Health-related quality of life results from the phase III CheckMate 067 study

For the Long Haul: Management of Long-Term Survivors after Melanoma Systemic Therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes the latest advancements in survivorship care for patients with advanced melanoma who received systemic therapy and emphasizes the areas where more research is needed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last decade there have been remarkable advances in the treatment of advanced and metastatic melanoma. Due to these novel treatments, including several immune checkpoint inhibitors and tyrosine kinase inhibitors, there are and will continue to be increasing numbers of long-term melanoma survivors who have been treated with systemic therapy. These patients will navigate new challenges are they are essentially among the first long term survivors after these novel therapies. Survivorship care focuses on improving the health-related quality of life of patients including the physical, emotional, social and functional effects of cancer that begin at diagnosis and continue through the end of life. Survivorship also includes screening for cancer recurrence and second cancers. As the number of melanoma survivors who received systemic therapy continues to grow, the survivorship care plan will become increasingly important for optimal care of patients even after their cancer treatments. Understanding the many domains of survivorship care for this group of patients is imperative for their care now and to identify unmet needs for future research.

Patients' experiences of cancer immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic review and thematic synthesis

AIM

To obtain a deeper understanding of peoples' experiences of cancer treatments with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs).

BACKGROUND

ICIs are transforming survival outcomes for many with certain advanced cancers. Given the possibility of unique immune-related adverse events (irAEs), understanding treatment experiences is crucial to identify support needs and provide safe and effective person-centred care.

DESIGN

A systematic review of qualitative research and thematic synthesis. To report this review, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Analysis and Meta Analysis (PRISMA) checklist and Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) guidance have been used.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science databases were searched in January 2022 for eligible studies published in English from database inception.

REVIEW METHODS

Two reviewers independently screened records, identified papers for inclusion and appraised methodological quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Themes were developed using thematic synthesis.

RESULTS

Eighteen papers were included and three analytical themes developed: immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment decision-making; the experience and impact of immune checkpoint inhibitor treatments; and appraising and responding to irAEs.

CONCLUSION

The synthesis renders visible individuals' unmet information, psychological and practical support needs. It identifies shortcomings in immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment decision-making processes and highlights the need for healthcare professionals to recognise and sensitively handle individuals' treatment expectations. Individuals' understandings of and responses to irAEs are also illustrated, and attention drawn to patients' concerns about healthcare professionals' checkpoint inhibitor and irAEs knowledge.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENT CARE

To sensitively manage treatment expectations and uncertainties, and optimise health outcomes, there are distinct points in treatment trajectories where care and support might require adapting and enhancing.

IMPACT

This review addresses people's experiences of immune checkpoint inhibitor treatments. The core findings reveal unmet information, psychological and practical support needs. Insights derived from this review will enhance individuals' experiences and outcomes and healthcare professionals' practice.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public involvement.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases: 7-year outcomes and quality of life from the multicenter phase III NIBIT-M2 trial

BACKGROUND

The primary analysis of the phase III NIBIT-M2 study showed a 41% 4-year overall survival (OS) of melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab.

METHODS

Here, we report the 7-year efficacy outcomes and the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) analyses of the NIBIT-M2 study.

RESULTS

As of May 1, 2023, at a median follow-up of 67 months (mo), the median OS was 8.5 (95% CI: 6.6-10.3), 8.2 (95% CI: 2.1-14.3) and 29.2 (95% CI: 0-69.9) mo for the fotemustine (F) Arm A, ipilimumab plus fotemustine Arm B, and ipilimumab plus nivolumab Arm C, respectively. The 7-year OS rate was 10.0% (95% CI: 0-22.5) in Arm A, 10.3% (95% CI: 0-22.6) in Arm B, and 42.8% (95% CI: 23.4-62.2) in Arm C. HRQoL was preserved in all treatment arms. Most functional scales evaluated from baseline to W12 were preserved, with a lower mean score decrease for EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and an increase for EORTC QLQ-Brain neoplasm (BN20) in patients receiving ipilimumab plus nivolumab.

CONCLUSIONS

With the longest follow-up available to date in melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases, the NIBIT-M2 study continues to show persistent therapeutic efficacy of I ipilimumab plus nivolumab while preserving HRQoL.

Immunotherapy Combined with Radiation in Malignant Melanoma without BRAF Mutations Brain Metastases-Favorable Response after Immunotherapy Continued beyond Progression

We present the case of a patient who was diagnosed in 2018 with nodular Malignant Melanoma (MM) without BRAF V 600 mutations stage 3 C (pT4b pN1a M0), and who underwent adjuvant citokines treatment with Interferon alpha 2b-48 weeks. Immunotherapy was initiated in January 2021 for lung and lymph node metastases. In June 2021, there was a partial response of the lung and lymph node metastases, but there was also progression to brain metastases. Immunotherapy was continued and Whole Brain Radiotherapy (WBRT) was performed. In September 2023, the imaging investigations revealed a favorable response, with no lesions suggestive of secondary determinations. The combination of Radiotherapy (RT) and Immunotherapy (IT) with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICI) has an abscopal effect. There is a coordinated action in the combination of RT and IT in order to obtain a common result, with the antitumor effect being greater than if RT or IT acted separately.

Pre-treatment 18F-FDG-PET/CT parameters as biomarkers for progression free survival, best overall response and overall survival in metastatic melanoma patients undergoing first-line immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Checkpoint inhibitors have drastically improved the therapy of patients with advanced melanoma. 18F-FDG-PET/CT parameters might act as biomarkers for response and survival and thus can identify patients that do not benefit from immunotherapy. However, little literature exists on the association of baseline 18F-FDG-PET/CT parameters with progression free survival (PFS), best overall response (BOR), and overall survival (OS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using a whole tumor volume segmentation approach, we investigated in a retrospective registry study (n = 50) whether pre-treatment 18F-FDG-PET/CT parameters of three subgroups (tumor burden, tumor glucose uptake and non-tumoral hematopoietic tissue metabolism), can act as biomarkers for the primary endpoints PFS and BOR as well as for the secondary endpoint OS.

RESULTS

Compared to the sole use of clinical parameters, baseline 18F-FDG-PET/CT parameters did not significantly improve a Cox proportional-hazard model for PFS (C-index/AIC: 0.70/225.17 and 0.68/223.54, respectively; p = 0.14). A binomial logistic regression analysis for BOR was not statistically significant (χ2(15) = 16.44, p = 0.35), with a low amount of explained variance (Nagelkerke's R2 = 0.38). Mean FDG uptake of the spleen contributed significantly to a Cox proportional-hazard model for OS (HR 3.55, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study could not confirm the capability of the pre-treatment 18F-FDG-PET/CT parameters tumor burden, tumor glucose uptake and non-tumoral hematopoietic tissue metabolism to act as biomarkers for PFS and BOR in metastatic melanoma patients receiving first-line immunotherapy. The documented potential of 18F-FDG uptake by immune-mediating tissues such as the spleen to act as a biomarker for OS has been reproduced.

Real-world outcomes with immuno-oncology therapies in advanced melanoma: final results of the OPTIMIzE registry study

Aim: The OPTIMIzE registry study evaluated real-world outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma receiving immuno-oncology therapies. Materials and methods: Data were collected for patients treated with anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) monotherapy (nivolumab or pembrolizumab; n = 147) or nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n = 81) from 2015-2017 and followed for ≥3 years. Results: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus anti-PD-1 monotherapy was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk of death (adjusted HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.54-1.28; p = 0.41), higher disease control rate (72 vs 56%; p = 0.04), and stable quality of life, but more grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (54 vs 26%; p < 0.0001). Conclusion: These results support the use of immuno-oncology therapy in advanced melanoma.

Measuring the impact of monoclonal antibody therapies

Objective

Monoclonal antibody (Mab) treatments have significantly improved the quality and quantity of life, but they are some of the most expensive treatments, resulting in a degree of hesitancy to introduce new Mab agents. A system for estimating the effect of Mab drugs, in general, would optimally inform health strategy and fully realize how a single scientific discovery can deliver health benefits. We evaluated such a method with several well-established Mab regimens.

Methods

We selected five different Mab regimens in oncology and rheumatology in England. We carried out two systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses to assess health outcomes (Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index for rheumatoid arthritis; overall mortality for melanoma) from real-world data and compared them to the outcomes from randomized control trials (RCTs). We applied economic modeling to estimate the net monetary benefits for health outcomes for the estimated patient population size for each Mab regimen.

Results

Meta-analyses of 27 eligible real-world data (RWD) sets and 26 randomized controlled trial (RCT) sets found close agreement between the observed and expected health outcomes. A Markov model showed the net positive monetary benefit in three Mab regimens and the negative benefit in two regimens. However, because of limited access to NHS data, the economic model made several assumptions about the number of treated patients and the cost of treatment to the NHS, the accuracy of which may affect the estimation of the net monetary benefit.

Conclusion

RCT results reliably inform the real-world experience of Mab treatments. Calculation of the net monetary benefit by the algorithm described provides a valuable overall measure of the health impact, subject to the accuracy of data inputs. This study provides a compelling case for building a comprehensive, systematized, and accessible database and related analytics, on all Mab treatments within health services.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, version 3.0

Since the first approval for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma more than a decade ago, immunotherapy has completely transformed the treatment landscape of this chemotherapy-resistant disease. Combination regimens including ICIs directed against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) with anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) agents or, more recently, anti-lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) agents, have gained regulatory approvals for the treatment of metastatic cutaneous melanoma, with long-term follow-up data suggesting the possibility of cure for some patients with advanced disease. In the resectable setting, adjuvant ICIs prolong recurrence-free survival, and neoadjuvant strategies are an active area of investigation. Other immunotherapy strategies, such as oncolytic virotherapy for injectable cutaneous melanoma and bispecific T-cell engager therapy for HLA-A*02:01 genotype-positive uveal melanoma, are also available to patients. Despite the remarkable efficacy of these regimens for many patients with cutaneous melanoma, traditional immunotherapy biomarkers (ie, programmed death-ligand 1 expression, tumor mutational burden, T-cell infiltrate and/or microsatellite stability) have failed to reliably predict response. Furthermore, ICIs are associated with unique toxicity profiles, particularly for the highly active combination of anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 agents. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to develop this clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, including rare subtypes of the disease (eg, uveal, mucosal), with the goal of improving patient care by providing guidance to the oncology community. Drawing from published data and clinical experience, the Expert Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for healthcare professionals using immunotherapy to treat melanoma, with topics including therapy selection in the advanced and perioperative settings, intratumoral immunotherapy, when to use immunotherapy for patients with BRAFV600-mutated disease, management of patients with brain metastases, evaluation of treatment response, special patient populations, patient education, quality of life, and survivorship, among others.

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures for advanced skin cancer patients

Many patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been used to study quality of life (QOL) in the skin cancer population. Advanced melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) may be associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and treatment side effects; however, it is unclear which PROM is valid and appropriate to use in these populations for both clinical and research purposes. We aimed to identify the PROMs that have been used to measure QOL in advanced skin cancer patients and determine which of these PROMs have been validated to assess QOL outcomes in this population. A PubMed and EMBASE search was conducted from its inception to March 2021 according to PRISMA guidelines with a comprehensive list of search terms under three main topics: (1) PROM; (2) advanced skin cancer; and (3) staging and interventions. We included articles utilizing a PROM measuring QOL and having a patient population with advanced skin cancer defined as melanoma stage > T1a or non-melanoma AJCC stage T3 or greater. Advanced skin cancer patients were also defined as those with metastasis or requiring adjuvant therapy (systemic chemotherapy, radiation, and immunotherapy). Studies were excluded according to the following criteria: mix of low-risk and advanced skin cancer patients in the study population without stratification into low-risk and advanced groups, stage T1a melanoma or mix of stages without stratification, low-risk NMSC, no PROM (i.e., study specific questionnaires), non-English publication, review article or protocol paper, conference abstract, or populations including non-skin cancers. A total of 1,998 articles were identified. 82 met our inclusion criteria resulting in 22 PROMs: five generic health-related (QWB-SA, AQoL-8D, EQ-5D, SF-36, and PRISM), six general cancer (EORTC QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-C36, LASA, IOC, Rotterdam Symptom Checklist, and FACT-G), nine disease-focused or specialized (EORTC QLQ-H&N35, EORTC QLQ-MEL38, EORTC QLQ-BR23, Facial Disability Index, FACT-H&N, FACT-BRM, FACT-B, FACT-M, and scqolit), and two general dermatology (Skindex-16 and DLQI) PROMs. All PROMs have been generally validated except for EORTC QLQ-MEL38. Only two PROMs have been validated in the advanced melanoma population: FACT-M and EORTC QLQ-C36. No PROMS have been validated in the advanced NMSC population. The PROMs that were validated in the advanced melanoma population do not include QOL issues unique to advanced skin tumors such as odor, bleeding, itching, wound care burden, and public embarrassment. Breast cancer and head and neck cancer instruments were adapted but not validated for use in the advanced skin cancer population due to the lack of an adequate instrument for this population. This study highlights the need for PROM instrument validation or creation specifically geared toward the advanced skin cancer population. Future studies should aim to develop and validate a PROM to assess QOL in this population.

Health-related quality of life with nivolumab plus relatlimab versus nivolumab monotherapy in patients with previously untreated unresectable or metastatic melanoma: RELATIVITY-047 trial

BACKGROUND

In the phase II/III RELATIVITY-047 trial, a novel fixed-dose combination (FDC) of nivolumab plus relatlimab (NIVO + RELA; a programmed death-1 and a lymphocyte-activation gene 3 inhibitor, respectively) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus NIVO in patients with previously untreated unresectable or metastatic melanoma (median follow-up, 13.2 months) with stable health-related quality of life (HRQoL), although grade three or four treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were more frequent with the combination. Updated HRQoL results (median follow-up, 19.3 months) are presented.

METHODS

Patients were randomised to receive intravenous NIVO + RELA (480 mg and 160 mg, respectively) or NIVO (480 mg) every 4 weeks. HRQoL was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Melanoma (FACT-M) and EQ-5D-3L questionnaires at baseline, before dosing at each treatment cycle, and at follow-up (posttreatment) visits.

RESULTS

Consistent with the initial analysis, HRQoL remained stable with NIVO + RELA on treatment and was similar to that with NIVO. Mean changes from baseline did not exceed clinically meaningful thresholds. HRQoL results were consistent across instruments and scales/subscales. Despite an increased rate of grade three or four TRAEs with NIVO + RELA versus NIVO, the proportion of patients reporting that they were bothered 'quite a bit' or 'very much' by TRAEs was low and comparable between treatments.

CONCLUSION

Results from the RELATIVITY-047 trial show that the PFS benefit with NIVO + RELA FDC over NIVO was obtained with stable patient-reported HRQoL, supporting NIVO + RELA as a first-line treatment option for patients with advanced melanoma.

Better Late Than Never: The Impact of Steroidal Treatment on the Outcome of Melanoma Patients Treated with Immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Successful treatment with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICI) requires the balanced activation of the immune system. Over-activation may result in immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which often require steroidal treatment. This study examined the possible impact of steroids on treatment efficacy in melanoma patients concerning initiation timing and dosage.

METHODS

A retrospective, single-center analysis of patients with advanced melanoma who underwent first-line ICI therapy during 2014-2020 was conducted.

RESULTS

Among the 415 patients, two-hundred patients (48.3%) were exposed to steroids during the first line, most of them due to irAEs (n = 169, 84.5%). Nearly a quarter of them were exposed to steroids within the first four weeks of treatment. Surprisingly, steroidal exposure was associated with better progression-free survival (PFS; HR = 0.74, p = 0.015); however, early exposure (within four weeks of treatment) resulted in a significantly shorter PFS compared to late exposure (adjusted HR 3.2, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Early exposure to corticosteroids during the priming phase of ICI therapy could impede the establishment of an effective immune response. These results suggest that caution should be exercised when considering the use of steroids for the management of early-onset irAEs.

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with two cycles of chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone (four cycles) in metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: CheckMate 9LA 2-year patient-reported outcomes

BACKGROUND

In CheckMate 9LA (NCT03215706), first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy (2 cycles) significantly improved overall survival versus chemotherapy (4 cycles) in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer and no known sensitising epidermal growth factor receptor/anaplastic lymphoma kinase alterations. We present exploratory patient-reported outcomes (PROs; minimum follow-up, 2 years).

METHODS

In patients (N = 719) randomised 1:1 to nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone, disease-related symptom burden and health-related quality of life were assessed using the Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) and 3-level EQ-5D (EQ-5D-3L). Treatment-phase changes in LCSS average symptom burden index (ASBI), LCSS three-item global index (3-IGI) and EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale (VAS) and utility index (UI) over time were analysed descriptively and using mixed-effect model repeated measures. Time-to-deterioration/improvement analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Treatment-phase PRO questionnaire completion rates were >80%. Mean treatment-phase changes showed no deterioration from baseline in both arms for LCSS ASBI/3-IGI and EQ-5D-3L VAS/UI; however, minimally important differences were not met. Mixed-effect model repeated measures analyses showed overall reduction in symptom burden from baseline for both arms; changes from baseline for LCSS 3-IGI and EQ-5D-3L VAS/UI were numerically improved with nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy, but minimally important differences were not met. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy delayed time-to-definitive-deterioration versus chemotherapy (LCSS ASBI: hazard ratio, 0.62 [95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.87]); results were similar across PRO measures.

CONCLUSIONS

At 2-year minimum follow-up, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab with chemotherapy reduced the risk of definitive deterioration in disease-related symptom burden and health-related quality of life versus chemotherapy and maintained QoL in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT03215706.

Impact of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy on health-related quality of life of people with stage III and IV melanoma: a mixed-methods systematic review

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and targeted therapies (TT) have significantly improved disease control and survival in people with stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma. Understanding the impact of therapy on health-related quality of life (HRQL) is vital for treatment decision-making and determining targets for supportive care intervention. We conducted a mixed-methods systematic review to synthesise the impact of ICIs and TT on all domains of HRQL in these populations.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in April 2022 on MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Quantitative and qualitative data relevant to the review question were extracted and synthesised in tables according to setting (adjuvant versus metastatic), treatment type (ICI versus TT) and HRQL issue.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight papers describing 27 studies were included: 15 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), four cohort studies, four single arm cross-sectional studies, two qualitative studies, one case control study and one mixed-methods study. In four studies of people with resected stage III melanoma, adjuvant pembrolizumab and dabrafenib-trametinib did not clinically or statistically change HRQL compared to baseline. In 17 studies of people with unresectable stage III/IV melanoma, inconsistencies in the impact of ICI on symptoms, functioning and overall HRQL were noted across different study designs. TT was associated with improvements in symptoms, functioning and HRQL across six studies.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the key physical, psychological and social issues experienced by people with stage III and IV melanoma treated with ICI and TT. Inconsistencies in the impact of ICI on HRQL were observed in different study designs. This highlights the need for treatment-specific patient-reported outcome measures for determining the impact of these therapies on HRQL and real-world data to inform treatment decision-making and appropriate supportive care interventions.

Quality of life and mental health in real-world patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma receiving adjuvant immunotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has expanded into the adjuvant setting enhancing the importance of knowledge on the immune-related toxicities and their impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Large phase 3 trials of patients with resected Stage III/IV melanoma found no effect on HRQoL during adjuvant immunotherapy. This study investigates how HRQoL was affected during and after adjuvant immunotherapy in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Patients with resected melanoma treated with adjuvant nivolumab from 2018 to 2021 in Denmark were identified using the Danish Metastatic Melanoma Database (DAMMED). The study was performed as a nationwide cross-sectional analysis as a questionnaire consisting of six different validated questionnaires on HRQoL, cognitive function, fatigue, depression, fear of recurrence, and decision regret was sent to all patients in March 2021. To evaluate HRQoL during and after adjuvant treatment, patients were divided into groups depending on their treatment status when answering the questionnaire; patients in active treatment for 0-6 months, patients in active treatment for >6 months, patients who ended treatment 0-6 months ago, and patients who ended treatment >6 months ago.

RESULTS

A total of 271/412 (66%) patients completed the questionnaire. Patients who ended therapy 0-6 months ago had the lowest HRQoL and had more fatigue. Patients in active treatment for >6 months had lower HRQoL and more fatigue than patients who started treatment 0-6 months ago. Patients ending therapy >6 months ago had higher HRQoL and less fatigue compared to patients who ended therapy 0-6 months ago. Multivariable analysis showed an association between HRQoL and treatment status, comorbidity, civil status, and employment status.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant nivolumab may affect some aspects of QoL, but the influence seems temporary. Patient characteristics, such as civil status, employment status, and comorbidity were associated with HRQoL.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Sequential Treatment Strategies for Advanced Melanoma in Real Life in France

Nine drugs have been marketed for 10 years for the treatment of advanced melanoma (AM). With half of patients reaching a second line, the optimal sequence of treatments remains unclear. To inform policy-makers about their efficiency, we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of sequential strategies in clinical practice in France, for BRAF-mutated and wild-type patients. A multistate model was developed to describe treatment sequences, associated costs, and health outcomes over 10 years. Sequences, clinical outcomes, utility scores, and economic data were extracted from the prospective Melbase cohort, collecting individual data in 1518 patients since 2013, from their AM diagnosis until their death. To adjust the differences in patients' characteristics among sequences, weighting by inverse probability was used. In the BRAF-mutated population, the MONO-targeted therapies (TT)-anti-PD1 sequence was the less expensive, whereas the anti-PD1-BI-TT sequence had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 180,441 EUR/QALY. Regarding the BRAF wild-type population, the three sequences constituted the cost-effective frontier, with ICERs ranging from 116 to 806,000 EUR/QALY. For BRAF-mutated patients, the sequence anti-PD1-BI-TT appeared to be the most efficient one in BRAF-mutated AM patients until 2018. Regarding the BRAF wild-type population until 2018, the sequence starting with IPI+NIVO appeared inefficient compared to anti-PD1, considering the extra cost for the QALY gained.

Health-related quality of life in patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab: prognostic implications and changes during treatment

Background

We have previously reported that the safety and efficacy of ipilimumab in real-world patients with metastatic melanoma were comparable to clinical trials. Few studies have explored health-related quality of life (HRQL) in real-world populations receiving checkpoint inhibitors. This study reports HRQL in real-world patients receiving ipilimumab and assesses the prognostic value of patient-reported outcome measures.

Patients and methods

Ipi4 (NCT02068196) was a prospective, multicentre, interventional phase IV trial. Real-world patients (N = 151) with metastatic melanoma were treated with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg intravenously as labelled. HRQL was assessed by the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire at baseline and after 10-12 weeks.

Results

The European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire was completed by 93% (141/151 patients) at baseline, and by 82% at 10-12 weeks. Poor performance status and elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) were associated with worse baseline HRQL. Clinically relevant and statistically significant deteriorations in HRQL from baseline to weeks 10-12 were reported (P <0.05). Baseline physical functioning [hazard ratio (HR) 1.96, P = 0.016], role functioning (HR 2.15, P <0.001), fatigue (HR 1.60, P = 0.030), and appetite loss (HR 1.76, P = 0.012) were associated with poorer overall survival independent of performance status, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and CRP. We further developed a prognostic model, combining HRQL outcomes with performance status, LDH, and CRP. This model identified three groups with large and statistically significant differences in survival.

Conclusions

Systemic inflammation is associated with impaired HRQL. During treatment with ipilimumab, HRQL deteriorated significantly. Combining HRQL outcomes with objective risk factors provided additional prognostic information that may aid clinical decision making.

•

HRQL was independently associated with survival in patients with metastatic melanoma receiving ipilimumab.

•

Patients experienced clinically meaningful and statistically significant deteriorations in HRQL during therapy.

•

A prognostic model combining HRQL and biological markers defined three groups with highly variable life expectancies.

•

This prognostic model may be of use in clinical decision making.

Health-related quality of life trajectories in melanoma patients after electrochemotherapy: real-world insights from the InspECT register

BACKGROUND

Electrochemotherapy (ECT) effectively controls skin metastases from cutaneous melanoma.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in melanoma patients pre-/post-ECT and its effect on treatment outcome.

METHODS

The analysis included prospective data from the International Network for Sharing Practices of ECT register. Following the Standard Operating Procedures, patients received intravenous or intratumoural bleomycin (15,000 IU/m2 ; 1000 IU mL/cm3 ) followed by 100-microsecond, 1000-V/cm electric pulses. Endpoints included response (RECIST v3.0), local progression-free survival (LPFS), toxicity (CTCAE v5.0), and patient-reported HRQoL at baseline, one, two, four and ten months (EuroQol [EQ-5D-3L], including 5-item utility score [EQ-5D] and visual analogue scale for self-reported health state [EQ-VAS]). Comparisons within/between subgroups were made for statistical and minimal important differences (MID). HRQoL scores and clinical covariates were analysed to identify predictors of response in multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Median tumour size was 2 cm. Complete response rate, G3 toxicity and one-year LPFS in 378 patients (76% of the melanoma cohort) were 47%, 5%, and 78%. At baseline, age-paired HRQoL did not differ from the general European population. Following ECT, both EQ-5D and EQ-VAS scores remained within MID boundaries, particularly among complete responders. A subanalysis of the EQ-5D items revealed a statistically significant deterioration in pain/discomfort and mobility (restored within four months), and self-care and usual activities (throughout the follow-up) domains. Concomitant checkpoint inhibition correlated with better EQ-5D and EQ-VAS trajectories. Baseline EQ-5D was the exclusive independent predictor for complete response (RR 14.76, p=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

HRQoL of ECT melanoma patients parallels the general population and is preserved in complete responders. Transient deterioration in pain/discomfort and mobility and persistent decline in self-care and usual activities may warrant targeted support interventions. Combination with checkpoint inhibitors is associated with better QoL outcomes. Baseline HRQoL provides predictive information which can help identify patients most likely to respond.

Combination of Whole-Body Baseline CT Radiomics and Clinical Parameters to Predict Response and Survival in a Stage-IV Melanoma Cohort Undergoing Immunotherapy

Simple Summary

The use of immunotherapeutic agents significantly improved stage-IV melanoma patients’ overall progression-free survival. To identify patients who do not benefit from immunotherapy, both clinical parameters and experimental biomarkers such as radiomics are currently being evaluated. However, no radiomic biomarker is widely accepted for routine clinical use. In a large cohort of 262 stage-IV melanoma patients given first-line immunotherapy treatment, we investigated whether radiomics—based on the segmentation of all baseline metastases in the whole body—in combination with clinical parameters offered added value compared to the usage of clinical parameters alone in a machine-learning prediction model. The primary endpoints were response at three months, and survival rates at six and twelve months. The study indicated a potential, but non-significant, added value of radiomics for six-month and twelve-month survival prediction, thus underlining the relevance of clinical parameters.

Abstract

Background: This study investigated whether a machine-learning-based combination of radiomics and clinical parameters was superior to the use of clinical parameters alone in predicting therapy response after three months, and overall survival after six and twelve months, in stage-IV malignant melanoma patients undergoing immunotherapy with PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors and CTLA-4 checkpoint inhibitors. Methods: A random forest model using clinical parameters (demographic variables and tumor markers = baseline model) was compared to a random forest model using clinical parameters and radiomics (extended model) via repeated 5-fold cross-validation. For this purpose, the baseline computed tomographies of 262 stage-IV malignant melanoma patients treated at a tertiary referral center were identified in the Central Malignant Melanoma Registry, and all visible metastases were three-dimensionally segmented (n = 6404). Results: The extended model was not significantly superior compared to the baseline model for survival prediction after six and twelve months (AUC (95% CI): 0.664 (0.598, 0.729) vs. 0.620 (0.545, 0.692) and AUC (95% CI): 0.600 (0.526, 0.667) vs. 0.588 (0.481, 0.629), respectively). The extended model was not significantly superior compared to the baseline model for response prediction after three months (AUC (95% CI): 0.641 (0.581, 0.700) vs. 0.656 (0.587, 0.719)). Conclusions: The study indicated a potential, but non-significant, added value of radiomics for six-month and twelve-month survival prediction of stage-IV melanoma patients undergoing immunotherapy.

Single-center prospective study on the efficacy of nivolumab against platinum-sensitive recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Nivolumab, an immune checkpoint inhibitor, is beneficial to patients with platinum-refractory recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M-HNSCC). However, platinum-sensitive R/M-HNSCC has not yet been studied. Hence, in this prospective study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab in patients with platinum-sensitive R/M-HNSCC. This prospective single-arm study was conducted in a single institution in Japan. Patients with platinum-sensitive R/M-HNSCC (defined as head and neck cancer that recurred or metastasized at least 6 months after platinum-based chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) were enrolled. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and quality of life (QOL). This study was registered at the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000031324). Twenty-two patients with platinum-sensitive R/M-HNSCC were enrolled. The median OS was 17.4 months, and the 1-year OS rate was 73%. The median PFS was 9.6 months, 1-year PFS rate was 48%, and ORR was 36%. Sixteen irAEs were recorded in 12 patients; however, no grade 4 or 5 irAEs were observed. The QOL assessments revealed that nivolumab did not decrease the QOL of patients. Nivolumab is effective against platinum-sensitive R/M-HNSCC with acceptable safety.

Defining unique clinical hallmarks for immune checkpoint inhibitor-based therapies

Introduction

Immuno-oncology therapies, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), have transformed cancer care and have brought into question whether classic oncology efficacy assessments adequately describe the distinctive responses observed with these agents. With more ICI-based therapies being approved across multiple tumor types, it is essential to define unique clinical hallmarks of these agents and their associated assessments to better reflect the therapeutic impact for both patients and physicians. Long-term survival and objective responses, such as depth and durability of responses, treatment-free survival, efficacy in brain metastases, improved health-related quality of life, and unique safety profiles, are among the hallmarks that have emerged for ICI therapies. An established clinical hallmark is a sustained long-term survival, as evidenced by a delayed separation of Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and a plateau at ~3 years. Combination ICI therapies provide the opportunity to raise this plateau, thereby affording durable survival benefits to more patients. Deepening of responses over time is a unique clinical ICI hallmark, with patients responding long term and with more durable complete responses. Depth of response has demonstrated prognostic value for long-term survival in some cancers, and several ICI studies have shown sustained responses even after discontinuing ICI therapy, offering the potential for treatment-free intervals. Although clinical evidence supporting efficacy in brain metastases is limited, favorable ICI intracranial responses have been seen that are largely concordant with extracranial responses. While patient outcomes can be significantly improved with ICIs, they are associated with unique immune-mediated adverse reactions (IMARs), including delayed ICI toxicities, and may require multidisciplinary management for optimal care. Interestingly, patients discontinuing ICIs for IMARs may maintain responses similar to patients who did not discontinue for an IMAR, whether they restarted ICI therapy or not.

Conclusion

Herein, we comprehensively review and refine the clinical hallmarks uniquely associated with ICI therapies, which not only will rejuvenate our assessment of ICI therapeutic outcomes but also will lead to a greater appreciation of the effectiveness of ICI therapies.

Treatment-free survival over extended follow-up of patients with advanced melanoma treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors in CheckMate 067

BACKGROUND

Treatment-free survival (TFS) characterizes disease control after discontinuation of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) until subsequent therapy or death. We previously evaluated TFS in a pooled analysis of the CheckMate 067 and CheckMate 069 trials of the ICIs nivolumab and ipilimumab, alone or in combination, in patients with advanced melanoma after minimum follow-up of 36 months. This analysis investigated TFS differences between treatments in CheckMate 067 after a minimum follow-up of 60 months, and their relation to overall survival (OS) differences.

METHODS

Data were from 937 patients who initiated treatment (nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, or ipilimumab) in CheckMate 067 (NCT01844505). TFS was defined as the area between the Kaplan-Meier curves for time to protocol therapy cessation and time to subsequent systemic therapy initiation or death, each measured from randomization. TFS was partitioned as time with and without toxicity. Toxicity included persistent and late-onset grade ≥2 select treatment-related adverse events (ie, those of potential immunologic etiology). The area between Kaplan-Meier curves was estimated by the difference in 60-month restricted-mean times of the endpoints. Between-group differences were estimated with bootstrapped 95% CIs.

RESULTS

At 60 months from randomization, 39%, 24%, and 11% of patients assigned to treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, and ipilimumab, respectively, had survived and were treatment-free. The 60-month mean TFS was approximately twice as long with the combination (19.7 months) than with nivolumab (9.9 months; absolute difference, 9.8 (95% CI 6.7 to 12.8)) or ipilimumab (11.9 months; absolute difference, 7.8 (95% CI 4.6 to 11.0)). In the respective groups, mean TFS represented 33% (8% with and 25% without toxicity), 17% (2% and 14%), and 20% (3% and 17%) of the 60-month period. Compared with 36-month estimates, mean TFS over the 60-month period represented slightly greater percentages of time in the nivolumab-containing regimen groups and a lesser percentage in the ipilimumab group. TFS differences between the combination and either monotherapy increased with longer follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Along with improved long-term OS with the nivolumab-containing regimens versus ipilimumab, TFS without toxicity was sustained with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus either monotherapy, demonstrating larger between-group differences with extended follow-up.

Comparison of Efficacy in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma Treated with Ipilimumab and Nivolumab Who Did or Did Not Discontinue Treatment Due to Immune-Related Adverse Events: A Real-World Data Study

Simple Summary

This retrospective study of real-world patients with metastatic melanoma shows that discontinuing treatment with combination immunotherapy due to adverse events does not result in a poorer outcome compared to patients that did not discontinue due to toxicity. This is important knowledge for clinicians and patients, as discontinuing treatment may cause great anxiety for patients because they believe that it may limit the response.

Abstract

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are very prevalent when treating patients with ipilimumab and nivolumab in combination, and 30–40% of patients discontinue the treatment for this reason. It is of high clinical relevance to investigate the consequences of discontinuing the treatment early since combination therapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab is the first line of treatment for many patients with metastatic melanoma. In this follow-up study, with real-world data from the nationwide DAMMED database, we investigated whether there was a difference in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients who discontinued or did not discontinue treatment within the first four doses of treatment due to irAEs. In total, 448 patients were treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab. Of these, 133 patients discontinued due to irAEs in the induction phase. Using the Cox proportional hazards model, there was no significant difference in PFS when comparing the group that discontinued with the group that did not discontinue. The group that discontinued had a significantly longer OS than the group that received the full length of treatment. Therefore, we conclude that there is no significant negative impact on efficacy for patients who discontinue due to irAEs in the induction phase of combination immunotherapy for metastatic melanoma.

Meta-Analysis of Quality of Life in Cancer Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have published patient-reported quality of life (QOL), but the size and heterogeneity of this literature can make patient education difficult. This meta-analysis aimed to describe change in QOL and symptomatology in patients receiving ICIs for cancer.

METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, databases were searched through November 2019 for articles or abstracts of prospective, original studies reporting longitudinal QOL in adult cancer patients treated with ICIs. The prespecified primary outcomes were change in global QOL among patients treated with ICIs and difference in change since baseline in global QOL between patients treated with ICI vs. non-ICI active treatment. Secondary outcomes included physical functioning and symptomatology. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

RESULTS

Twenty-six of 20,323 publications met inclusion criteria. Global QOL did not change over time in patients treated with ICIs (k = 26, n = 6,974, P = .19). Larger improvements in global QOL was observed in patients receiving ICI vs. non-ICI regimens (k = 16, ICI n = 3,588, non-ICI n = 2,948, P < .001). Physical functioning did not change in patients treated with ICIs (k = 14, n = 3,169, P=.47); there were no differences in mean change between ICI vs. non-ICI regimens (k = 11, n = 4,630, P=.94. Regarding symptoms, appetite loss, insomnia, and pain severity decreased but dyspnea severity increased in patients treated with ICIs (k = 14, n = 3,243-3,499) (Ps < 0.001). Insomnia severity was higher in patients treated with ICIs than non-ICI regimens (k = 11, n = 4,791) (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study is among the first to quantitatively summarize QOL in patients treated with ICIs. Findings suggest ICI recipients report no change in global QOL and higher QOL than patients treated with non-ICI regimens.

Clinical Categorization Algorithm (CLICAL) and Machine Learning Approach (SRF-CLICAL) to Predict Clinical Benefit to Immunotherapy in Metastatic Melanoma Patients: Real-World Evidence from the Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione Pascale, Napoli, Italy

The real-life application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may yield different outcomes compared to the benefit presented in clinical trials. For this reason, there is a need to define the group of patients that may benefit from treatment. We retrospectively investigated 578 metastatic melanoma patients treated with ICIs at the Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione "G. Pascale" of Napoli, Italy (INT-NA). To compare patients' clinical variables (i.e., age, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), eosinophil, BRAF status, previous treatment) and their predictive and prognostic power in a comprehensive, non-hierarchical manner, a clinical categorization algorithm (CLICAL) was defined and validated by the application of a machine learning algorithm-survival random forest (SRF-CLICAL). The comprehensive analysis of the clinical parameters by log risk-based algorithms resulted in predictive signatures that could identify groups of patients with great benefit or not, regardless of the ICI received. From a real-life retrospective analysis of metastatic melanoma patients, we generated and validated an algorithm based on machine learning that could assist with the clinical decision of whether or not to apply ICI therapy by defining five signatures of predictability with 95% accuracy.

Impact of open-label versus blinded study design on patient-reported outcomes data in randomized clinical trials of immunotherapy in advanced or metastatic cancer patients: a systematic review

AIM

A systematic literature review of immuno-oncology trials was conducted to assess the potential impact of open-label vs double-blind trial design on patient-reported outcome (PRO) data.

METHODS

A systematic search of indexed literature published from January 2009 to May 2019 was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE database. All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of immuno-oncology therapies on advanced cancer patients reporting PRO data were identified. Descriptive analyses were performed to quantify differences at baseline and over time, by the type of study, regarding questionnaire completion rate and PRO scores.

RESULTS

In total, 23 studies were retained (15 open-label, 8 blinded). At baseline, no difference in completion rate was observed between arms irrespective of trial design (absolute mean difference of 2.8% and 2.2% for open label and blinded studies, respectively). No clinically significant difference in baseline PRO scores was observed between arms. Over time, impact on PRO scores could not be identified due to the limited number of studies, heterogeneity of questionnaires and tumor types.

CONCLUSIONS

Trial design had no impact on PRO completion rate or baseline scores. Future research should involve analyses by specific cancer types and ideally compare individual data from two similar RCTs (blinded vs. open-label).

Quality of life in long-term survivors of advanced melanoma treated with checkpoint inhibitors

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (CIs) have revolutionized treatment of advanced melanoma, leading to an emerging population of long-term survivors. Survivors’ quality of life (QOL) and symptom burden are poorly understood. We set out to evaluate symptom burden and QOL in patients with advanced melanoma alive more than 1 year after initiating CI therapy.

Methods

Cross-sectional surveys, accompanied by chart review of patients with advanced melanoma treated with CIs at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, completed therapy, and were alive >1 year after treatment initiation. Surveys were administered between February and August 2018. Surveys included: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30, EuroQOL, items from Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and Fatigue Severity Scale.

Results

We included 90 patients. The most common CI regimens were ipilimumab plus nivolumab (53%) and pembrolizumab (41%); most patients (71%) were not treated in clinical trials. Median time from CI therapy initiation was 40 months and from last dose was 28 months. Fatigue was reported by 28%, with higher fatigue scores in women than men; 12% reported difficulty sleeping. Aching joints (17%) and muscles (12%) were fairly common. Level of functioning was generally high. Overall QOL was excellent though 40% reported ‘some or moderate’ problems with anxiety/depression and 31% with pain/discomfort.

Conclusions

After CI therapy, long-surviving advanced melanoma patients commonly report fatigue but otherwise have moderate symptom burden and good QOL. Ensuring appropriate symptom management will optimize clinical outcomes for these patients.

Experiences of cancer immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ExCIm)-insights of people affected by cancer and healthcare professionals: a qualitative study protocol

INTRODUCTION

There is a global interest in cancer immunotherapy. Clinical trials have found that one group, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), has demonstrated clinical benefits across various cancers. However, research focused on the experiences of people affected by cancer who have undergone this treatment using qualitative methodology is currently limited. Moreover, little is known about the experiences and education needs of the healthcare staff supporting the people receiving these immunotherapies. This study therefore seeks to explore the experiences of using ICIs by both the people affected by cancer and the healthcare professionals who support those people, and use the findings to make recommendations for ICI supportive care guidance development, cancer immunotherapy education materials for healthcare professionals, cancer policy and further research.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Patient participants (n=up to 30) will be recruited within the UK. The sample will incorporate a range of perspectives, sociodemographic factors, diagnoses and ICI treatments, yet share some common experiences. Healthcare professionals (n=up to 15) involved in supporting people receiving immunotherapy will also be recruited from across the UK. Data will be generated through in-depth, semistructured interviews. Reflexive thematic analysis will be used to obtain thorough understanding of individual's perspectives on, and experiences of, immunotherapy. Study dates are as follows: December 2019-March 2022.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The research will be performed in accordance with the UK Policy for Health and Social Care Research and Cardiff University's Research Integrity and Governance Code of Practice (2018). The study received ethical approval from the West Midlands and Black Country Research Ethics Committee in October 2019. Health Research Authority and Health and Care Research Wales approvals were confirmed in December 2019. All participants will provide informed consent. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, non-academic platforms, the Macmillan Cancer Support website, disseminated at relevant national and international conferences and presented via a webinar. The study is listed on the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network Central Portfolio.

Adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected stage III melanoma (EORTC 1325-MG/KEYNOTE-054): health-related quality-of-life results from a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 1325-MG/KEYNOTE-054 trial in patients with resected, high-risk stage III melanoma demonstrated improved recurrence-free survival with adjuvant pembrolizumab compared with placebo (hazard ratio 0·57 [98·4% CI 0·43-0·74]; p<0·0001). This study reports the results from the health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) exploratory endpoint.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was done at 123 academic centres and community hospitals across 23 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated histologically confirmed stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC resected cutaneous melanoma, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 1 or 0 were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a central interactive voice-response system on the basis of a minimisation technique stratified for stage and geographic region to receive intravenously 200 mg pembrolizumab or placebo. Treatment was administered every 3 weeks for 1 year, or until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint of the trial was recurrence-free survival (reported elsewhere). HRQOL was a prespecified exploratory endpoint, with global health/quality of life (GHQ) over 2 years measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30 as the primary analysis. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02362594, and EudraCT, 2014-004944-37, and long-term follow-up is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between Aug 26, 2015, and Nov 14, 2016, 1019 patients were assigned to pembrolizumab (n=514) or placebo (n=505). Median follow-up was 15·1 months (IQR 12·8-16·9) at the time of this analysis. HRQOL compliance was greater than 90% at baseline, greater than 70% during the first year, and greater than 60% thereafter for both groups. Because of low absolute compliance numbers at later follow-up, the analysis was truncated to week 84. Baseline GHQ scores were similar between groups (77·55 [SD 18·20] in the pembrolizumab group and 76·54 [17·81] in the placebo group) and remained stable over time. The difference in average GHQ score between the two groups over the 2 years was -2·2 points (95% CI -4·3 to -0·2). The difference in average score during treatment was -1·1 points (95% CI -3·2 to 0·9) and the difference in average score after treatment was -2·2 points (-4·8 to 0·4). These differences are within the 5-point clinical relevance threshold for the QLQ-C30 and are therefore clinically non-significant.

INTERPRETATION

Pembrolizumab does not result in a clinically significant decrease in HRQOL compared with placebo when given as adjuvant therapy for patients with resected, high-risk stage III melanoma. These results support the use of adjuvant pembrolizumab in this setting.

FUNDING

Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Reporting of harms in oncological clinical study reports submitted to the European Medicines Agency compared to trial registries and publications-a methodological review

BACKGROUND

An accurate and comprehensive assessment of harms is a fundamental part of an accurate weighing of benefits and harms of an intervention when making treatment decisions; however, harms are known to be underreported in journal publications. Therefore, we sought to compare the completeness of reporting of harm data, discrepancies in harm data reported, and the delay to access results of oncological clinical trials between three sources: clinical study reports (CSRs), clinical trial registries and journal publications.

METHODS

We used the EMA clinical data website to identify all trials submitted to the EMA between 2015 and 2018. We retrieved all CSRs and included all phase II, II/III or III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing targeted therapy and immunotherapy for cancer. We then identified related records in clinical trial registries and journals. We extracted harms data for eight pre-specified variables and determined the completeness of reporting of harm data in each of the three sources.

RESULTS

We identified 42 RCTs evaluating 13 different drugs. Results were available on the EMA website in CSRs for 37 (88%) RCTs, ClinicalTrials.gov for 36 (86%), the European Clinical Trials Register (EUCTR) for 20 (48%) and in journal publications for 32 (76%). Harms reporting was more complete in CSRs than other sources. We identified marked discrepancies in harms data between sources, e.g. the number of patients discontinuing due to adverse events differed in CSRs and clinical trial registers for 88% of trials with data in both sources. For CSRs and publications, the corresponding number was 90%. The median (interquartile range) delay between the primary trial completion date and access to results was 4.34 (3.09-7.22) years for CSRs, 2.94 (1.16-4.52) years for ClinicalTrials.gov, 5.39 (4.18-7.33) years for EUCTR and 2.15 (0.64-5.04) years for publications.

CONCLUSIONS

Harms of recently approved oncological drugs were reported more frequently and in more detail in CSRs than in trial registries and journal publications. Systematic reviews seeking to address harms of oncological treatments should ideally use CSRs as the primary source of data; however, due to problems with access, this is currently not feasible.

Pulmonary metastasectomy in the era of targeted therapy and immunotherapy

Metastatic melanoma is a fatal malignancy with a high mortality and morbidity. Since the early 1970s, available medical therapies were limited in improving survival. Surgery represented the best chance for a cure. However, surgery could only be offered to selected patients. The current landscape of treatment has radically evolved since the introduction of targeted and immunotherapies including BRAF and MEK inhibitors, and checkpoint blockers, like PD-1 and CTLA-4 antibodies. These new therapies have seen survival rates matching, and in some cases surpassing, that of surgery. Anti-PD1 and CTLA-4 combination treatments are associated with severe side effects and BRAF and MEK inhibitor combinations may trigger initial tumour responses but prolonged use have resulted in the development of resistant tumour clones and disease relapse. This review examines the role of pulmonary metastasectomy for lung metastasis from malignant melanoma in the current landscape of effective targeted therapy and immunotherapy.

First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Versus Chemotherapy in Advanced NSCLC With 1% or Greater Tumor PD-L1 Expression: Patient-Reported Outcomes From CheckMate 227 Part 1

INTRODUCTION

In CheckMate 227 (NCT02477826), patients with treatment-naive stage IV or recurrent NSCLC and 1% or greater tumor programmed death ligand 1 expression had significantly improved overall survival with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy. We present the patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

Patients (N = 1189) were randomized to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, or chemotherapy. PROs were exploratory. Changes in Lung Cancer Symptom Scale (LCSS) average symptom burden index, LCSS 3-item global index, EQ-5D visual analog scale (VAS), and EQ-5D utility index were analyzed descriptively. Mixed-effect model repeated measures and time-to-first deterioration and improvement analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

PRO completion rates were generally greater than 80%. On-treatment improvements from baseline in LCSS measures of symptom burden and global health status with nivolumab plus ipilimumab generally met or exceeded the minimal important difference (smallest clinically meaningful change) from weeks 24 and 30, respectively; improvements with chemotherapy generally remained below the minimal important difference. Mean on-treatment EQ-5D VAS scores for both treatments approached the U.K. population norm at week 24, remaining so throughout the treatment period. Mixed-effect model repeated measures analyses revealed numerically greater improvements from baseline with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy across LCSS average symptom burden index and 3-item global index, and EQ-5D VAS and utility index. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab had delayed time-to-first deterioration (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.74 [0.56 to 0.98]) and a trend for more rapid time-to-first improvement (1.24 [0.98 to 1.59]) versus chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab revealed delayed deterioration and numerical improvement in symptoms and health-related quality of life versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC and 1% or greater programmed death ligand 1 expression.

Ocular side effects of checkpoint inhibitors

The incidence and impact of ocular side effects in patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors are not clearly defined. We reviewed prospective phase III clinical trials of checkpoint inhibitors applied in lung cancer, renal cell cancer, and melanoma. Case reports of the occurrence of ocular toxicities in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors were also included. Of the 35 articles corresponding to phase III clinical trials with checkpoint inhibitors, ocular toxicity was described in four. Forty-six clinical cases of ocular toxicity after therapy with checkpoint inhibitors have been reported. The most frequently described ocular toxicities are uveitis, inflammatory orbital disease, and alterations of the ocular surface. Ocular toxicity is underestimated in checkpoint inhibitors clinical trials. Early ophthalmic examination and treatment with corticosteroids may improve the visual prognosis in these patients.

Combined immune checkpoint blockade increases CD8+CD28+PD-1+ effector T cells and provides a therapeutic strategy for patients with neuroblastoma

Immune checkpoint therapy has resulted in minimal clinical response in many pediatric cancers. We sought to understand the influence of immune checkpoint inhibition using anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 antibodies individually, in combination, and after chemotherapy on immune responses in minimal and established murine neuroblastoma models. We also sought to understand the role of the tumor microenvironment (TME) and PD-L1 expression and their alteration post-chemotherapy in our models and human tissues. PD-L1 expression was enriched in human tumor-associated macrophages and up-regulated after chemotherapy. In a murine minimal disease model, single and dual immune checkpoint blockade promoted tumor rejection, improved survival, and established immune memory with long-term anti-tumor immunity against re-challenge. In an established tumor model, only dual immune checkpoint blockade showed efficacy. Interestingly, dual immune checkpoint therapy distinctly influenced adaptive and innate immune responses, with significant increase in CD8⁺CD28⁺PD-1⁺ T cells and inflammatory macrophages (CD11b^hiCD11c⁻F4/80⁺Ly6C^hi) in tumor-draining lymph nodes. Adding chemotherapy before immunotherapy provided significant survival benefit for mice with established tumors receiving anti-PD-1 or dual immune checkpoint blockade. Our findings demonstrate anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 therapy induces a novel subset of effector T cells, and support administration of induction chemotherapy immediately prior to immune checkpoint blockade in children with high-risk neuroblastoma.

Health-related quality of life of long-term advanced melanoma survivors treated with anti-CTLA-4 immune checkpoint inhibition compared to matched controls

BACKGROUND

Checkpoint inhibitors have changed overall survival for patients with advanced melanoma. However, there is a lack of data on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of long-term advanced melanoma survivors, years after treatment. Therefore, we evaluated HRQoL in long-term advanced melanoma survivors and compared the study outcomes with matched controls without cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Ipilimumab-treated advanced melanoma survivors without evidence of disease and without subsequent systemic therapy for a minimum of two years following last administration of ipilimumab were eligible for this study. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma questionnaire (FACT-M) were administered. Controls were individually matched for age, gender, and educational status. Outcomes of survivors and controls were compared using generalized estimating equations, and differences were interpreted as clinically relevant according to published guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 89 survivors and 265 controls were analyzed in this study. After a median follow-up of 39 (range, 17-121) months, survivors scored significantly lower on physical (83.7 vs. 89.8, difference (diff) = -5.80, p=.005), role (83.5 vs. 90, diff = -5.97, p=.02), cognitive (83.7 vs. 91.9, diff = -8.05, p=.001), and social functioning (86.5 vs. 95.1, diff = -8.49, p= <.001) and had a higher symptom burden of fatigue (23.0 vs. 15.5, diff = 7.48, p=.004), dyspnea (13.3 vs. 6.7, diff = 6.47 p=.02), diarrhea (7.9 vs. 4.0, diff = 3.78, p=.04), and financial impact (10.5 vs. 2.5, diff = 8.07, p=.001) than matched controls. Group differences were indicated as clinically relevant.

DISCUSSION

Compared to matched controls, long-term advanced melanoma survivors had overall worse functioning scores, more physical symptoms, and financial difficulties. These data may contribute to the development of appropriate survivorship care.

Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab in advanced melanoma: a drug review

Introduction: The immune checkpoint inhibitors, including nivolumab, and targeted agents have dramatically improved the outcome for patients with unresectable advanced melanoma. Areas covered: This is a narrative review of the published evidence on nivolumab in metastatic melanoma. Expert opinion: In ipilimumab pre-treated patients (CheckMate 037), nivolumab was associated with a higher response rate and a longer duration of response when compared to chemotherapy. In previously untreated patients, nivolumab improves survival when compared to chemotherapy (CheckMate 066) or to ipilimumab (CheckMate 067). The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab also improves survival when compared to ipilimumab (CheckMate 067). CheckMate 067 was not designed to compare the nivolumab-ipilimumab combination to nivolumab alone. A modified regimen using a lower dose of ipilimumab in combination with standard dose nivolumab is better tolerated than nivolumab in combination with standard dose ipilimumab (CheckMate 511). In patients with previously untreated metastatic melanoma, the anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies nivolumab and pembrolizumab improve survival when compared to ipilimumab. Nivolumab is equally active in BRAF mutated and BRAF wild type melanoma. The optimal sequence of checkpoint inhibitors and BRAF/MEK inhibitors in BRAF mutated patients has not been established.

Real World Outcomes of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma

Background: Immunotherapy has drastically changed the outlook for melanoma patients over the past decade. Specifically, the dual blockade of immune checkpoints using ipilimumab and nivolumab has shown unprecedented response rates and survival outcomes. This immense achievement, though, is at the cost of toxicity, with 60% of the patients experiencing high-grade adverse events (AEs). Our study aims to report the efficacy and toxicity outcomes of an out-of-trial, real-life population. Methods: Data on metastatic melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab were retrieved from our melanoma database—a single-center prospectively updated, medical-records based oncologic registry. Data included demographics, clinical and pathological information, as well as tumor responses and survival. Associations between patient or treatment characteristics and outcomes were also evaluated. Results: We identified 172 metastatic melanoma patients, of whom 64% were treatment-naïve. The median follow-up was 12 months. The response rates for treatment-naïve and previously-treated patients were 61% and 25%, respectively; median progression-free survival (PFS) were 12.2 and 2.6 months, and median overall survival (OS) were not-reached (NR) and 6.1 months, respectively. The estimated three-year OS for treatment-naïve patients was 58% (95% CI 42–65). At data cutoff, 22% were still on-treatment. Grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 60% of the patients, almost all of whom were exposed to steroid treatments (59%); AEs were fatal in 4 patients, and led to permanent treatment discontinuation in 31%. Factors significantly associated with outcome were cutaneous histology, low lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), low number of metastatic sites, performance status, first line of treatment and number of combinations administered during the induction phase. Conclusions: Despite the profoundly different baseline patient characteristics, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab is as effective in the real-world population as it was in clinical trials, including long-term outcomes. In addition to confirming the significance of baseline prognostic factors, our study reveals that the number of combinations effectively administered may also be correlated with good outcome.

[Quality of life in immune checkpoint inhibitors trials]

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized oncological management in several tumor types, allowing prolonged tumoral responses. Thus, they are administered over long periods of time and can give specific autoimmune adverse reactions that may have a potential impact on quality of life (QoL). Most of phase III trials with ICI have included an assessment of QoL. In metastatic setting, in comparison with chemotherapy or targeted therapies, they indicate an absence of degradation of the QoL scores or even an improvement of these scores. In adjuvant setting, the deterioration of QoL scores is not clinically significant, regardless of the ICI used. In addition, there is no impairment of quality of life in patients with prolonged treatment duration. However, the measurement of QoL under ICI remains a challenge because of the specificities of these treatments and adapted measurement scales are being developed to improve the assessment of the impact of these treatments on patients' QoL.

Patient-reported outcome instruments used in immune-checkpoint inhibitor clinical trials in oncology: a systematic review

Context

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have shown significant benefits for overall survival across various cancer types. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are assessed in clinical trials as a measure of efficacy. However, it remains unclear to what extent current PRO instruments capture symptoms specific to ICI toxicities. We conducted a systematic review to identify the use and content validity of PRO instruments in ICI clinical trials in oncology.

Methods

Literature was retrieved from PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Medline and CINAHL databases. Articles presenting ICI clinical trials’ PRO results, clinical trial study protocols, and conference abstracts stating the use of PRO measures were assessed. We evaluated the validity of identified instruments by comparing their symptom-related content with the adverse events reported in each ICI clinical trial.

Results

From database inception until January 2020, we identified 191 ICI clinical trials stating the use of PRO measures of which 26 published PRO results. The cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30 and the generic EQ-5D questionnaires were the most widely used instruments, often in combination with disease-specific PROs. Instruments used to report PRO symptom-related toxicities covered 45% of the most frequently reported AEs, whereas 23% of AEs were partially covered and 29% were not covered at all. Of non-covered AEs, 59% referred to the dermatologic system. Partially covered AEs related to endocrine and specific types of pain.

Conclusion

Despite the high frequency of symptom-related toxicities related to ICI, these events are only partially covered (or not addressed) by current PRO instruments, even when combined. Further research is needed to develop new strategies to tailor PRO instruments to specific ICI toxicities.

Ultraviolet Radiation and Melanomagenesis: From Mechanism to Immunotherapy

Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer, and nearly 90% of melanomas are believed to be caused by ultraviolet radiation (UVR), mainly from sunlight. UVR induces DNA damage, forming products such as cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPD) and 6-4-pyrimidone photoproducts (6-4PP) in a wavelength-dependent manner and causes oxidative DNA damage. These DNA lesions lead to DNA mutations and contribute to the formation of melanoma. In this review, we discuss the protective role of melanocytes against UV-induced DNA damage and how genetic variations, including those in p53 and melanocortin-1 receptor (MC1R), or epigenetic histone modifications in melanocytes result in a tendency toward melanoma. We also provide a summary of prevention and treatment strategies against melanoma, including the most recent immunotherapies. Collectively, this work contributes to the understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of UV-induced melanoma.

Health-related quality of life (QoL) in patients with advanced melanoma receiving immunotherapies in real-world clinical practice settings

Background

Pembrolizumab (PEMBRO) and ipilimumab + nivolumab (IPI + NIVO) are approved advanced melanoma (AM) immunotherapies. To address limited health-related quality of life (QoL) real-world evidence with immunotherapies in AM, we compared QoL in AM patients receiving either treatment in clinical practice.

Methods

A prospective US observational study enrolled adult AM patients initiating first-line PEMBRO or IPI + NIVO between June 2017 and March 2018. Endpoints included the QLQ-C30 global health score (GHS) and EuroQol visual analog scale (EQ-VAS) scores. Mean changes were compared using repeated measures mixed-effects models and are presented covariate adjusted.

Results

225 PEMBRO and 187 IPI + NIVO patients were enrolled. From baseline through week 24, PEMBRO was associated with 3.2 mean GHS score increase (95% CI 0.5, 5.9; p = .02), while no change was observed with IPI + NIVO; 0.2 (95% CI − 2.6, 3.0; p = 0.87). Among objective treatment-responders, GHS scores associated with PEMBRO increased 6.0 (95% CI 3.1, 8.8; p < .0001); IPI + NIVO patients increased 3.8 (95% CI 0.8, 6.9; p = .01). In treatment non-responders, IPI + NIVO was associated with GHS/QoL deterioration of − 3.7 (95% CI − 6.8, − 0.6; p = .02), PEMBRO non-responders demonstrated no change; 0.7 (95% CI − 2.3, 3.7; p = 0.6). Between treatments, PEMBRO patients increased 2.6 greater in EQ-VAS (95% CI 0.6, 4.5; p = .01) vs IPI + NIVO at 24 weeks.

Conclusions

PEMBRO was associated with better 24-week QoL compared to IPI + NIVO in actual clinical practice settings. Real-world data has known limitations, but with further confirmation these results may have implications for treatment selection.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11136-020-02520-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Immune-related adverse events of checkpoint inhibitors

Cancer immunotherapies have changed the landscape of cancer treatment during the past few decades. Among them, immune checkpoint inhibitors, which target PD-1, PD-L1 and CTLA-4, are increasingly used for certain cancers; however, this increased use has resulted in increased reports of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). These irAEs are unique and are different to those of traditional cancer therapies, and typically have a delayed onset and prolonged duration. IrAEs can involve any organ or system. These effects are frequently low grade and are treatable and reversible; however, some adverse effects can be severe and lead to permanent disorders. Management is primarily based on corticosteroids and other immunomodulatory agents, which should be prescribed carefully to reduce the potential of short-term and long-term complications. Thoughtful management of irAEs is important in optimizing quality of life and long-term outcomes.

Is single versus combination therapy problematic in the treatment of cutaneous melanoma?

Introduction: The development of immunotherapies and targeted therapies has changed the treatment approach in resectable, nonresectable, and metastatic melanoma. Because of their different pharmacological profiles, immunotherapies and/or targeted therapies have been studied in various combinations. Areas covered: We reviewed PubMed for most important clinical trials investigating efficacy and tolerability of combinatorial and single-agent approaches for the treatment of melanoma that were published up to June 2019. We discuss the most promising therapy approaches and highlight challenges of melanoma treatment. Expert opinion: Combinatorial approaches seem to be very promising in the treatment of resectable and advanced melanoma. Currently, dual immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) with nivolumab and ipilimumab offers the best first-line treatment option for patients with BRAF-wt and -mutated, advanced melanoma. It is therapy of choice in younger patients with good ECOG performance status and poor prognostic features, whereas ICI monotherapy should be preferred in elderly patients with advanced melanoma. Benefit-risk ratio, patient's QoL and expectations, as well as treatment costs have to be considered in the choice of treatment. However, to elucidate mechanisms of resistance, biomarkers of response and to better define personalized strategies in the treatment of cutaneous melanoma, larger clinical trials comparing combined versus sequential therapies are necessary.

Health-related quality of life in cancer patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic review on reporting of methods in randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have recently shown tremendous promise in the treatment of diverse cancers. The available data suggests that ICIs are well tolerated in terms of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) compared to other anticancer therapies. However, it appears that instruments currently used to evaluate HRQOL in this context may fail to capture important symptomatology unique to ICIs. This systematic review was designed to assess the adequacy of methods used to report HRQOL in cancer patients treated with ICIs and to identify the quality of life scales used.

METHOD

A systematic review was performed (systematic registration number: PROSPERO: CRD42019121427). A search of the PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences collection, and SocINDEX databases was carried out for publications in English and in French. Relevant databases were searched from the earliest records through to March 2019. Publications were selected if they reported on HRQOL in patients with cancer treated by ICIs. Risk of bias was scored using the Cochrane Collaboration bias assessment tool.

RESULTS

Our search identified 144 publications between 2012 and 2019, of which 15 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The results suggest that even though the overall reporting of HRQOL was deemed to be of good quality, the data available was marred by methodological aspects such as the lack of HRQOL research hypotheses and the lack of questionnaires validated for cancer patients treated with immunotherapy.

CONCLUSION

This study provides a comprehensive analysis of the current state of the art and identifies gaps in knowledge on HRQOL analysis with respect to ICIs. It also suggests avenues for further research.

Development of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Immune Checkpoint Modulator (FACT-ICM): A toxicity subscale to measure quality of life in patients with cancer who are treated with ICMs

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer who are treated with immune checkpoint modulators (ICMs) have their health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measured using general patient-reported outcome (PRO) tools. To the authors' knowledge, no instrument has been developed to date specifically for patients treated with ICMs. The objective of the current study was to develop a toxicity subscale PRO instrument for patients treated with ICMs to assess HRQOL.

METHODS

Input was collected from a systematic review as well as patients and physicians experienced with ICM treatment. Descriptive thematic analysis was used to evaluate the qualitative data obtained from patient focus groups and interviews, which informed an initial list of items that described ICM side effects and their impact on HRQOL. These inputs informed item generation and/or reduction to develop a toxicity subscale.

RESULTS

Focus groups and individual interviews with 37 ICM-treated patients generated an initial list of 176 items. After a first round of item reduction that produced a shortened list of 76 items, 16 physicians who care for patients who are treated with ICMs were surveyed with a list of 49 patient-reported side effects and 11 physicians participated in follow-up interviews. A second round of item reduction was informed by the physician responses to produce a list of 25 items.

CONCLUSIONS

To the authors' knowledge, this 25-item list is the first HRQOL-focused toxicity subscale for patients treated with ICMs and was developed in accordance with US Food and Drug Administration guidelines, which prioritize patient input in developing PRO tools. The subscale will be combined with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) to form the FACT-ICM. Prior to recommending the formal use of this PRO instrument, the authors will evaluate its validity and reliability in longitudinal studies involving substantially more patients.

Monoclonal Antibodies in Dermatooncology-State of the Art and Future Perspectives

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting specific proteins are currently the most popular form of immunotherapy used in the treatment of cancer and other non-malignant diseases. Since the first approval of anti-CD20 mAb rituximab in 1997 for the treatment of B-cell malignancies, the market is continuously booming and the clinically used mAbs have undergone a remarkable evolution. Novel molecular targets are constantly emerging and the development of genetic engineering have facilitated the introduction of modified mAbs with improved safety and increased capabilities to activate the effector mechanisms of the immune system. Next to their remarkable success in hematooncology, mAbs have also an already established role in the treatment of solid malignancies. The recent development of mAbs targeting the immune checkpoints has opened new avenues for the use of this form of immunotherapy, also in the immune-rich milieu of the skin. In this review we aim at presenting a comprehensive view of mAbs' application in the modern treatment of skin cancer. We present the characteristics and efficacy of mAbs currently used in dermatooncology and summarize the recent clinical trials in the field. We discuss the side effects and strategies for their managing.