the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment and tumor immune escape. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms underlying immune avoidance mediated by tumor-intrinsic signaling may help identify new therapeutic targets for expanding the efficacy of cancer immunotherapies.

[Stage III melanoma: Sentinel node biopsy, completion lymph node dissection and prospects of adjuvant therapy. A French national survey on current and envisaged practices]

BACKGROUND

The recent publication of randomized trials investigating the efficacy of adjuvant therapy and completion lymph node dissection at microscopic stage III melanoma calls for a reappraisal of melanoma management from different angles: indications for sentinel lymph node biopsy, indications for completion lymph node dissection in microscopic-stage disease, and adjuvant therapies. Our objective was to evaluate current practices and to question French onco-dermatologists about any changes they envisaged in their practices in the light of recent publications.

METHODS

We conducted a national survey among members of the Cutaneous Oncology Group of the French Society of Dermatology in October 2017.

RESULTS

Forty French health centers were included, and 53 individual responses were collected. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma was performed at 75 % of the centers. Before the summer of 2017 and the publication of MSLT-II (proving the absence of any therapeutic benefits for complete lymph node dissection in microscopic stage III melanoma), when a positive sentinel lymph node was diagnosed, immediate completion lymph node dissection was performed at 90 % of the centers. After the publication of MSLT-II, 45 % of the respondents considered stopping this practice. The risk-benefit ratio prompted prescription of nivolumab and of combined dabrafenib+trametinib as adjuvant therapy by respectively 96 % and 79 % of respondents, while the corresponding rates for interferon and ipilimumab were only 21 % and 15 %.

CONCLUSION

Early melanoma management stands on the verge of major changes thanks to the arrival of efficient adjuvant therapies and a decrease in immediate completion lymph node dissections for patients with microscopic stage III is also anticipated.

Resistance Mechanisms to SYK Inhibition in Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Spleen tyrosine kinase (SYK) is a nonmutated therapeutic target in acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Attempts to exploit SYK therapeutically in AML have shown promising results in combination with chemotherapy, likely reflecting induced mechanisms of resistance to single-agent treatment in vivo. We conducted a genome-scale open reading frame (ORF) resistance screen and identified activation of the RAS-MAPK-ERK pathway as one major mechanism of resistance to SYK inhibitors. This finding was validated in AML cell lines with innate and acquired resistance to SYK inhibitors. Furthermore, patients with AML with select mutations activating these pathways displayed early resistance to SYK inhibition. To circumvent SYK inhibitor therapy resistance in AML, we demonstrate that a MEK and SYK inhibitor combination is synergistic in vitro and in vivo. Our data provide justification for use of ORF screening to identify resistance mechanisms to kinase inhibitor therapy in AML lacking distinct mutations and to direct novel combination-based strategies to abrogate these. SIGNIFICANCE: The integration of functional genomic screening with the study of mechanisms of intrinsic and acquired resistance in model systems and human patients identified resistance to SYK inhibitors through MAPK signaling in AML. The dual targeting of SYK and the MAPK pathway offers a combinatorial strategy to overcome this resistance.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 161.

First Eastern European experience of isolated limb infusion for in-transit metastatic melanoma confined to the limb: Is it still an effective treatment option in the modern era?

BACKGROUND

Isolated limb infusion (ILI) with cytotoxic agents is a simple and effective treatment option for patients with melanoma in-transit metastases (ITMs) confined to an extremity. Data for ILIs performed in Europe are sparse and to date no Eastern European ILI experience has been reported. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy of ILI in Estonia.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data for twenty-one patients were collected and analysed. All patients had melanoma ITMs and underwent an ILI between January 2012 and May 2018. The cytotoxic drug combination of melphalan and actinomycin-D was used. Drug circulation times were 20-30 min under mildly hyperthermic conditions (38-39 °C). Primary outcome measures were treatment response and overall survival.

RESULTS

Nineteen lower limb and two upper limb ILIs were performed. The female to male ratio was 18:3. The overall response rate (complete + partial response) was 76% (n = 16), with a complete response in 38% (n = 8). The overall long-term limb salvage rate was 90% (n = 19). During follow-up, eight patients (38%) died, two due to metastatic melanoma. Five-year overall survival was 57%.

CONCLUSION

This first Eastern European report of ILI for melanoma ITMs shows results comparable to those from other parts of the world. In this era of effective targeted and immune therapies, ILI remains a useful treatment option, with a high overall response rate and durable responses in patients with melanoma ITMs confined to a limb.

Management of V600E and V600K BRAF-Mutant Melanoma

OPINION STATEMENT

The optimal management of advanced stage BRAF-mutated melanoma is widely debated and complicated by the availability of several different regimens that significantly improve outcomes but have not been directly compared. While there are many unanswered questions relevant to this patient population, the major uncertainty in current practice is the choice between BRAF/MEK inhibitors or immunotherapy for those with previously untreated metastatic or high-risk disease. Decisions regarding first line therapy should include consideration of patient preference as well as the presence of symptomatic metastatic disease and degree of comorbidity, particularly secondary to any history of severe auto-immune disorder.BRAF/MEK inhibitors have a high response rate and rapid onset and thus can be quickly introduced when patients are symptomatic. They have also produced long-term responses in a subset of patients with more favorable prognostic indicators. In addition, impressive survival benefits have also been observed in patients with resected stage 3 disease at high risk of recurrence. On the other hand, anti-PD-1 monotherapy is associated with high rates of clinical benefit (~45% response rate in the metastatic setting) and low rates of severe toxicity. In many patients with adverse prognostic features, we use combined anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 for metastatic disease. While associated with high rates of toxicity, adverse events are largely manageable with corticosteroids and treatment cessation, in which case patients may continue to benefit even after a limited duration of treatment.Multiple treatment options exist for patients with BRAF V600 mutant melanoma. Herein, we review the clinical data for safety and efficacy of these options.

An update on adjuvant systemic therapies in melanoma

There is a global increase in the incidence of melanoma, with approximately 300,000 new cases in 2018 worldwide, according to statistics from the International Agency for Research on Cancer. With this rising incidence, it is important to optimize treatment strategies in all stages of the disease to provide better patient outcomes. The role of adjuvant therapy in patients with resected stage 3 melanoma is a rapidly evolving field. Interferon was the first agent shown to have any utility in this space, however, recent advances in both targeted therapies and immunotherapies have led to a number of practice changing adjuvant trials in resected stage 3 disease.

Precision medicine, agriculture, and genome editing: science and ethics

The era of precision medicine has generated advances in various fields of science and medicine with the potential for a paradigm shift in healthcare delivery that will ultimately lead to an individualized approach to medicine. Such timely topics were explored in 2018 at a workshop held at the Third International Conference on One Medicine One Science (iCOMOS), in Minneapolis, Minnesota. A broad range of scientists and regulatory experts provided detailed insights into the challenges and opportunities associated with precision medicine and gene editing. There was a general consensus that advances in studying the genomic traits driving differential pharmacogenomics will undoubtedly enhance individualized treatments for a wide variety of diseases. Ethical considerations, societal implications, approaches for prioritizing safe and secure use of treatment modalities, and the advent of high-throughput computing and analysis of large, complex datasets were discussed. Large biobanks, such as the All of Us Research Program and the Veterans Affairs Million Veterans Program, can aid studies of various conditions in massive cohorts of patients. As the applications of precision medicine continue to mature, the full potential and promise of these individualized approaches will continue to yield important advances in transplant medicine, oncology, public health, agriculture, pharmacology, and bioinformatics.

The Role and Necessity of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Invasive Melanoma

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is a widely accepted procedure for melanoma staging and treatment. The development of lymphatic mapping and SLNB, which was first introduced in 1992, has enabled surgeons to detect microscopic nodal metastases and stage-negative regional nodal basins with low morbidity. SLNB has also facilitated the selective application of regional lymph node dissection for patients with microscopic nodal metastases, enabling unnecessary lymph node dissection. In contrast, recent major randomized phase III trials (DeCOG-SLT and MSLT–II trial) compared the clinical benefit of early completion lymph node dissection with observation after detecting microscopic nodal disease. The results of those studies indicated that there was no significant difference in the survival between the two groups, although regional control was superior after early completion lymph node dissection compared to that obtained after observation. Thus, the role and value of early completion lymph node dissection worldwide are currently very limited for patients with microscopic nodal disease. However, the use of SLNB is still controversial. In addition, the recent approval of adjuvant therapy using novel agents, such as anti-programmed death-1 antibodies, and molecular targeted therapeutics may influence the skipping of complete lymph node dissection in patients with micrometastatic nodal disease in a real-world setting. Furthermore, modern neoadjuvant therapy, which is now under investigation, may have the potential to change the surgical procedure used for nodal disease. Herein, we describe the current role and value of SLNB and completion lymph node dissection and discuss the major controversies as well as the favorable future outlook.

Health-related quality of life in patients with fully resected BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma receiving adjuvant vemurafenib

AIM OF STUDY

The aim of the study was to assess the impact of treatment with adjuvant vemurafenib monotherapy on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with resected stage IIC-IIIC melanoma.

METHODS

The phase 3 BRIM8 study (NCT01667419) randomised patients with BRAF^V600 mutation-positive resected stage IIC-IIIC melanoma to 960 mg of vemurafenib twice daily or matching placebo for 52 weeks (13 × 28-day cycles). Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) version 3 at baseline, cycle 1 (days 1, 15 and 22), cycle 2 (days 1 and 15), day 1 of every subsequent 4-week cycle, the end-of-treatment visit and each visit during the follow-up period.

RESULTS

Completion rates for the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire were high (>80%). There was a mean decline in the global health status (GHS)/quality of life (QOL) score of 17.4 (±22.9) and 17.3 (±24.1) points at days 15 and 22 of cycle 1, respectively, among vemurafenib-treated patients who recovered to approximately 10 points below baseline for the remainder of the treatment period. A similar trend was observed in all functional scales except for cognitive function (<10-point change from baseline at all visits) and in the symptom scores for appetite loss, fatigue and pain. As observed for the GHS/QOL score, all scores rapidly returned to baseline after completion of planned vemurafenib treatment or treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

The schedule of HRQOL assessments allowed for an accurate and complete evaluation of the impact of acute treatment-related symptoms. Vemurafenib-treated patients experience clinically meaningful moderate worsening in some treatment- or disease-related symptoms and GHS/QOL that resolve over time.

Combined ipilimumab and nivolumab first-line and after BRAF-targeted therapy in advanced melanoma

The combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab is a highly active systemic therapy for metastatic melanoma but can cause significant toxicity. We explore the safety and efficacy of this treatment in routine clinical practice, particularly in the setting of serine/threonine-protein kinase B-Raf (BRAF)-targeted therapy. Consecutive patients with unresectable stage IIIC/IV melanoma commenced on ipilimumab and nivolumab across 10 tertiary melanoma institutions in Australia were identified retrospectively. Data collected included demographics, response and survival outcomes. A total of 152 patients were included for analysis, 39% were treatment-naïve and 22% failed first-line BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 67% of patients, grade 3-5 in 38%. The overall objective response rate was 41%, 57% in treatment-naïve and 21% in BRAF/MEK failure patients. Median progression-free survival was 4.0 months (95% CI, 3.0-6.0) in the whole cohort, 11.0 months (95% CI, 6.0-NR) in treatment-naïve and 2.0 months (95% CI, 1.4-4.6) in BRAF/MEK failure patients. The combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab can be used safely and effectively in a real-world population. While first-line efficacy appears comparable to trial populations, BRAF-mutant patients failing prior BRAF/MEK inhibitors show less response.

Surgical Considerations and Systemic Therapy of Melanoma

Recent advances in effective medical therapies have markedly improved the prognosis for patients with advanced melanoma. This article aims to highlight the current era of integrated multidisciplinary care of patients with advanced melanoma by outlining current approved therapies, including immunotherapy, targeted therapy, radiation therapy, and other strategies used in both the adjuvant and the neoadjuvant setting as well as the evolving role of surgical intervention in the changing landscape of advanced melanoma.

Principles of Targeted Therapy for Melanoma

Targeted BRAF and MEK inhibition has become an appropriate first-line treatment of BRAF-mutant advanced cutaneous melanoma. The authors present an overview of the MAPK pathway as well as the other major pathways implicated in melanoma development. Melanoma brain metastases are a devastating complication of melanoma that can be traced to derangements in cell signaling pathways, and the current evidence for targeted therapy is reviewed. Finally, activating KIT mutations are rarely found to cause melanomas and may provide an actionable target for therapy. The authors review the current evidence for targeted KIT therapy and summarize the ongoing clinical trials.

Budget Impact of Dabrafenib and Trametinib in Combination as Adjuvant Treatment of BRAF V600E/K Mutation-Positive Melanoma from a U.S. Commercial Payer Perspective

BACKGROUND

Before the approval of dabrafenib and trametinib in combination, there were no approved therapies in the adjuvant setting that target the RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the budget impact of dabrafenib and trametinib in combination for adjuvant treatment of patients with BRAF V600 mutation-positive resected Stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC melanoma from a U.S. commercial payer perspective using data from the COMBI-AD trial, as well as other sources.

METHODS

The budget impact of dabrafenib and trametinib in combination for patients with BRAF V600E/K mutation-positive, resected Stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC melanoma was evaluated from the perspective of a hypothetical population of 1 million members with demographic characteristics consistent with those of a commercially insured U.S. insurance plan (i.e., adults aged less than 65 years) using an economic model developed in Microsoft Excel. The model compared melanoma-related health care costs over a 3-year projection period under 2 scenarios: (1) a reference scenario in which dabrafenib and trametinib are assumed to be unavailable for adjuvant therapy and (2) a new scenario in which the combination is assumed to be available. Treatments potentially displaced by dabrafenib and trametinib were assumed to include observation, high-dose interferon alpha-2b, ipilimumab, and nivolumab. Costs considered in the model include those of adjuvant therapies and treatment of locoregional and distant recurrences. The numbers of patients eligible for treatment with dabrafenib and trametinib were based on data from cancer registries, published sources, and assumptions. Treatment mixes under the reference and new scenarios were based on market research data, clinical expert opinion, and assumptions. Probabilities of recurrence and death were based on data from the COMBI-AD trial and an indirect treatment comparison. Medication costs were based on wholesale acquisition cost prices. Costs of distant recurrence were from a health insurance claims study.

RESULTS

In a hypothetical population of 1 million commercially insured members, 48 patients were estimated to become eligible for treatment with dabrafenib and trametinib in combination over the 3-year projection period; in the new scenario, 10 patients were projected to receive such treatment. Cumulative costs of melanoma-related care were estimated to be $6.3 million in the reference scenario and $6.9 million in the new scenario. The budget impact of dabrafenib and trametinib in combination was an increase of $549 thousand overall and 1.5 cents per member per month.

CONCLUSIONS

For a hypothetical U.S. commercial health plan of 1 million members, the budget impact of dabrafenib and trametinib in combination as adjuvant treatment for melanoma is likely to be relatively modest and within the range of published estimates for oncology therapies. These results may assist payers in making coverage decisions regarding the use of adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib in melanoma.

DISCLOSURES

Funding for this research was provided to Policy Analysis Inc. (PAI) by Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Stellato, Moynahan, and Delea are employed by PAI. Ndife, Koruth, Mishra, and Gunda are employed by Novartis. Ghate was employed by Novartis at the time of this study and is shareholder in Novartis, Provectus Biopharmaceuticals, and Mannkind Corporation. Gerbasi was employed by PAI at the time of this study and is currently an employee, and stockholder, of Sage Therapeutics. Delea reports grant funding from Merck and research funding from Amgen, Novartis, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Jazz, EMD Serono, and 21st Century Oncology, unrelated to this work.

Current management of patients with melanoma who are found to be sentinel node-positive

Background

The results of the DeCOG‐SLT and MSLT‐II studies, published in 2016 and mid‐2017, indicated no survival benefit from completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in melanoma patients with positive sentinel nodes (SNs). Subsequently, several studies have been published reporting a benefit of adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with stage III melanoma. The current study assessed how these findings influenced management of SN‐positive patients in a dedicated melanoma treatment centre.

Methods

SN‐positive patients treated at Melanoma Institute Australia between July 2017 and December 2018 were prospectively identified. Surgeons completed a questionnaire documenting the management of each patient. Information on patients, primary tumours, SNs, further treatment and follow‐up was collected from patient files, the institutional research database and pathology reports.

Results

During the 18‐month study period, 483 patients underwent SN biopsy. A positive SN was found in 61 (13%). Two patients (3%) requested CLND because of anxiety about observation in view of unfavourable primary tumour and SN characteristics. The other 59 patients (97%) were followed with a four‐monthly ultrasound examination of the relevant lymph node field(s). Two of them (3%) developed an isolated nodal recurrence after 4 and 11 months of follow‐up. Fifty‐seven patients (93%) were seen following the publication of the first two adjuvant systemic therapy studies in November 2017; 46 (81%) were referred to a medical oncologist to discuss adjuvant systemic therapy, which 32 (70%) chose to receive.

Conclusion

At Melanoma Institute Australia most patients with an involved SN are now managed without CLND. The majority are referred to a medical oncologist and receive adjuvant systemic therapy.

First-Line Treatment of Widely Metastatic BRAF-Mutated Salivary Duct Carcinoma With Combined BRAF and MEK Inhibition

Salivary duct carcinoma (SDC) is a rare and aggressive malignancy for which limited data exist to guide treatment decisions. With the advent of advanced molecular testing and tumor genomic profiling, clinicians now have the ability to identify potential therapeutic targets in difficult-to-treat cancers such as SDC. This report presents a male patient with widely metastatic SDC found on targeted next-generation sequencing to have a BRAF p.V600E mutation. He experienced a prolonged and robust response to first-line systemic chemotherapy with dabrafenib and trametinib. During his response interval, new data emerged to justify subsequent treatment with both an immune checkpoint inhibitor and androgen blockade after his disease progressed. To our knowledge, this is the first report of frontline BRAF-directed therapy eliciting a response in metastatic SDC.

The Prognosis and Natural History of In-Transit Melanoma Metastases at a High-Volume Centre

BACKGROUND

Patients with in-transit melanoma metastases (ITM) experience a diverse spectrum of clinical presentations and a highly variable disease course. There is no standardized treatment protocol for these patients due to the limited data comparing treatment modalities for ITM. This is the first study to describe the disease trajectory and natural history of a large cohort of patients with ITM.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients treated for ITM between 2004 and 2018 at the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre was performed. Clinical and pathological characteristics for primary and in-transit episodes were analyzed for predictors of relapse-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and melanoma-specific survival.

RESULTS

A total of 109 patients with 303 episodes of ITM were identified: 52 (48%) females, median age 70.1 years (range 35-92). The median RFS for all episodes was 5 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.2-5.7). Eighty-seven percent of episodes involving isolated in-transit lesions underwent surgical excision, compared with 17% involving more than five in-transit lesions. A trend was seen between a greater number of lesions and shorter RFS (p = 0.055). The median DMFS was 34.8 months (95% CI 22.8-51.6). Factors associated with shorter DMFS included primary tumor thickness (hazard ratio [HR] 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.15; p = 0.026), site of primary tumor (p = 0.008), and BRAF mutation (HR 2.12, 95% CI 1.14-3.94; p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Locoregional relapse is common in patients with ITM regardless of treatment modality. Characteristics of the ITM may predict for RFS, while primary tumor characteristics remain important predictors of DMFS.

Acute myeloid leukemia-induced T-cell suppression can be reversed by inhibition of the MAPK pathway

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remains difficult to treat due to mutational heterogeneity and the development of resistance to therapy. Targeted agents, such as MEK inhibitors, may be incorporated into treatment; however, the impact of MEK inhibitors on the immune microenvironment in AML is not well understood. A greater understanding of the implications of MEK inhibition on immune responses may lead to a greater understanding of immune evasion and more rational combinations with immunotherapies. This study describes the impact of trametinib on both T cells and AML blast cells by using an immunosuppressive mouse model of AML and primary patient samples. We also used a large AML database of functional drug screens to understand characteristics of trametinib-sensitive samples. In the mouse model, trametinib increased T-cell viability and restored T-cell proliferation. Importantly, we report greater proliferation in the CD8+CD44+ effector subpopulation and impaired activation of CD8+CD62L+ naive cells. Transcriptome analysis revealed that trametinib-sensitive samples have an inflammatory gene expression profile, and we also observed increased programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression on trametinib-sensitive samples. Finally, we found that trametinib consistently reduced PD-L1 and PD-L2 expression in a dose-dependent manner on the myeloid population. Altogether, our data present greater insight into the impact of trametinib on the immune microenvironment and characteristics of trametinib-sensitive patient samples.

Newly diagnosed papillary craniopharyngioma with BRAF V600E mutation treated with single-agent selective BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib: a case report

We report a case of a patient with newly diagnosed, locally extensive and cystic, suprasellar papillary craniopharyngioma successfully treated with single-agent Dabrafenib. The patient was symptomatic with gait imbalance with falls, lethargic episodes, fatigue and incontinence. Diagnostic imaging demonstrated a cystic suprasellar tumor extending into the third ventricle causing obstructive hydrocephalus. The tumor was partially debulked, and bilateral shunts were placed. NGS sequencing demonstrated BRAF V600E mutation, and the patient was prescribed dual agent Dabrafenib and Trametinib. However, due to insurance denial for Trametinib, he only received single-agent Dabrafenib (150mg BID). The treatment resulted in a major response (over two years), including reduction of the tumor cyst, and improvement of the clinical symptoms. No adverse events have been reported. The patient continues on Dabrafenib (150 mg BID) with a steady reduction in tumor size, and improvement in cognitive function leading to independent living.

Indirect comparison between immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies for the treatment of melanoma

Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to provide comparative and quantitative data about immune checkpoint inhibitor (IMM) and targeted therapy (TAR) in this work.

Methods: A literature search was performed with PubMed, Embase, PMC database, and Web of Science databases to identify relevant studies. Hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and odds ratios (ORs) for overall response rate (ORR) were estimated.

Results: Eighteen manuscripts were ultimately utilized for indirect comparisons. In general, both TAR and IMM can prolong the PFS either by monotherapy, combination therapy with chemotherapy or adjuvant therapy. BRAF inhibitor monotherapy showed superiority over anti-CTLA-4 in OS (HR: 1.28, 95%CI: 0.93-1.75) and best ORR (OR: 12.57, 95%CI: 6.63-23.82), as well as longer PFS (HR: 1.63, 95%CI: 1.00-2.67) and higher best ORR (OR: 3.29, 95%CI: 1.94-5.55) compared with anti-PD-1. However, MEK inhibitor monotherapy showed no priority. When combined with chemotherapy, anti-CTLA-4 showed marginally advantages over MEK inhibitor in OS (HR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.44-1.03), however no advantage in PFS (HR: 1.12, 95%CI: 0.76-1.64), or ORR (OR: 1.78, 95%CI: 0.70-4.49). For post-operational melanoma patient, adjuvant TAR and adjuvant IMM showed no difference in OS (HR: 1.14, 95%CI: 0.82-1.58) or PFS (HR: 1.20, 95%CI: 0.79-1.83). Moreover, the high-rate adverse events and underlying diseases should be considered during the application of those agents.

Conclusions: For the unresectable late-stage melanoma, IMM may be a better choice for the combined treatment with chemotherapy. If the chemotherapy is not tolerable for patients, BRAFi involved TAR can be considered.

[Sentinel node biopsy and lymph node dissection in the era of new systemic therapies for malignant melanoma]

BACKGROUND

Recently, adjuvant therapies with checkpoint inhibitors and BRAF/MEK inhibitors have become available for patients with malignant melanoma and microscopic nodal disease. Meanwhile the number of complete nodal dissections for a melanoma-positive sentinel node (SN) have decreased significantly.

OBJECTIVE

The authors discuss the significance of sentinel node biopsy (SNB) and early lymph node dissection in the era of adjuvant systemic therapy for stage III melanoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Current publications and recommendations were evaluated.

RESULTS

Complete nodal dissection for a positive SN significantly reduces the risk of regional nodal relapse. However, neither SNB nor complete nodal dissection following a positive SN are associated with a benefit in survival. With the availability of novel adjuvant systemic treatment strategies for stage III melanoma, SNB has become an even more important part of modern staging diagnostics. Thus, detection of early dissemination of melanoma cells into the SN as well as the quantification of the tumor load are decisive for further therapy planning.

CONCLUSION

Accurate assessment of the regional lymph node status by SNB is becoming even more important in the era of novel effective adjuvant therapies for microscopic nodal disease. Whether complete lymph node dissection is performed in patients with a positive SN needs to be assessed individually. In the case of "active nodal surveillance" instead of surgery, long-term close follow-up in specialized centers, including ultrasonographic controls, is required.

Adjuvant therapy versus watch-and-wait post surgery for stage III melanoma: a multicountry retrospective chart review

AIM

To describe treatment patterns among patients with stage III melanoma who underwent surgical excision in years 2011-2016, and assess outcomes among patients who subsequently received systemic adjuvant therapy versus watch-and-wait.

METHODS

Chart review of 380 patients from 17 melanoma centers in North America, South America and Europe.

RESULTS

Of 129 (34%) patients treated with adjuvant therapy, 85% received interferon α-2b and 56% discontinued treatment (mostly due to adverse events). Relapse-free survival was significantly longer for patients treated with adjuvant therapy versus watch-and-wait (hazard ratio = 0.63; p < 0.05). There was considerable heterogeneity in adjuvant treatment schedules and doses. Similar results were found in patients who received interferon-based adjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant therapies with better safety/efficacy profiles will improve clinical outcomes in patients with stage III melanoma.