Laparoscopic management of liver metastases from uveal melanoma

The Current State of Systemic Therapy of Metastatic Uveal Melanoma

Uveal melanoma (UM) is genetically a distinct tumor compared to cutaneous melanoma (CM), and due to its low mutational burden, it is far less perceptible to the immune system. Thus, treatments that have revolutionized the treatment of CM remain widely inefficient in metastatic UM or only demonstrate effectiveness in a small subpopulation of patients. To this end, the therapeutic benefit of immune checkpoint blockade is very limited and may come at the expense of severe immune-related adverse events that could potentially affect all organ systems. Notably, tebentafusp, an entirely novel class of anti-cancer drugs, has received official authorization for the treatment of metastatic UM. It is the first agent that demonstrated a survival advantage in a randomized controlled trial of metastatic UM patients. Despite the survival benefit and approval, the restriction of tebentafusp to HLA-A*02:01-positive patients and the low objective response rate indicate the persistent need for additional therapies. Thus, liver-directed therapies are commonly used for tumor control of hepatic metastases and represent a central pillar of the daily management of liver-dominant disease. Further, promising data from targeted therapies independent of MEK-inhibitors, such as the combination of darovasertib and crizotinib, raise hope for additional options in metastatic UM in the future. This narrative review provides a timely and comprehensive overview of the current treatment landscape for metastatic UM.

Immunoembolization for the Treatment of Uveal Melanoma Hepatic Metastases

Uveal melanoma is the most common primary intraocular tumor in adults. Approximately 50% of patients develop metastatic disease despite successful treatment of the primary eye tumor. The liver is the most common site of metastatic disease occurring in more than 90% of patients. Clinical prognosis is dependent on the ability to control the growth of liver tumors. Locoregional therapies play an important role in stabilizing liver metastases, prolonging survival for patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. As overall survival is prolonged, the development of extrahepatic disease becomes more common. Immunoembolization, a form of liver-directed therapy, not only focuses on treating hepatic metastases by stimulating the local immune system to suppress the growth of liver tumors, but it potentially generates a systemic immune response delaying the growth of extrahepatic metastases as well. The following article discusses immunoembolization for the treatment of metastatic uveal melanoma including the rationale, mechanism of action, indications, contraindications, outcomes, and associated toxicities.

Surveillance for Metastasis in High-Risk Uveal Melanoma Patients: Standard versus Enhanced Protocols

PURPOSE

to evaluate the effectiveness of enhanced surveillance protocols (EP) utilizing high frequency (HF) or enhanced modality (EM) compared to the standard protocol (SP) in detecting metastasis and determining their impact on overall survival (OS) in high-risk uveal melanoma (UM) patients.

METHODS

A total of 87 consecutive patients with Class 2 (high risk) primary UM were enrolled, with negative baseline systemic staging. The patients underwent systemic surveillance with either SP (hepatic ultrasonography [US] every 6 months) or EP (either HF [US every 3 months] or EM [incorporation hepatic computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging]) following informed discussion. The main outcome measures were largest diameter of largest hepatic metastasis (LDLM), number of hepatic metastatic lesions, time to detection of metastasis (TDM), and OS.

RESULTS

This study revealed significant differences in LDLM between surveillance protocols, with the use of EP detecting smaller metastatic lesions (HF, EM, and SP were 1.5 cm, 1.6 cm, and 6.1 cm, respectively). Patients on the EM protocol had a lower 24-month cumulative incidence of >3 cm metastasis (3.5% EM vs. 39% SP; p = 0.021), while those on the HF protocol had a higher 24-month cumulative incidence of ≤3 cm metastasis compared to SP (31% HF vs. 10% SP; p = 0.017). Hazard of death following metastasis was significantly reduced in the EP (HR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.84), HF (HR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.84), and EM (HR: 0.11; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.5) groups compared to SP. However, TDM and OS did not significantly differ between protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

Enhanced surveillance protocols improved early detection of hepatic metastasis in UM patients but did not translate into a survival advantage in our study cohort. However, early detection of metastasis in patients receiving liver-directed therapies may lead to improved overall survival.

Liver-directed treatment is associated with improved survival and increased response to immune checkpoint blockade in metastatic uveal melanoma: results from a retrospective multicenter trial

Metastases of uveal melanoma (UM) spread predominantly to the liver. Due to low response rates to systemic therapies, liver-directed therapies (LDT) are commonly used for tumor control. The impact of LDT on the response to systemic treatment is unknown. A total of 182 patients with metastatic UM treated with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) were included in this analysis. Patients were recruited from prospective skin cancer centers and the German national skin cancer registry (ADOReg) of the German Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group (DeCOG). Two cohorts were compared: patients with LDT (cohort A, n = 78) versus those without LDT (cohort B, n = 104). Data were analyzed for response to treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The median OS was significantly longer in cohort A than in cohort B (20.1 vs. 13.8 months; P = 0.0016) and a trend towards improved PFS was observed for cohort A (3.0 vs. 2.5 months; P = 0.054). The objective response rate to any ICB (16.7% vs. 3.8%, P = 0.0073) and combined ICB (14.1% vs. 4.5%, P = 0.017) was more favorable in cohort A. Our data suggest that the combination of LDT with ICB may be associated with a survival benefit and higher treatment response to ICB in patients with metastatic UM.

Minimally Invasive Treatment Options for Hepatic Uveal Melanoma Metastases

Uveal melanoma is one of the most common primary intraocular malignancies that accounts for about 85% of all ocular melanomas. The pathophysiology of uveal melanoma is distinct from cutaneous melanoma and has separate tumor profiles. The management of uveal melanoma is largely dependent on the presence of metastases, which confers a poor prognosis with a one-year survival reaching only 15%. Although a better understanding of tumor biology has led to the development of novel pharmacologic agents, there is increasing demand for minimally invasive management of hepatic uveal melanoma metastases. Multiple studies have already summarized the systemic therapeutic options available for metastatic uveal melanoma. This review covers the current research for the most prevalent locoregional treatment options for metastatic uveal melanoma including percutaneous hepatic perfusion, immunoembolization, chemoembolization, thermal ablation, and radioembolization.

Liver resection for metastatic uveal melanoma: experience from a supra-regional centre and review of literature

Management of liver metastases from uveal melanoma (LMUM) requires multimodal approach. This study describes evolution of liver resection for LMUM, reviewing current literature and institutional outcomes. Records of patients referred to the Melanoma Multi-Disciplinary Team between February 2005 and August 2018 were reviewed. All publications describing surgery for LMUM were identified from PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar. Thirty-one of 147 patients with LMUM underwent laparoscopic liver biopsy, and 29 (14 females) had liver resections. Nineteen liver resections were performed locally [7 major (≥3 seg), 14 laparoscopic] without major complications or mortality. Overall survival positively correlated with the time from uveal melanoma to LMUM (Spearman's rho rs  = 0.859, P  < 0.0001). Overall and recurrence-free survivals were comparable following R1 or R0 resections (OS 25 vs. 28 months, P  = 0.404; RFS 13 vs. 6 months, P  = 0.596). R1 resection cohort had longer lead-time (median 100 vs. 24 months, P  = 0.0408). Eleven publications describing liver resection for LMUM were identified and included in the narrative review. Surgery for LMUM is safe and complements multidisciplinary management. Despite heterogeneity in literature, time from diagnosis of uveal melanoma to LMUM remains a key factor affecting survival after liver resection.

Surgery for liver metastases from primary melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Historically , liver metastases due to melanoma have been associated with dismal prognosis. Moreover, the actual survival benefit from the treatment of melanoma liver metastases is still controversial. Hence, this study aims to evaluate the difference in surgical versus non-surgical options for melanoma liver metastases.

METHODS

Four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) were searched from inception to July 17, 2022. Studies were included if they compared outcomes between surgical and non-surgical treatment for patients with liver metastases from resectable melanoma. Meta-analyses were performed for the outcomes of 1-year, 2-year, 3-year and 5-year OS. Sensitivity analyses were performed for outcomes with substantial statistical heterogeneity. To account for possible moderators that might contribute to statistical heterogeneity, univariate meta-regression with mixed-effects models and subgroup analyses were conducted for the outcome of 2-year OS.

RESULTS

The search yielded 6610 articles; 13 studies were included in our analysis. Meta-analyses showed that survival outcomes were in favour of patients undergoing surgery as compared to non-surgery: 1-year OS (HR = 0.29, 95%CI 0.19-0.44, p < 0.00001), 2-year OS (HR = 0.19, 95%CI 0.09-0.38, p < 0.00001), 3-year OS (HR = 0.07, 95%CI 0.03-0.19, p < 0.00001) and 5-year OS (HR = 0.07, 95%CI 0.02-0.22, p < 0.00001). All included studies were of high quality. There was moderate-to-high statistical heterogeneity. Findings were robust to sensitivity analyses. Subgroup analyses and univariate meta-regression revealed neoadjuvant therapy and age as statistically significant subgroup and moderator respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that surgical treatment of melanoma liver metastases could offer better OS outcomes compared with non-surgical treatment.

Systemic and liver-directed therapies in metastatic uveal melanoma: state-of-the-art and novel perspectives

Metastatic uveal melanoma (MUM) is the most common form of noncutaneous melanoma. It is different from its cutaneous counterpart and is characterized by a very poor prognosis. Despite groundbreaking improvements in the treatment of cutaneous melanoma, there have been few advances in the treatment of MUM, and standard treatments for MUM have not been defined. We performed a systematic review focusing our attention on all interventional studies, ongoing or already published, concerning the treatment of MUM. We present results from studies of chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy and liver-directed therapies. Although the results in this setting have been disappointing until now, trials investigating novel immunotherapeutic strategies alone and in combination with targeted agents and liver-directed therapies are ongoing.

Impact of staging on survival outcomes: a nationwide real-world cohort study of metastatic uveal melanoma

No data exist regarding whether any first-line treatment for metastatic uveal melanoma provides overall survival (OS) benefit, if staged and compared to best supportive care (BSC). We analyzed OS in a nationwide, consecutive cohort diagnosed with metastatic uveal melanoma between January 1999 and December 2016. The Helsinki University Hospital Working Formulation was used to assign patients to stage IVa, IVb and IVc, corresponding to predicted median OS ≥12, <12-6 and <6 months, respectively. OS of 216 actively treated patients was compared by treatment and working formulation stage against 108 similarly staged, concurrent patients managed with BSC using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression. The median OS with active treatment was 18 (range, 0.7-162), 6.9 (range, 1.3-30) and 1.9 (range, 0.2-18) months in working formulation stage IVa, IVb and IVc, respectively. Patients who received chemoimmunotherapy, selective internal radiation therapy, or underwent surgical resection survived longer - median OS 13, 16 and 24 months, respectively - than those receiving conventional chemotherapy - median OS 5.1 months - but only with surgical resection their OS exceeded that with BSC, both overall and in stage IVa (P < 0.001, P = 0.010). In stage IVb and IVc, no difference in OS was observed in any comparison. Staging of patients is crucial when comparing survival after metastatic uveal melanoma. Only surgical resection for stage IVa disease provided longer OS in our national cohort. We additionally recommend stage-specific comparison of novel treatments against available BSC data.

An Overview of Liver Directed Locoregional Therapies

An overview of all liver-directed locoregional therapies, including surgical resection for melanoma liver metastases (MLMs), is provided. MLM patients are divided by their primary melanoma location; cutaneous, uvea (eye), and mucosal melanoma. If patients with isolated cutaneous MLMs are considered for surgical resection, treatment with systemic therapy should be part of the treatment course. For uveal MLMs, complete surgical or ablative treatment of all MLMs suggests superior results compared with other liver-directed or systemic therapies, based on current evidence, no recommendations for any liver-directed regional therapy in the treatment of mucosal MLMs can be made.

Locoregional Therapies for the Treatment of Uveal Melanoma Hepatic Metastases

Uveal melanoma is the most common primary intraocular malignant tumor in adults. Approximately 50% of patients develop metastatic disease of which greater than 90% of patients develop hepatic metastases. Following the development of liver tumors, overall survival is dismal with hepatic failure being the cause of death in nearly all cases. To prolong survival for patients with metastatic uveal melanoma, controlling the growth of hepatic tumors is essential. This article will discuss imaging surveillance following the diagnosis of primary uveal melanoma; locoregional therapies used to control the growth of hepatic metastases including chemoembolization, immunoembolization, radioembolization, percutaneous hepatic perfusion, and thermal ablation; as well as currently available systemic treatment options for metastatic uveal melanoma.

Gene Expression Profiling in Uveal Melanoma: Five-Year Prospective Outcomes and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

The prognostic 15-gene expression profile (15-GEP) test for uveal melanoma (UM) predicts metastatic risk based on primary tumor biology. Here we report outcomes from a prospective registry of 15-GEP-tested patients, and a meta-analysis with published cohorts.

Objectives

Management and 5-year clinical outcomes following 15-GEP testing were evaluated.

Methods

Eighty-nine patients with 15-GEP results were prospectively enrolled at four centers. Physician-recommended management plans were collected, and clinical outcomes tracked every 6 months.

Results

Eighty percent of Class 1 (low-risk) patients underwent low-intensity management; all Class 2 (high-risk) patients underwent high-intensity management (p < 0.0001). Median follow-up for event-free patients was 4.9 years. Five Class 1 (10%) and 23 Class 2 (58%) tumors metastasized (p < 0.0001). Five-year Class 1 and 2 metastasis-free survival rates were 90% (81-100%) and 41% (27-62%; p < 0.0001), and melanoma-specific survival rates were 94% (87-100%) and 63% (49-82%; p = 0.0007). Class 2 was the only independent predictor of metastasis and was associated with increased risk for metastasis and mortality by meta-analysis.

Conclusions

UM patient management is guided by 15-GEP testing. Class 2 patients were managed more intensely, in accordance with an observed metastatic rate of >50%; Class 1 patients were safely spared intensive surveillance, resulting in appropriate utilization of healthcare resources.

Molecular Insights and Emerging Strategies for Treatment of Metastatic Uveal Melanoma

Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common intraocular cancer. In recent decades, major advances have been achieved in the diagnosis and prognosis of UM allowing for tailored treatments. However, nearly 50% of patients still develop metastatic disease with survival rates of less than 1 year. There is currently no standard of adjuvant and metastatic treatment in UM, and available therapies are ineffective resulting from cutaneous melanoma protocols. Advances and novel treatment options including liver-directed therapies, immunotherapy, and targeted-therapy have been investigated in UM-dedicated clinical trials on single compounds or combinational therapies, with promising results. Therapies aimed at prolonging or targeting metastatic tumor dormancy provided encouraging results in other cancers, and need to be explored in UM. In this review, the latest progress in the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of UM in adjuvant and metastatic settings are discussed. In addition, novel insights into tumor genetics, biology and immunology, and the mechanisms underlying metastatic dormancy are discussed. As evident from the numerous studies discussed in this review, the increasing knowledge of this disease and the promising results from testing of novel individualized therapies could offer future perspectives for translating in clinical use.

Systematic review of liver directed therapy for uveal melanoma hepatic metastases

BACKGROUND

Uveal melanoma (UM) is a rare malignancy with a propensity for metastasis to the liver. Systemic chemotherapy is typically ineffective in these patients with liver metastases and overall survival is poor. There are no evidence-based guidelines for management of UM liver metastases. The aim of this study was to review the evidence for management of UM liver metastases.

METHODS

A systematic review of English literature publications was conducted across Ovid Medline, Ovid MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL databases until April 2019. The primary outcome was overall survival, with disease free survival as a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

55 studies were included in the study, with 2446 patients treated overall. The majority of these studies were retrospective, with 17 of 55 including comparative data. Treatment modalities included surgery, isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP), hepatic artery infusion (HAI), transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) and Immunoembolization (IE). Survival varied greatly between treatments and between studies using the same treatments. Both surgery and liver-directed treatments were shown to have benefit in selected patients.

CONCLUSION

Predominantly retrospective and uncontrolled studies suggest that surgery and locoregional techniques may prolong survival. Substantial variability in patient selection and study design makes comparison of data and formulation of recommendations challenging.

Uveal Melanoma Metastatic to the Liver: Treatment Trends and Outcomes

Objective

To describe treatment trends and outcomes of liver metastasis from uveal melanoma.

Methods

Retrospective case series of 73 patients with uveal melanoma liver metastasis. Patients were treated first-line with systemic therapy (not including checkpoint inhibitors), checkpoint inhibitors, local therapy or no treatment. Time to metastasis, detection method, and survival data were collected. Time periods were divided between 2004-2011 and 2012-2016. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

Median PFS and OS for the entire cohort was 4 months (95% CI 3-5) and 15 months (95% CI 11-18), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in PFS and OS across the two time periods. Patients who received no treatment had the shortest OS (median 4.9 months), whereas those treated with local therapy had the longest PFS (median 4.6 months) and OS (median 18.7 months). Having liver metastasis diagnosed by symptoms was associated with a greater risk of mortality (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Patients who received first-line local treatment had the longest PFS and OS, while patients who received no treatment had the shortest OS. Survival outcomes did not improve for patients including those receiving check point inhibitors.

Laparoscopic liver resection for metastatic melanoma

BACKGROUND

Stage IV metastatic melanoma carries a poor prognosis. In the case of melanoma liver metastasis (MLM), surgical resection may improve survival and represents a therapeutic option, with varying levels of success. Laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for metastatic melanoma is poorly studied. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of LLR in patients with MLM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between April 2000 and August 2013, 11 (1 cutaneous, 9 ocular and 1 unknown primary) patients underwent LLR for MLM at Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet and 13 procedures in total were carried out. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes were analyzed. Postoperative morbidity was classified using the Accordion classification. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 23 liver specimens were resected. The median operative time was 137 (65-470) min, while the median blood loss was less than 50 (<50-900) ml. No intraoperative unfavorable incidents and 30-day mortality occurred. Median follow-up was 33 (9-92) months. Ten patients (91%) developed recurrence within a median of 5 months (2-18 months) and two patients underwent repeat LLR for recurrent liver metastases. One-, three-, and five-year overall survival rates were 82, 45 and 9%, respectively. The median overall survival was 30 (9-92) months.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative morbidity and long-term survival after LLR for MLM seems to be comparable to open liver resection. Thus, LLR may be preferred over open liver resection due to the well-known advantages of laparoscopy, such as reduced pain and improved possibility for repeated resections.