Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C and stage IV melanoma (CheckMate 238): 4-year results from a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

Adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone versus placebo in patients with resected stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease (IMMUNED): final results of a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

The IMMUNED trial previously showed significant improvements in recurrence-free survival for adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab as well as for adjuvant nivolumab alone in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after resection or radiotherapy. Here, we report the final analysis, including overall survival data.

METHODS

IMMUNED was an investigator-sponsored, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-arm, phase 2 trial conducted in 20 academic medical centres in Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18-80 years with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after surgery or radiotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to either nivolumab plus ipilimumab (nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks), nivolumab monotherapy (nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks), or matching placebo, for up to 1 year. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints were time-to-recurrence, overall survival, progression-free survival or recurrence-free survival 2 (in patients in the placebo group who crossed over to nivolumab monotherapy after experiencing disease recurrence), and safety endpoints. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02523313), and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 2, 2015, and Nov 20, 2018, 175 patients were enrolled in the study, and 167 were randomly assigned to receive either nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=56), nivolumab plus ipilimumab-matching placebo (n=59), or double placebo control (n=52). At a median follow-up of 49·2 months (IQR 34·9-58·1), 4-year recurrence-free survival was 64·2% (95% CI 49·2-75·9) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 31·4% (19·7-43·8) in the nivolumab alone group, and 15·0% (6·7-26·6) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence for the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo was 0·25 (97·5% CI 0·13-0·48; p<0·0001), and for the nivolumab group versus placebo was 0·60 (0·36-1·00; p=0·024). Median overall survival was not reached in any treatment group. The HR for overall survival was significantly in favour of the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo (HR 0·41; 95% CI 0·17-0·99; p=0·040), but not for the nivolumab group versus placebo (HR 0·75; 0·36-1·56; p=0·44). 4-year overall survival was 83·8% (95% CI 68·8-91·9) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 72·6% (57·4-83·2) in the nivolumab alone group, and 63·1% (46·9-75·6) in the placebo group. The median progression-free survival or recurrence-free survival 2 of patients in the placebo group who crossed over to nivolumab monotherapy after experiencing disease recurrence was not reached (95% CI 21·2 months to not reached). Rates of grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events remained largely unchanged compared with our previous report, occurring in 71% (95% CI 57-82) of the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, and 29% (95% CI 17-42) of patients receiving nivolumab alone. There were no treatment-related deaths.

INTERPRETATION

Both active regimens continued to show significantly improved recurrence-free survival compared with placebo in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease who were at high risk of recurrence. Overall survival was significantly improved for patients receiving nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared with placebo. Use of subsequent anti-PD-1-based therapy was high in patients in the placebo group after recurrence and most likely impacted the overall survival comparison of nivolumab alone versus placebo. The recurrence-free and overall survival benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab over placebo reinforces the change of practice already initiated for the treatment of patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease.

FUNDING

Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Treatment Approaches for Melanomas That Relapse After Adjuvant or Neoadjuvant Therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Effective adjuvant treatment with immunotherapy and targeted therapy has significantly improved outcomes for patients with resectable locally advanced or metastatic melanoma, but a substantial proportion unfortunately relapse. Here, we review available data and explore evolving research which might impact decision-making in this setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Small retrospective studies have explored pattern of disease relapse and observed outcomes of subsequent treatment. There are ongoing trials in the neoadjuvant setting which may provide valuable information regarding disease response and potentially change the way we approach disease relapse. Currently there is limited evidence to guide clinicians in managing melanomas that relapse after adjuvant therapy. Standardised data collection and future prospective studies are needed.

Neoadjuvant therapy for melanoma: A critical appraisal

The treatment of advanced melanoma has significantly changed since the development of targeted and immune therapy. To date, these agents have primarily been used in the adjuvant or metastatic setting. Given several theoretical advantages, there is increased interest in the use of these new therapeutics in the neoadjuvant setting. In this review, we detail the potential benefits and pitfalls of neoadjuvant therapy for melanoma, review the currently available data, and describe ongoing neoadjuvant trials.

Perspectives in Melanoma: meeting report from the Melanoma Bridge (December 2nd - 4th, 2021, Italy)

Advances in immune checkpoint and combination therapy have led to improvement in overall survival for patients with advanced melanoma. Improved understanding of the tumor, tumor microenvironment and tumor immune-evasion mechanisms has resulted in new approaches to targeting and harnessing the host immune response. Combination modalities with other immunotherapy agents, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, electrochemotherapy are also being explored to overcome resistance and to potentiate the immune response. In addition, novel approaches such as adoptive cell therapy, oncogenic viruses, vaccines and different strategies of drug administration including sequential, or combination treatment are being tested. Despite the progress in diagnosis of melanocytic lesions, correct classification of patients, selection of appropriate adjuvant and systemic theràapies, and prediction of response to therapy remain real challenges in melanoma. Improved understanding of the tumor microenvironment, tumor immunity and response to therapy has prompted extensive translational and clinical research in melanoma. There is a growing evidence that genomic and immune features of pre-treatment tumor biopsies may correlate with response in patients with melanoma and other cancers, but they have yet to be fully characterized and implemented clinically. Development of novel biomarker platforms may help to improve diagnostics and predictive accuracy for selection of patients for specific treatment. Overall, the future research efforts in melanoma therapeutics and translational research should focus on several aspects including: (a) developing robust biomarkers to predict efficacy of therapeutic modalities to guide clinical decision-making and optimize treatment regimens, (b) identifying mechanisms of therapeutic resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors that are potentially actionable, (c) identifying biomarkers to predict therapy-induced adverse events, and (d) studying mechanism of actions of therapeutic agents and developing algorithms to optimize combination treatments. During the Melanoma Bridge meeting (December 2nd-4th, 2021, Naples, Italy) discussions focused on the currently approved systemic and local therapies for advanced melanoma and discussed novel biomarker strategies and advances in precision medicine as well as the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on management of melanoma patients.

BRAF and NRAS Mutation Status and Response to Checkpoint Inhibition in Advanced Melanoma

PURPOSE

Little is known about the effect of specific gene mutations on efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with advanced melanoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients with advanced melanoma treated with first-line anti-PD-1 or ipilimumab-nivolumab between 2012 and 2021 in the nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry were included in this cohort study. Objective response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed according to BRAF and NRAS status. A multivariable Cox model was used to analyze prognostic factors associated with PFS and OS.

RESULTS

In total, 1764 patients received anti-PD-1 and 759 received ipilimumab-nivolumab. No significant differences in PFS were found in the anti-PD-1 cohort. In the ipilimumab-nivolumab cohort, median PFS was significantly higher for BRAF-mutant melanoma (9.9 months; 95% CI, 6.8 to 17.2) compared with NRAS-mutant (4.8 months; 95% CI, 3.0 to 7.5) and double wild-type (5.3 months; 95% CI, 3.6 to 7.1). In multivariable analysis, BRAF-mutant melanoma was significantly associated with a lower risk of progression or death in the ipilimumab-nivolumab cohort. Median OS was significantly higher for BRAF-mutant melanoma compared with NRAS-mutant and double wild-type melanoma for both immune checkpoint inhibitor regimens.

CONCLUSION

Ipilimumab-nivolumab-treated patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma display improved PFS and OS compared with patients with NRAS-mutant and double wild-type melanoma. BRAF mutation status is a factor to consider while choosing between mono and dual checkpoint inhibition in advanced melanoma.

Association of tumor molecular factors with in-transit metastasis in primary cutaneous melanoma

BACKGROUND

In-transit metastases (ITM) are a form of locoregional relapse representing intralymphatic metastatic spread and occur in approximately 4-9% of patients with melanoma >1 mm Breslow thickness. Our objective was to evaluate a combination of clinicopathologic risk factors and gene expression biomarkers predictive of ITM risk.

METHODS

We used PCR to quantify gene expression in diagnostic biopsy tissue across a prospectively designed archival cohort of 854 consecutive thin and intermediate thickness primary cutaneous melanomas. The outcome of interest was ITM >90 days after a melanoma diagnosis. Cox proportional hazard models were fit to estimate each clinicopathologic and molecular characteristic's association with the risk of ITM.

RESULTS

The 5-year cumulative incidence of ITM was 3.2%. Clinical factors univariately associated with an increased risk of ITM were older age, greater Breslow thickness, greater mitotic rate, lower extremity location, ulceration, and a positive SLN biopsy. Of 108 genes tested, five were significantly upregulated and five significantly downregulated when evaluated in Cox models adjusted for age, Breslow thickness, mitotic rate, and lower extremity location. Among the upregulated genes, the strongest association was observed for interleukin-8 (IL8).

CONCLUSION

A subset of gene expression biomarkers was identified as independently associated with the risk of ITM after adjusting for key covariates. Once sufficiently validated, our results may lead the way to regional therapy trials for a small, selected group of high-risk patients.

Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab (CheckMate 238 trial): Reassessment of 4-year efficacy outcomes in patients with stage III melanoma per AJCC-8 staging criteria

PURPOSE

Nivolumab was approved as adjuvant therapy for melanoma based on data from CheckMate 238, which enrolled patients per American Joint Committee on Cancer version 7 (AJCC-7) criteria. Here, we analyse long-term outcomes per AJCC-8 staging criteria compared with AJCC-7 results to inform clinical decisions for patients diagnosed per AJCC-8.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a double-blind, phase 3 trial (NCT02388906), patients aged ≥15 years with resected, histologically confirmed AJCC-7 stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV melanoma were randomised to receive nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for 4 doses and then every 12 weeks, both intravenously ≤1 year. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were assessed in patients with stage III disease, per AJCC-7 and AJCC-8.

RESULTS

Per AJCC-7 staging, 42.4% and 57.3% of patients were in substage IIIB and IIIC, respectively; per AJCC-8, 1.1%, 30.4%, 62.8%, and 5.0% were in IIIA, IIIB, IIIC, and IIID. After 4 years' minimum follow-up, the AJCC-7 superior efficacy of nivolumab over ipilimumab in patients with resected stage III melanoma was preserved per AJCC-8 analysis. No statistically significant difference in RFS between stage III substage hazard ratios was observed per AJCC-7 or -8 staging criteria (interaction test: AJCC-7, P = 0.8115; AJCC-8, P = 0.1051; P = 0.8392 ((AJCC-7) and P = 0.8678 (AJCC-8) for DMFS).

CONCLUSIONS

CheckMate 238 4-year RFS and DMFS outcomes are consistent per AJCC-7 and AJCC-8 staging criteria. Outcome benefits can therefore be translated for patients diagnosed per AJCC-8.

Unveiling the tumor immune microenvironment of organ-specific melanoma metastatic sites

Background

The liver is a known site of resistance to immunotherapy and the presence of liver metastases is associated with shorter progression-free and overall survival (OS) in melanoma, while lung metastases have been associated with a more favorable outcome. There are limited data available regarding the immune microenvironment at different anatomical sites of melanoma metastases. This study sought to characterize and compare the tumor immune microenvironment of liver, brain, lung, subcutaneous (subcut) as well as lymph node (LN) melanoma metastases.

Methods

We analyzed OS in 1924 systemic treatment-naïve patients with AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage IV melanoma with a solitary site of organ metastasis. In an independent cohort we analyzed and compared immune cell densities, subpopulations and spatial distribution in tissue from liver, lung, brain, LN or subcut sites from 130 patients with stage IV melanoma.

Results

Patients with only liver, brain or bone metastases had shorter OS compared to those with lung, LN or subcutaneous and soft tissue metastases. Liver and brain metastases had significantly lower T-cell infiltration than lung (p=0.0116 and p=0.0252, respectively) and LN metastases (p=0.0116 and p=0.0252, respectively). T cells were further away from melanoma cells in liver than lung metastases (p=0.0335). Liver metastases displayed unique T-cell profiles, with a significantly lower proportion of programmed cell death protein-1+ T cells compared to all other anatomical sites (p<0.05), and a higher proportion of TIM-3+ T cells compared to LN (p=0.0004), subcut (p=0.0082) and brain (p=0.0128) metastases. Brain metastases had a lower macrophage density than subcut (p=0.0105), liver (p=0.0095) and lung (p<0.0001) metastases. Lung metastases had the highest proportion of programmed death ligand-1+ macrophages of the total macrophage population, significantly higher than brain (p<0.0001) and liver metastases (p=0.0392).

Conclusions

Liver and brain melanoma metastases have a significantly reduced immune infiltrate than lung, subcut and LN metastases, which may account for poorer prognosis and reduced immunotherapy response rates in patients with liver or brain metastases. Increased TIM-3 expression in liver metastases suggests TIM-3 inhibitor therapy as a potential therapeutic opportunity to improve patient outcomes.

Adjuvant PD-1 and PD-L1 Inhibitors and Relapse-Free Survival in Cancer Patients: The MOUSEION-04 Study

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant treatment has always been a cornerstone in the therapeutic approach of many cancers, considering its role in reducing the risk of relapse and, in some cases, increasing overall survival. Adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors have been tested in different malignancies.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis aimed to explore the impact of adjuvant PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors on relapse-free survival (RFS) in cancer patients enrolled in randomized controlled clinical trials. We retrieved all phase III trials published from 15 June 2008 to 15 May 2022, evaluating PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors monotherapy as an adjuvant treatment by searching on EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and PubMed/ Medline, and international oncological meetings' abstracts. The outcome of interest was RFS. We also performed subgroup analyses focused on age and gender.

RESULTS

Overall, 8 studies, involving more than 6000 patients, were included in the analysis. The pooled results highlighted that the use of adjuvant PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors may reduce the risk of relapse compared to control treatments (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence intervals, 0.67-0.78). In addition, the subgroup analyses observed that this benefit was consistent in different patient populations, including male, female, younger, and older patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment is associated with an increased RFS in the overall population and in subgroups divided according to age and gender.

Outcomes with adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy in patients with sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma without completion lymph node dissection

Until recently, most patients with sentinel lymph node-positive (SLN+) melanoma underwent a completion lymph node dissection (CLND), as mandated in published trials of adjuvant systemic therapies. Following multicenter selective lymphadenectomy trial-II, most patients with SLN+ melanoma no longer undergo a CLND prior to adjuvant systemic therapy. A retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes in SLN+ melanoma patients treated with adjuvant systemic therapy after July 2017 was performed in 21 international cancer centers. Of 462 patients who received systemic adjuvant therapy, 326 patients received adjuvant anti-PD-1 without prior immediate (IM) CLND, while 60 underwent IM CLND. With median follow-up of 21 months, 24-month relapse-free survival (RFS) was 67% (95% CI 62% to 73%) in the 326 patients. When the patient subgroups who would have been eligible for the two adjuvant anti-PD-1 clinical trials mandating IM CLND were analyzed separately, 24-month RFS rates were 64%, very similar to the RFS rates from those studies. Of these no-CLND patients, those with SLN tumor deposit >1 mm, stage IIIC/D and ulcerated primary had worse RFS. Of the patients who relapsed on adjuvant anti-PD-1, those without IM CLND had a higher rate of relapse in the regional nodal basin than those with IM CLND (46% vs 11%). Therefore, 55% of patients who relapsed without prior CLND underwent surgery including therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND), with 30% relapsing a second time; there was no difference in subsequent relapse between patients who received observation vs secondary adjuvant therapy. Despite the increased frequency of nodal relapses, adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy may be as effective in SLN+ pts who forego IM CLND and salvage surgery with TLND at relapse may be a viable option for these patients.

Thymosin alpha 1 as an adjuvant to hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in an experimental model of peritoneal metastases from colonic carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is currently implemented in the treatment of peritoneal metastases from colorectal carcinoma (PM-CRC) origin. However, recurrence is common and the effectiveness of HIPEC has been questioned. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of thymosin alpha 1 (Tα1), an immunomodulatory molecule, as an adjuvant to HIPEC treatment.

METHODS

We developed an experimental model of HIPEC by the induction of PM-CRC in C57BL mice and intra-abdominal perfusion of mitomycin C (MMC). Mice were treated with Tα1 at 0.6 mg/kg for 5 days after HIPEC. Clinical and immunological parameters were compared between HIPEC and HIPEC + Tα1 groups.

RESULTS

Treatment with Tα1 increased overall survival of mice compared to HIPEC treatment alone and sham-treated animals (16.1 ± 0.8 vs. 14.1 ± 0.6 and 11.8 ± 0.8, respectively, p = 0.02). Tα1 had no direct anti-tumor effect, as seen by lack of inhibition of tumor cell proliferation. Tα1 treatment induced a T helper (Th) 1 immune response in tumor metastases as evidenced by a significant increase of the Th1-specific markers IFN-γ and T-bet (1.21 ± 0.3 vs. 0.52 ± 0.08, p < 0.05; 0.88 ± 0.04 vs. 0.64 ± 0.14, p < 0.05, respectively). This Th1 skew was accompanied by increased CD8⁺ infiltration into omental and visceral metastases by Tα1 treatment compared to sham and HIPEC-treated animals (21.24 ± 2.16 vs. 10.45 ± 0.89 and 7.7 ± 1.3, p < 0.001; 14.12 ± 1.54 vs. 12.12 ± 0.01 and 6.64 ± 0.87, p < 0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Tα1 augments the effect of HIPEC by the induction of a Th1 anti-tumor immune response. Further experiments should evaluate Tα1 and other novel immunomodulators in order to exploit the immunological opportunities created by HIPEC.

Adjuvant Anti-PD-1 Antibody Therapy for Advanced Melanoma: A Multicentre Study of 78 Japanese Cases

Anti-PD-1 antibodies (Abs) are among the optimal adjuvant therapies for melanoma at high risk of recurrence, especially BRAF wild-type melanoma, but the anti-tumour effects of anti-PD-1 Abs in the adjuvant setting for acral melanoma have not been evaluated previously. The aim of this study was to analyse the efficacy and safety profiles of anti-PD-1 Ab monotherapy in the adjuvant setting in an Asian population including a high ratio of acral melanoma. The efficacy and safety profiles of anti-PD-1 Ab monotherapy in the adjuvant setting were retrospectively analysed in 78 Japanese patients with advanced melanoma, including 31 cases (40%) of acral melanoma. Overall relapse-free survival was 60.3% (47 of 78 cases, 95% confidence interval (CI) 49.2-70.4%), and 39.7% of patients (31 of 78 patients, 95% CI 29.6-50.8%) relapsed during the adjuvant PD-1 Ab treatment. Six cases (7.9%) discontinued the protocol due to serious adverse events. One case (1.3%) discontinued the protocol due to trauma. The relapse-free survival of acral melanoma was 25.8%, whereas that of high cumulative sun damage was 60.0%, and that of low cumulative sun damage was 57.1%. The acral type had a significantly lower 12-month relapse-free survival than other cutaneous types (p = 0.029). The acral type appeared to be an independent prognostic factor on multivariate analysis (p = 0.015). Adverse events due to anti-PD-1 antibody were observed in 37.1% overall. The results of this study suggest that anti-PD-1 Ab therapy in the adjuvant setting is less effective for acral melanoma than for other cutaneous types.

PD-1 inhibitors plus oxaliplatin or cisplatin-based chemotherapy in first-line treatments for advanced gastric cancer: A network meta-analysis

Background

Currently, there has been no direct comparison between programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors plus different chemotherapy regimens in first-line treatments for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). This study performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PD-1 inhibitors plus oxaliplatin- or cisplatin-based chemotherapy.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register were used to seek a series of phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studying on first-line PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy and phase III RCTs comparing first-line oxaliplatin and cisplatin-based chemotherapy for AGC to perform NMA. The main outcome was overall survival (OS) and other outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).

Results

Eight eligible RCTs involving 5723 patients were included. Compared with PD-1 inhibitors plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy, PD-1 inhibitors plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy could prolong the OS without statistical significance (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82, 95% credible interval [CI]: 0.63-1.06). However, for patients with combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 1, PD-1 inhibitors plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy significantly prolonged the OS (HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.57-0.99). PFS in PD-1 inhibitors plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy was significantly longer than that in PD-1 inhibitors plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy (HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.53-0.99). Regarding safety, the incidence of ≥ 3 TRAEs was similar between PD-1 inhibitors plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy and PD-1 inhibitors plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy (RR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.66-1.12). The surface under the cumulative ranking area curve (SUCRA) indicated that PD-1 inhibitors plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy ranked first for OS (97.7%), PFS (99.3%), and ORR (89.0%). For oxaliplatin-based regimens, there was no significant difference between nivolumab plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy and sintilimab plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in terms of OS, PFS, ORR, and ≥3 TRAEs.

Conclusion

Compared with PD-1 inhibitors plus cisplatin-based chemotherapy, PD-1 inhibitors plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy significantly prolonged PFS. Considering both efficacy and safety, PD-1 inhibitors plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy might be a better option in the first-line treatment for AGC.

Management of Acral and Mucosal Melanoma: Medical Oncology Perspective

Acral and mucosal melanomas (MM) are rare subtypes of melanoma that are biologically and clinically distinct from cutaneous melanoma. Despite the progress in the treatment of cutaneous melanomas with the development of targeted and immune therapies, the therapeutic options for these less common subtypes remain limited. Difficulties in early diagnosis, the aggressive nature of the disease, and the frequently occult sites of origin have also contributed to the poor prognosis associated with acral and MM, with substantially worse long-term prognosis. The rarity of these subtypes has posed significant barriers to better understanding their biological features and investigating novel therapies. Consequently, establishing standardized treatment guidelines has been a challenge. In this review, we provide a brief overview of the current knowledge regarding acral and MM, focusing on their epidemiology, genetic backgrounds, and unique clinical characteristics. Further discussion centers around the management of primary and advanced disease and the role of emerging targeted and immune therapies for these subtypes, specifically focusing on issues relevant to medical oncologists.

Neoadjuvant nivolumab + T-VEC combination therapy for resectable early stage or metastatic (IIIB-IVM1a) melanoma with injectable disease: study protocol of the NIVEC trial

Background

Trials investigating neoadjuvant treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with melanoma have shown high clinical and pathologic response rates. Treatment with talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC), a modified herpes simplex virus type-1 (HSV-1), is approved for patients with unresectable stage IIIB-IVM1a melanoma and has the potential to make tumors more susceptible for ICI. Combination ICI and intralesional T-VEC has already been investigated in patients with unresectable stage IIIB-IV disease, however, no data is available yet on the potential benefit of this combination therapy in neoadjuvant setting.

Methods

This single center, single arm, phase II study aims to show an improved major pathologic complete response (pCR) rate, either pCR or near-pCR, up to 45% in 24 patients with resectable stage IIIB-IVM1a melanoma upon neoadjuvant combination treatment with intralesional T-VEC and systemic nivolumab (anti-PD-1 antibody). Patients will receive four courses of T-VEC up to 4 mL (first dose as seroconversion dose) and three doses of nivolumab (240 mg flatdose) every 2 weeks, followed by surgical resection in week nine. The primary endpoint of this trial is pathologic response rate. Secondary endpoints are safety, the rate of delay of surgery and event-free survival. Additionally, prognostic and predictive biomarker research and health-related quality of life evaluation will be performed.

Discussion

Intralesional T-VEC has the capacity to heighten the immune response and to elicit an abscopal effect in melanoma in combination with ICI. However, the potential clinical benefit of T-VEC plus ICI in the neoadjuvant setting remains unknown. This is the first trial investigating the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant treatment of T-VEC and nivolumab followed by surgical resection in patients with stage IIIB-IVM1a melanoma, with the potential of high pathologic response rates and acceptable toxicity.

Trial registration

This trial was registered in the European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT- number: 2019–001911-22) and the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (NL71866.000.19) on 4th June 2020.

Secondary identifying number: NCT04330430.

Treatment of Metastatic Melanoma with a Combination of Immunotherapies and Molecularly Targeted Therapies

Simple Summary

Immunotherapies and molecularly targeted therapies have drastically changed the therapeutic approach for unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma. The majority of melanoma patients have benefitted from these therapies; however, some patients acquire resistance to them. Novel combinations of immunotherapies and molecularly targeted therapies may be more efficient in treating these patients. In this review, we discuss various combination therapies under pre-clinical and clinical development which can reduce toxicity, enhance efficacy, and prevent recurrences in patients with metastatic melanoma.

Abstract

Melanoma possesses invasive metastatic growth patterns and is one of the most aggressive types of skin cancer. In 2021, it is estimated that 7180 deaths were attributed to melanoma in the United States alone. Once melanoma metastasizes, traditional therapies are no longer effective. Instead, immunotherapies, such as ipilimumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab, are the treatment options for malignant melanoma. Several biomarkers involved in tumorigenesis have been identified as potential targets for molecularly targeted melanoma therapy, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Unfortunately, melanoma quickly acquires resistance to these molecularly targeted therapies. To bypass resistance, combination treatment with immunotherapies and single or multiple TKIs have been employed and have been shown to improve the prognosis of melanoma patients compared to monotherapy. This review discusses several combination therapies that target melanoma biomarkers, such as BRAF, MEK, RAS, c-KIT, VEGFR, c-MET and PI3K. Several of these regimens are already FDA-approved for treating metastatic melanoma, while others are still in clinical trials. Continued research into the causes of resistance and factors influencing the efficacy of these combination treatments, such as specific mutations in oncogenic proteins, may further improve the effectiveness of combination therapies, providing a better prognosis for melanoma patients.

Adverse events induced by nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab monotherapy among cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were performed to examine treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) for combination of nivolumab (NIVO) and ipilimumab (IPI) compared to NIVO monotherapy among cancer patients. We searched several databases to identify relevant RCTs. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects model. In fourteen RCTs included in the study, we found that compared to NIVO monotherapy, combination NIVO + IPI increased the risk of any grade (Risk Ratio (RR)=1.11), and grade 3 or 4 (RR =1.95) TRAEs. Compared to NIVO, NIVO + IPI had higher risk for any grade colitis (RR =4.52), pneumonitis (RR =3.06), and diarrhea (RR =1.68).

Management of cutaneous melanoma: radiologists challenging and risk assessment

Melanoma patient remains a challenging for the radiologist, due to the difficulty related to the management of a patient more often in an advanced stage of the disease. It is necessary to determine a stratification of risk, optimizing the means, with diagnostic tools that should be optimized in relation to the type of patient, and improving knowledge. Staging and risk assessment procedures are determined by disease presentation at diagnosis. Melanoma staging is a critical tool to assist clinical decision-making and prognostic assessment. It is used for clinical trial design, eligibility, stratification, and analysis. The current standard for regional lymph nodes staging is represented by the sentinel lymph node excision biopsy procedure. For staging of distant metastases, PET-CT has the highest sensitivity and diagnostic odds ratio. Similar trend is observed during melanoma surveillance. The advent of immunotherapy, which has improved patient outcome, however, has determined new issues for radiologists, partly due to atypical response patterns, partly due to adverse reactions that must be identified as soon as possible for the correct management of the patient. The main objectives of the new ir-criteria are to standardize the assessment between different trials. However, these ir-criteria do not take into account all cases of atypical response patterns, as hyperprogression or dissociated responses. None of these criteria has actually been uniformly adopted in routine. The immune-related adverse events (irAEs) can involve various organs from head to toe. It is crucial for radiologists to know the imaging appearances of this condition, to exclude recurrent or progressive disease and for pneumonitis, since it could be potentially life-threatening toxicity, resulting in pneumonitis-related deaths in early phase trials, to allow a proper patient management.

Toxicity spectrum of immunotherapy in advanced lung cancer: A safety analysis from clinical trials and a pharmacovigilance system

BACKGROUND

With the increased use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced lung cancer, adverse events (AEs), particularly immune-related AEs (irAEs), have garnered considerable interest. We conducted a comprehensive assessment of the toxicity profile in advanced lung cancer using multi-source medical data.

METHODS

First, we systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases (from inception to 10 August 2021) for relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving ICI-based treatments for advanced lung cancer. The primary outcomes were treatment-related AEs and irAEs, including events that were assigned grade 1-5 and 3-5. The secondary outcomes were grade 5 AEs and irAEs (grade 1-5 and grade 3-5) in specific organs. Network comparisons were conducted for 11 treatments, including chemotherapy (CT), ICI monotherapy (three regimens: programmed death-1 receptor [PD-1] inhibitors, programmed death ligand-1 [PD-L1] inhibitors, and cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen [CTLA-4] inhibitors), dual-ICI combination therapy (two regimens), and treatment using one or two ICI drugs administered in combination with CT (five regimens). We also conducted a disproportionality analysis by extracting reports of various irAEs associated with ICIs from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database. The reporting odds ratios and fatality proportions of different irAEs were calculated and compared. PROSPERO: CRD42021268650.

FINDINGS

Overall, 41 RCTs involving 23,121 patients with advanced lung cancer were included. Treatments containing chemotherapy increased the risk of treatment-related AEs compared to ICI-based regimens without chemotherapy. Concerning irAEs, PD-L1 + CTLA-4 + CT was associated with the highest risk of grade 1-5 irAEs, followed by two regimens of dual ICI combination, three regimens of ICI monotherapy, and three regimens of one ICI combined with CT. For 3-5 irAEs, CTLA-4 accounted for most AEs. Detailed comparisons of ICI-based treatment options provided irAE profiles based on specific organs/systems and AE severity. Insights from the FAERS database revealed that signals corresponding to pneumonitis, colitis, thyroiditis, and hypophysitis were observed across all ICI regimens. Further analyses of the outcomes indicated that myocarditis (163 of 367, 44.4%), pneumonitis (1610 of 4497, 35.8%), and hepatitis (290 of 931, 31.1%) had high fatality rates.

INTERPRETATION

Included RCTs showed heterogeneity in a few clinical factors, and reports derived from the FAERS database might have involved inaccurate data. Our results can be used as a basis for improving clinical treatment strategies and designing preventive methods for ICI treatment in advanced lung cancer.

FUNDING

This study was supported by the Research Project of Drug Clinical Comprehensive Evaluation and Drug Treatment Pathway (SHYXH-ZP-2021-001, SHYXH-ZP-2021-006), Clinical Research Innovation and Cultivation Fund of Ren Ji Hospital (RJPY-LX-008), Ren Ji Boost Project of National Natural Science Foundation of China (RJTJ-JX-001), and Shanghai "Rising Stars of Medical Talent" Youth Development Program - Youth Medical Talents - Clinical Pharmacist Program (SHWJRS (2019) 072).

Risk of Rash in PD-1 or PD-L1-Related Cancer Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Given that immune-related rash was the most frequently reported PD-1 or PD-L1-related skin toxicity, this systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to elucidate its incidence risk.

Methods

The meta-analysis was carried out according to the PRISMA guidelines. The random effect model was used in the process of all analyses. Skin rash of all grades and grades 3–5 were calculated and gathered in the final comprehensive analyses.

Results

The study included 86 clinical trials classified into 15 groups. Compared with chemotherapy, PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors significantly strengthened the risk of developing rash across all grades (OR = 1.66, 95% CI: [1.31, 2.11]; p < 0.0001). This trend was significantly stronger when the control group was placebo (OR = 2.62, 95% CI: [1.88, 3.65]; p < 0.00001). Similar results were observed when PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors were given together with chemotherapy (OR = 1.87, 95% CI: [1.59, 2.20]; p < 0.00001), even in patients with grades 3–5. As with other combination therapies, the risk of developing rash for all grades was enhanced when PD-1 or PD-L1 was given together with chemotherapy as the second-line option (OR = 2.98, 95% CI: [1.87, 4.75]; p=0.05). No statistically significant differences could be found in skin rash between the PD-1 and PD-L1-related subgroups.

Conclusion

Whether PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors were given alone or together with others, the risk of developing rash would be enhanced. Furthermore, the risk of developing rash appeared to be higher when PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors together with other antitumor drugs were given as the second-line options. No statistically significant results of developing rash between PD-1 and PD-L1 subgroups were obtained owing to the participation of PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors.

Toripalimab (anti-PD-1) versus High-Dose Interferon-α2b as Adjuvant Therapy in Resected Mucosal Melanoma: A Phase II Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

No standard of care for mucosal melanoma (MM) in the adjuvant setting has been established. Meanwhile, relapse-free survival (RFS) is only about five months after surgery alone. This phase II trial aimed to compare toripalimab vs. high-dose interferon-α2b (HDI) as an adjuvant therapy for resected MM.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From July 2017 to May 2019, 145 patients with resected MM were randomized (1:1) to receive HDI (N = 72) or toripalimab (N = 73) for one year until disease relapse/distant metastasis, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was RFS. The secondary endpoints included distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 26.3 months, the numbers of RFS, OS, and DMFS events were 51 vs. 46, 33 vs. 29, and 49 vs. 44 in the toripalimab arm and the HDI arm, respectively. The median RFS were 13.6 (95%CI: 8.31-19.02) months and 13.9 (95%CI: 8.28-19.61) months in the toripalimab arm and HDI arm, respectively. The DMFS was not significantly different between the two arms (HR: 1.00, 95%CI: 0.65-1.54). The median OS was 35.1 months (95%CI: 27.93-NR) in the toripalimab arm, with no significant difference in all-cause death (HR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.66-1.84) for the two arms. The median sums of the patients' actual infusion doses were 3672 mg and 1054.5 MIU in the toripalimab arm and HDI arm, respectively. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events with a grade ≥ 3 was much higher in the HDI arm than in the toripalimab arm (87.5% vs. 27.4%).

CONCLUSION

Toripalimab showed a similar RFS and a more favorable safety profile than HDI, both better than historical data, suggesting that toripalimab might be the better treatment option. However, additional translational studies and better treatment regimens are still warranted to improve the clinical outcome of MM.

Histological changes associated with laser interstitial thermal therapy for radiation necrosis: illustrative cases

BACKGROUND

Patients with lung cancer and melanoma remain the two largest groups to develop brain metastases. Immunotherapy has been approved for treatment of stage IV disease in both groups. Many of these patients are additionally treated with stereotactic radiosurgery for their brain metastases during ongoing immunotherapy. Use of immunotherapy has been reported to increase the rates of radiation necrosis (RN) after radiosurgery, causing neurological compromise due to growth of the enhancing lesion as well as worsening of associated cerebral edema.

OBSERVATIONS

Laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) is a surgical approach that has been shown effective in the management of RN, especially given its efficacy in early reduction of perilesional edema. However, little remains known about the pathology of the post-LITT lesions and how LITT works in this condition. Here, we present two patients who needed surgical decompression after LITT for RN. Clinical, histopathological, and imaging features of both patients are presented.

LESSONS

Criteria for selecting the best patients with RN for LITT therapy remains unclear. Given two similarly sized lesions and not too dissimilar clinical histories but with differing outcomes, further investigation is clearly needed to identify predictors of response to LITT in the setting of SRS and immunotherapy-induced RN.

Optimal systemic therapy for high-risk resectable melanoma

Immunotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors and molecularly targeted therapy with BRAF inhibitors were pioneered in the setting of advanced-stage, unresectable melanoma, where they revolutionized treatment and considerably improved patient survival. These therapeutic approaches have also been successfully transitioned into the resectable disease setting, with the regulatory approvals of ipilimumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab, and dabrafenib plus trametinib as postoperative (adjuvant) treatments for various, overlapping groups of patients with high-risk melanoma. Moreover, these agents have shown variable promise when used in the preoperative (neoadjuvant) period. The expanding range of treatment options available for resectable high-risk melanoma, all of which come with risks as well as benefits, raises questions over selection of the optimal therapeutic strategy and agents for each individual, also considering that many patients might be cured with surgery alone. Furthermore, the use of perioperative therapy has potentially important implications for the management of patients who have disease recurrence. In this Viewpoint, we asked four expert investigators and medical or surgical oncologists who have been involved in the key studies of perioperative systemic therapies for their perspectives on the optimal management of patients with high-risk melanoma.

Efficacy and safety of anti-PD1 monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with V600BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma have higher rates of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with first-line anti-PD1 (PD1]+anti-CTLA-4 (IPI) versus PD1. Whether this is also true after BRAF/MEKi therapy is unknown. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of PD1 versus IPI +PD1 after BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi).

METHODS

Patients with V600BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF/MEKi who had subsequent PD1 versus IPI+PD1 at eight centers were included. The endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), PFS, OS and safety in each group.

RESULTS

Of 200 patients with V600E (75%) or non-V600E (25%) mutant metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF/MEKi (median time of treatment 7.6 months; treatment cessation due to progressive disease in 77%), 115 (57.5%) had subsequent PD1 and 85 (42.5%) had IPI+PD1. Differences in patient characteristics between PD1 and IPI+PD1 groups included, age (med. 63 vs 54 years), time between BRAF/MEKi and PD1±IPI (16 vs 4 days), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) of ≥1 (62% vs 44%), AJCC M1C/M1D stage (72% vs 94%) and progressing brain metastases at the start of PD1±IPI (34% vs 57%). Median follow-up from PD1±IPI start was 37.8 months (95% CI, 33.9 to 52.9). ORR was 36%; 34% with PD1 vs 39% with IPI+PD1 (p=0.5713). Median PFS was 3.4 months; 3.4 with PD1 vs 3.6 months with IPI+PD1 (p=0.6951). Median OS was 15.4 months; 14.4 for PD1 vs 20.5 months with IPI+PD1 (p=0.2603). The rate of grade 3 or 4 toxicities was higher with IPI+PD1 (31%) vs PD1 (7%). ORR, PFS and OS were numerically higher with IPI+PD1 vs PD1 across most subgroups except for females, those with <10 days between BRAF/MEKi and PD1±IPI, and those with stage III/M1A/M1B melanoma. The combination of ECOG PS=0 and absence of liver metastases identified patients with >3 years OS (area under the curve, AUC=0.74), while ECOG PS ≥1, progressing brain metastases and presence of bone metastases predicted primary progression (AUC=0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

IPI+PD1 and PD1 after BRAF/MEKi have similar outcomes despite worse baseline prognostic features in the IPI+PD1 group, however, IPI+PD1 is more toxic. A combination of clinical factors can identify long-term survivors, but less accurately those with primary resistance to immunotherapy after targeted therapy.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for melanoma. Part 2: Treatment - Update 2022

A unique collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), and the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed to make recommendations on cutaneous melanoma diagnosis and treatment, based on the systematic literature reviews and the experts' experience. Cutaneous melanomas are excised with one to 2-cm safety margins. Sentinel lymph node dissection shall be performed as a staging procedure in patients with tumor 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 can be proposed in stage III/completely resected stage IV patients and are primarily anti-PD-1, independent of mutational status, or alternatively dabrafenib plus trametinib for BRAF mutant patients. In distant metastases (stage IV), either resected or not, systemic treatment is always 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 stage IV melanoma with 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 harboring a BRAF-V600  E/K mutation, this therapy shall be offered as second-line therapy. 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.

Using a Clinicopathologic and Gene Expression (CP-GEP) Model to Identify Stage I-II Melanoma Patients at Risk of Disease Relapse

Background: The current standard of care for patients without sentinel node (SN) metastasis (i.e., stage I−II melanoma) is watchful waiting, while >40% of patients with stage IB−IIC will eventually present with disease recurrence or die as a result of melanoma. With the prospect of adjuvant therapeutic options for patients with a negative SN, we assessed the performance of a clinicopathologic and gene expression (CP-GEP) model, a model originally developed to predict SN metastasis, to identify patients with stage I−II melanoma at risk of disease relapse. Methods: This study included patients with cutaneous melanoma ≥18 years of age with a negative SN between October 2006 and December 2017 at the Sahlgrenska University Hospital (Sweden) and Erasmus MC Cancer Institute (The Netherlands). According to the CP-GEP model, which can be applied to the primary melanoma tissue, the patients were stratified into high or low risk of recurrence. The primary aim was to assess the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) of low- and high-risk CP-GEP. A secondary aim was to compare the CP-GEP model with the EORTC nomogram, a model based on clinicopathological variables only. Results: In total, 535 patients (stage I−II) were included. CP-GEP stratification among these patients resulted in a 5-year RFS of 92.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 86.4−96.4) in CP-GEP low-risk patients (n = 122) versus 80.7% (95%CI: 76.3−84.3) in CP-GEP high-risk patients (n = 413; hazard ratio 2.93 (95%CI: 1.41−6.09), p < 0.004). According to the EORTC nomogram, 25% of the patients were classified as having a ‘low risk’ of recurrence (96.8% 5-year RFS (95%CI 91.6−98.8), n = 130), 49% as ‘intermediate risk’ (88.4% 5-year RFS (95%CI 83.6−91.8), n = 261), and 26% as ‘high risk’ (61.1% 5-year RFS (95%CI 51.9−69.1), n = 137). Conclusion: In these two independent European cohorts, the CP-GEP model was able to stratify patients with stage I−II melanoma into two groups differentiated by RFS.

The Treatment of Advanced Melanoma: Therapeutic Update

Cutaneous melanoma is the main cause of death for skin cancer. The majority of patients with a diagnosis of melanoma have localized disease, which can be successfully treated with surgical treatment. However, the surgical approach is not curative for advanced melanoma (AM). Indeed, the management of AM is still challenging, since melanoma is the solid tumor with the highest number of mutations and cancer cells have the capacity to evade the immune system. In the past, the treatment of AM relied on chemotherapeutic agents, without showing efficacy data. Recent knowledge on melanoma pathogenesis as well as the introduction of immunotherapies, targeted therapies vaccines, small molecules, and combination therapies has revolutionized AM management, showing promising results in terms of effectiveness and safety. The aim of this review is to assess and to discuss the role of emerging therapies for AM management in order to obtain a complete overview of the currently available treatment options and future perspectives.

Current State of Adjuvant Therapy for Melanoma: Less Is More, or More Is Better?

Advances in melanoma treatments over the past decade have changed the course of survival for patients. Several adjuvant therapies have been approved and are now considered standard of care for high-risk patients. These therapies have shown improvements for recurrence-free survival and distant metastases-free survival, but not overall survival, as the data are maturing. The 5-year recurrence-free survival in the COMBI-AD study, which compared dabrafenib and trametinib with placebo, was 65% and 58%, respectively. In the KEYNOTE-054 study, the recurrence-free survival at 3 years was 63.7% versus 41%. Despite these advances, approximately 50% of patients will succumb to their disease. Adjuvant therapy is considered potentially curative and avoids the morbidity of relapsed disease and the poor outcomes seen in metastatic disease. However, the lack of overall survival benefit in clinical trials of patients with high-risk stage II and stage III disease raises the question of whether it is more efficacious to treat when there is residual microscopic disease, or to wait until the disease recurs to avoid treating those who may have been cured by surgery alone. Immunotherapy also has the potential for substantial toxicity that may be lifelong; hence, discussion of risks and benefits of therapy is warranted because there should be less tolerance for substantial toxicity in the adjuvant setting. Adjuvant trials are needed that will integrate biomarkers to allow for better selection of patients who will truly benefit from adjuvant therapy.

Mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) immunoreactivity in positive sentinel nodes from patients with melanoma

OBJECTIVE

Patients with cutaneous melanoma and a positive sentinel node (SN) are currently eligible for adjuvant treatment with targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence imaging could be an alternative and less invasive tool for SN biopsy to select patients for adjuvant treatment. One potential target for NIR is the mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET). This study aimed to assess MET immunoreactivity in positive SNs and to evaluate its potential diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic value.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, positive SN samples from patients with primary cutaneous melanoma were collected to assess MET immunoreactivity. To this end, paraffin-embedded SNs were stained for MET (monoclonal antibody D1C2). A 4-point Histoscore was used to determine cytoplasmic and membranous immunoreactivity (0 negative/1 weak/2 moderate/3 strong). Samples were considered positive when ≥10% of the cancer cells showed MET expression (staining intensity ≥1). Patient and clinicopathological characteristics were used for descriptive statistics, binary logistic regression, and survival analyses.

RESULTS

Positive MET immunohistochemistry was observed in 24 out of 37 samples (65%). No statistically significant associations were found between MET positivity and the following prognostic factors: Breslow thickness (P = 0.961), ulceration (P = 1.000), and SN tumor burden (P = 0.792). According to MET positivity, Kaplan-Meier curves showed no significant differences in survival.

CONCLUSION

This exploratory study found no evidence to support MET immunoreactivity in positive SNs as a possible diagnostic or prognostic indicator in patients with melanoma.

Personalized response-directed surgery and adjuvant therapy after neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab in high-risk stage III melanoma: the PRADO trial

Neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab induces high pathologic response rates (pRRs) in clinical stage III nodal melanoma, and pathologic response is strongly associated with prolonged relapse-free survival (RFS). The PRADO extension cohort of the OpACIN-neo trial ( NCT02977052 ) addressed the feasibility and effect on clinical outcome of using pathologic response after neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab as a criterion for further treatment personalization. In total, 99 patients with clinical stage IIIb-d nodal melanoma were included and treated with 6 weeks of neoadjuvant ipilimumab 1 mg kg-1 and nivolumab 3 mg kg-1. In patients achieving major pathologic response (MPR, ≤10% viable tumor) in their index lymph node (ILN, the largest lymph node metastasis at baseline), therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND) and adjuvant therapy were omitted. Patients with pathologic partial response (pPR; >10 to ≤50% viable tumor) underwent TLND only, whereas patients with pathologic non-response (pNR; >50% viable tumor) underwent TLND and adjuvant systemic therapy ± synchronous radiotherapy. Primary objectives were confirmation of pRR (ILN, at week 6) of the winner neoadjuvant combination scheme identified in OpACIN-neo; to investigate whether TLND can be safely omitted in patients achieving MPR; and to investigate whether RFS at 24 months can be improved for patients achieving pNR. ILN resection and ILN-response-tailored treatment were feasible. The pRR was 72%, including 61% MPR. Grade 3-4 toxicity within the first 12 weeks was observed in 22 (22%) patients. TLND was omitted in 59 of 60 patients with MPR, resulting in significantly lower surgical morbidity and better quality of life. The 24-month relapse-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival rates were 93% and 98% in patients with MPR, 64% and 64% in patients with pPR, and 71% and 76% in patients with pNR, respectively. These findings provide a strong rationale for randomized clinical trials testing response-directed treatment personalization after neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab.

Clinicopathological features and programmed death-ligand 1 immunohistochemical expression in a multicenter cohort of uterine and ovarian melanomas: a retrospective study in Japan (KCOG-G1701s)

The objective of this study was to propose prognostic factors and optimal treatment strategies by analyzing the clinicopathological features and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. We analyzed 31 patients diagnosed with uterine or ovarian melanoma between 1997 and 2017 in the Kansai Clinical Oncology Group/Intergroup. Twenty-four and seven patients with cervical and ovarian melanomas were included, respectively. Immune checkpoint inhibitors were used in seven patients, and the objective response rate was 40%. Notably, two patients with objective responses had a high PD-L1 expression. Ten and four patients with cervical and ovarian melanomas, respectively, had high PD-L1 immunohistochemical expressions. Multivariate analysis revealed that tumor stage was an independent prognostic factor for progression-free survival in patients with cervical melanomas. In patients with ovarian melanomas, the 1-year cumulative progression-free and overall survival rates were 0 and 29%, respectively. Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed that age <60 years was associated with poorer progression-free and overall survivals in patients with ovarian melanomas. In patients with cervical melanomas, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative overall survival rates were 53, 32, and 16%, respectively. Histological atypia was associated with a poorer progression-free survival, but there was no difference in survival between patients who underwent radical hysterectomy and those who did not. The present study is a large cohort study of uterine and ovarian melanomas, which are aggressive tumors with a significantly poor prognosis, even after standard surgery and adjuvant therapy. The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors is a promising and effective treatment option.

Higher proportions of CD39+ tumor-resident cytotoxic T cells predict recurrence-free survival in patients with stage III melanoma treated with adjuvant immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) immunotherapies have significantly reduced the recurrence rate in high-risk patients with stage III melanoma compared with surgery alone. However, 48% of anti-PD-1-treated patients will develop recurrent disease within 4 years. There is a need to identify biomarkers of recurrence after adjuvant ICI to enable identification of patients in need of alternative treatment strategies. As cytotoxic T cells are critical for the antitumor response to anti-PD-1, we sought to determine whether specific subsets were predictive of recurrence in anti-PD-1-treated high-risk patients with stage III melanoma.

METHODS

Associations with recurrence in patients with stage III melanoma were sought by analyzing resection specimens (n=103) taken prior to adjuvant nivolumab/pembrolizumab±low-dose/low-interval ipilimumab. Multiplex immunohistochemistry was used to quantify intratumoral CD8+ T-cell populations using phenotypical markers CD39, CD103, and PD-1.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 19.3 months, 37/103 (36%) of patients had a recurrence. Two CD8+ T-cell subpopulations were significantly associated with recurrence. First, CD39+ tumor-resident memory cells (CD39+CD103+PD-1+CD8+ (CD39+ Trm)) comprised a significantly higher proportion of CD8+ T cells in recurrence-free patients (p=0.0004). Conversely, bystander T cells (CD39-CD103-PD-1-CD8+) comprised a significantly greater proportion of T cells in patients who developed recurrence (p=0.0002). Spatial analysis identified that CD39+ Trms localized significantly closer to melanoma cells than bystander T cells. Multivariable analysis confirmed significantly improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients with a high proportion of intratumoral CD39+ Trms (1-year RFS high 78.1% vs low 49.9%, HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.69), no complete lymph node dissection performed, and less advanced disease stage (HR 2.85, 95% CI 1.13 to 7.19, and HR 1.29, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.82). The final Cox regression model identified patients who developed recurrence with an area under the curve of 75.9% in the discovery cohort and 69.5% in a separate validation cohort (n=33) to predict recurrence status at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant immunotherapy-treated patients with a high proportion of CD39+ Trms in their baseline melanoma resection have a significantly reduced risk of melanoma recurrence. This population of T cells may not only represent a biomarker of RFS following anti-PD-1 therapy, but may also be an avenue for therapeutic manipulation and enhancing outcomes for immunotherapy-treated patients with cancer.

Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors in high-risk stage III melanoma

The success of immunotherapy and targeted therapy for metastatic melanoma has generated considerable interest in the adjuvant setting, even though high-risk stage III melanoma (with or without in-transit metastases) still holds a substantial probability of relapse, despite surgical resection and available adjuvant treatments. Based on preclinical and clinical trials in resectable melanoma, immune checkpoint inhibitors can enhance anti-tumor immunity by activating antigen-specific T cells found in the primary site. These tumor-reactive T cells continue to exert their anti-tumor effects on remaining neoplastic cells after resection of the primary tumor, potentially preventing relapses from reoccurring. Several trials in the neoadjuvant setting have been conducted for melanoma patients using checkpoint inhibitors with promising early data, showing an improvement of operability and clinical outcomes. Hence, in this study, we review and discuss the available published and ongoing clinical trials to explore the scientific background behind immunotherapy in the neoadjuvant context.

"Skin rashes" and immunotherapy in melanoma: distinct dermatologic adverse events and implications for therapeutic management

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown efficacy in the treatment of different cancers by stimulating the antitumoral activity of the patient's immune system, representing a major breakthrough in the field of cancer therapy. Monoclonal antibodies including anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4, anti-programmed cell death protein 1 and its ligand inhibitors have been approved for advanced melanoma among other solid cancers. Although immunotherapy demonstrated a good safety profile, a new spectrum of multisystemic immune-related adverse events has been recently reported due to their use. Cutaneous reactions represent one of the leading adverse events, often reported in literature as "skin rash", and rarely further characterized in distinct dermatologic entities. Herein we describe the distinctive cutaneous rashes occurring during immunotherapies for advanced melanoma, discussing implications in the treatment management.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in adjuvant setting after radical resection of melanoma: a meta-analysis of the pivotal trials

Beyond the overall relapse-free survival (RFS) advantage demonstrated in randomized trials (RCT) of adjuvant anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in radically resected stage III-IV melanoma, key issues about subgroups of interest have been raised in recent years, with non-conclusive results when considering single studies. In the present meta analysis, we pooled all RCT data in this setting, analyzing, overall, 3043 patients. The RFS benefit of adjuvant immunotherapy over the comparator (placebo or anti-CTLA-4) was strongly confirmed in the pooled analysis, and it was statistically significant in most subgroups, excluding patients with stage IIIA and stage IV M1c melanoma. Nevertheless, the relative benefit was not statistically significantly different when considering their IIIB-IIIC and M1a-M1b counterparts. Future trials in this setting should consider subgroups of interest for tailoring the adjuvant strategy in terms of duration and drug combination in light of literature data.

Melanoma: An immunotherapy journey from bench to bedside

Melanoma gave science a window into the role immune evasion plays in the development of malignancy. The entire spectrum of immune focused anti-cancer therapies has been subjected to clinical trials in this disease, with limited success until the immune checkpoint blockade era. That revolution launched first in melanoma, heralded a landscape change throughout cancer that continues to reverberate today.

The "Great Debate" at Melanoma Bridge 2021, December 2nd-4th, 2021

The Great Debate session at the 2021 Melanoma Bridge virtual congress (December 2-4) featured counterpoint views from experts on seven important issues in melanoma. The debates considered the use of adoptive cell therapy versus use of bispecific antibodies, mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) inhibitors versus immunotherapy in the adjuvant setting, whether the use of corticosteroids for the management of side effects have an impact on outcomes, the choice of programmed death (PD)-1 combination therapy with cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen (CTLA)-4 or lymphocyte-activation gene (LAG)-3, whether radiation is needed for brain metastases, when lymphadenectomy should be integrated into the treatment plan and then the last debate, telemedicine versus face-to-face. As with previous Bridge congresses, the debates were assigned by meeting Chairs and positions taken by experts during the debates may not have necessarily reflected their respective personal view. Audiences voted both before and after each debate.

Evolving Treatment Approaches to Mucosal Melanoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review mainly focuses on the unique features and the development of available therapeutic options for mucosal melanoma in different treatment settings, i.e., neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and palliative.

RECENT FINDINGS

Mucosal melanoma is distinct from cutaneous melanoma in epidemiology, clinical features, and molecular landscape, characterized by more aggressive biological behavior, lower mutational burden, more chromosomal structure variants, unique driver mutation profile, and distinct tumor microenvironment. Systemic therapy is generally less effective to mucosal melanoma than its cutaneous counterpart. Therapeutic landscape for mucosal melanoma has evolved substantially in recent years: with new targeted therapy options as well as combination therapies built on the backbone of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies available (esp. anti-angiogenic agent and PD-1/PD-L1 combination), which, based on early phase trial data, seem to be promising. Mucosal melanoma is unique and distinct from cutaneous subtype. Unraveling the unique features of mucosal melanoma is a key to improve clinical outcomes.

Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Therapies in Cutaneous Melanoma

Melanoma is the most common cause of skin cancer-related death in the United States. Cutaneous melanoma is most prevalent in the head and neck. The long-term prognosis has been poor and chemotherapy is not curative. Complete surgical resection with locally advanced disease can be challenging and melanoma is resistant to radiation. Advances made in immunotherapy and genomically targeted therapy have transformed the treatment of metastatic melanoma; as of 2021, the 5-year survival for metastatic melanoma is greater than 50%. Ongoing clinical studies are underway to integrate these life-saving therapies into the presurgical or postsurgical settings. This article reviews that effort.

Neoadjuvant Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy in Melanoma: Efficacy, Safety and Timing

The introduction of effective systemic therapies has significantly changed the treatment of stage III and IV melanoma. Both immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies have improved recurrence-free survival in the adjuvant setting. Recent interest has sparked for neoadjuvant systemic therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors. The intended benefit of pre-operative treatment with immunotherapy is amongst others to enable tailoring of the surgery and adjuvant systemic therapy according to the treatment response. Most importantly, recurrence-free survival might be improved by neoadjuvant systemic therapy over the current standard of care of surgery followed by adjuvant systemic therapy. The first phase I and II trials investigating anti-PD1 inhibitors, both as a single agent and in combination with anti-CTLA-4 inhibitors or other therapeutic agents, have shown promising results. Pathological complete response on neoadjuvant systemic therapy seems a valid surrogate endpoint for relapse-free and overall survival. Pathological complete response rates in these trials vary between 30 and 70%. The optimal dose with respect to efficacy and toxicity and the interval between systemic and surgical treatment remain important issues to address. Accumulating follow-up data and ongoing phase III studies must prove if neoadjuvant systemic therapy is superior to surgery followed by standard-of-care adjuvant therapy.

Long-Term Outcomes of Immune Checkpoint Inhibition in Metastatic Melanoma

Increasing knowledge about the biology of melanoma and of immunology has led to the development and regulatory approval of the immune checkpoint inhibitors ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab, which are indicated for the treatment of melanoma irrespective of the B-Raf proto-oncogene mutation status of the tumour. Only a subset of patients will respond, but those who do can expect long-lasting, previously unheard-of responses. Long-term survival results for the registration trials, including CheckMate 067, Keynote-006, and Keynote-001, have recently been published. In particular, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab showed an impressive 5-year overall survival of just over 50%. However, toxicity remains a significant concern, with some of the side effects being life threatening and/or life changing. In this review, we discuss the safety and efficacy data of all the agents currently approved for the first-line treatment of advanced melanoma, identifying factors that influence the choice of a single agent rather than combination therapy. We highlight the potential biomarkers of response, effects of long-term toxicity, and options after progression.

An Update on the Immunotherapy for Oropharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) is an uncommon malignancy worldwide. Remarkably, the rising incidence of OPSCC has been observed in many developed countries over the past few decades. On top of tobacco smoking and alcohol consumption, human papillomavirus (HPV) infection has become a major etiologic factor for OPSCC. The radiotherapy-based or surgery-based systemic therapies are recommended equally as first-line treatment, while chemotherapy-based strategy is applied to advanced diseases. Immunotherapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is currently under the spotlight, especially for patients with advanced diseases. Numerous researches on programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 checkpoint inhibitors have proven beneficial to patients with metastatic HNSCC. In 2016, nivolumab and pembrolizumab were approved as the second-line treatment for advanced metastatic HNSCC by the USA Food and Drug Administration. Soon after, in 2019, the USA Food and Drug Administration approved pembrolizumab as the first-line treatment for patients with unresectable, recurrent, and metastatic HNSCC. It has been reported that HPV-positive HNSCC patients were associated with increased programmed death-ligand 1 expression; however, whether HPV status indicates different treatment outcomes among HNSCC patients treated with immunotherapy has contradicted. Notably, HPV-positive OPSCC exhibits a significantly better clinical response to primary treatment (i.e., radiotherapy, surgery, and chemotherapy) and a more desirable prognosis compared to the HPV-negative OPSCC. This review summarizes the current publications on immunotherapy in HNSCC/OPSCC patients and discusses the impact of HPV infection in immunotherapeutic efficacy, providing an update on the immune landscape and future perspectives in OPSCC.

Representativeness of the Index Lymph Node for Total Nodal Basin in Pathologic Response Assessment After Neoadjuvant Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy in Patients With Stage III Melanoma

IMPORTANCE

Neoadjuvant checkpoint inhibition in patients with high-risk stage III melanoma shows high pathologic response rates associated with a durable relapse-free survival. Whether a therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND) can be safely omitted when a major pathologic response in the largest lymph node metastasis at baseline (index lymph node; ILN) is obtained is currently being investigated. A previous small pilot study (n = 12) showed that the response in the ILN may be representative of the pathologic response in the entire TLND specimen.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the concordance of response between the ILN and the total lymph node bed in a larger clinical trial population.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective pathologic response analysis of a multicenter clinical trial population of patients from the randomized Study to Identify the Optimal Adjuvant Combination Scheme of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab in Melanoma Patients (OpACIN) and Optimal Neo-Adjuvant Combination Scheme of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab (OpACIN-neo) trials. Included patients were treated with 6 weeks neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab. Patient inclusion into the trials was conducted from August 12, 2015, to October 24, 2016 (OpACIN), and November 24, 2016, and June 28, 2018 (OpACIN-neo). Data were analyzed from April 1, 2020, to August 31, 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Concordance of the pathologic response between the ILN and the TLND tumor bed. The pathologic response of the ILN was retrospectively assessed according to the International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium criteria and compared with the pathologic response of the entire TLND specimen.

RESULTS

A total of 82 patients treated with neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab followed by TLND (48 [59%] were male; median age, 58.5 [range, 18-80] years) were included. The pathologic response in the ILN was concordant with the entire TLND specimen response in 81 of 82 patients (99%) and in 79 of 82 patients (96%) concordant when comparing the ILN response with the response in every individual lymph node. In the single patient with a discordant response, the ILN response (20% viable tumor, partial pathologic response) underestimated the entire TLND specimen response (5% viable, near-complete pathologic response). Two other patients each had 1 small nonindex node that contained 80% viable tumor (pathologic nonresponse) whereas all other lymph nodes (including the ILN) showed a partial pathologic response. In these 2 patients, the risk of regional relapse might potentially have been increased if TLND had been omitted.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The results of this study suggest that the pathologic response of the ILN may be considered a reliable indicator of the entire TLND specimen response and may support the ILN response-directed omission of TLND in a prospective trial.

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors: long-term implications of toxicity

The development of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has heralded a new era in cancer treatment, enabling the possibility of long-term survival in patients with metastatic disease, and providing new therapeutic indications in earlier-stage settings. As such, characterizing the long-term implications of receiving ICIs has grown in importance. An abundance of evidence exists describing the acute clinical toxicities of these agents, although chronic effects have not been as well catalogued. Nonetheless, emerging evidence indicates that persistent toxicities might be more common than initially suggested. While generally low-grade, these chronic sequelae can affect the endocrine, rheumatological, pulmonary, neurological and other organ systems. Fatal toxicities also comprise a diverse set of clinical manifestations and can occur in 0.4-1.2% of patients. This risk is a particularly relevant consideration in light of the possibility of long-term survival. Finally, the effects of immune-checkpoint blockade on a diverse range of immune processes, including atherosclerosis, heart failure, neuroinflammation, obesity and hypertension, have not been characterized but remain an important area of research with potential relevance to cancer survivors. In this Review, we describe the current evidence for chronic immune toxicities and the long-term implications of these effects for patients receiving ICIs.