Gynecologic tract melanoma in the contemporary therapeutic era: High rates of local and distant disease progression

Ocular side effects of anticancer agents used in the treatment of gynecologic cancers

The treatment landscape of gynecologic cancers has expanded in recent years to include targeted and immune-based therapies. These therapies often have ocular side effects not seen with conventional chemotherapies, some of which can cause significant visual impairment if not recognized in a timely fashion. Clinicians must know how to appropriately identify, mitigate, and treat these ocular adverse events. Management often involves working with an interdisciplinary team of eye specialists, and it is important to know when to refer patients for specialized care. Proactive identification of eye specialists, especially in rural and community settings where access to care can be limited, may be necessary. Here, we discuss the management of common ocular toxicities seen with novel anticancer agents used to treat gynecologic cancers.

Endothelial Mitochondria Transfer to Melanoma Induces M2-Type Macrophage Polarization and Promotes Tumor Growth by the Nrf2/HO-1-Mediated Pathway

Gynecologic tract melanoma is a malignant tumor with poor prognosis. Because of the low survival rate and the lack of a standard treatment protocol related to this condition, the investigation of the mechanisms underlying melanoma progression is crucial to achieve advancements in the relevant gynecological surgery and treatment. Mitochondrial transfer between adjacent cells in the tumor microenvironment regulates tumor progression. This study investigated the effects of endothelial mitochondria on the growth of melanoma cells and the activation of specific signal transduction pathways following mitochondrial transplantation. Mitochondria were isolated from endothelial cells (ECs) and transplanted into B16F10 melanoma cells, resulting in the upregulation of proteins associated with tumor growth. Furthermore, enhanced antioxidation and mitochondrial homeostasis mediated by the Sirt1-PGC-1α-Nrf2-HO-1 pathway were observed, along with the inhibition of apoptotic protein caspase-3. Finally, the transplantation of endothelial mitochondria into B16F10 cells promoted tumor growth and increased M2-type macrophages through Nrf2/HO-1-mediated pathways in a xenograft animal model. In summary, the introduction of exogenous mitochondria from ECs into melanoma cells promoted tumor growth, indicating the role of mitochondrial transfer by stromal cells in modulating a tumor's phenotype. These results provide valuable insights into the role of mitochondrial transfer and provide potential targets for gynecological melanoma treatment.

Multicenter Evaluation of Radiation and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy in Mucosal Melanoma and Review of Recent Literature

Purpose

Optimal integration of local therapy and systemic immune therapy for patients with mucosal melanoma (MM) is uncertain. We evaluated treatment patterns and outcomes following radiation therapy (RT) in combination with immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) in MM.

Methods and Materials

Thirty-seven patients with localized (n = 32, 87%) or node-positive (n = 5, 14%) MM were treated across 4 institutions with RT to the primary tumor with or without oncologic resection (n = 28, 76%) and ICI from 2012 to 2020. Recurrence rates were estimated using cumulative incidence in the presence of the competing risk of death.

Results

Mucosal sites were head/neck (n = 29, 78%), vaginal (n = 7, 19%), and anorectal (n = 1, 3%). Patients received ICI prior to or concurrent with RT (n = 14, 38%), following RT (n = 5, 14%), or at recurrence (n = 18, 49%). The objective response rate for evaluable patients was 31% for ICI as initial treatment (95% CI, 11%-59%) and 19% for ICI at recurrence (95% CI, 4%-46%). Median follow-up was 26 months for living patients; median overall survival (OS) was 54 months (95% CI, 31 months-not reached). Two-year OS was 85%; distant metastasis-free survival 44%. The 2-year cumulative incidence of local recurrence (LR) was 26% (95% CI, 13%-41%). For 9 patients with unresectable disease, 2-year OS was 88% (95% CI, 35%-98%); LR was 25% (95% CI, 3%-58%). For 5 patients with positive nodes at diagnosis, 2-year OS was 100%; LR was 0%.

Conclusions

High rates of local control were achieved with RT with or without oncologic resection and ICI for localized and locally advanced MM. In particular, favorable local control was possible even for patients with unresectable or node-positive disease. Although risk of distant failure remains high, patients with MM may benefit from aggressive local therapy including RT in the setting of immunotherapy treatment.

Margin status in vulvovaginal melanoma: Management and oncologic outcomes of 50 cases

Objectives

To determine the influence of margin status, including preinvasive disease at the margin, on local recurrence and overall survival (OS) in patients with vulvovaginal melanoma.

Methods

All patients with Stage 0-III vulvovaginal melanoma treated with primary surgical management between 1/2010-12/2019 were included. Margin status was categorized as negative, preinvasive disease (atypical junctional melanocytic hyperplasia and melanoma in situ), and invasive melanoma. Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed for local progression free survival (PFS) and OS. The impact of clinical and pathologic factors on local PFS and OS were assessed with Cox-regression analyses.

Results

Fifty patients with a median follow-up of 48 months (range 3-119) were included. The median age was 63 years (range 20-83). Twenty percent (N = 10) had Stage 0 disease, 18% (N = 9) had Stage I, 46% (N = 23) had Stage II, and 16% (N = 8) had Stage III. Forty-four percent (N = 22) of patients had negative surgical margins, 46% (N = 23) had preinvasive disease at the margins, and 10% (N = 5) had invasive melanoma at the margins. The 5-year local PFS was 63% (95% CI: 42-78%) and OS was 60% (95% CI: 42-74%). Age, Breslow depth, stage, margin status, and re-resection did not significantly impact local PFS. In patients with preinvasive disease at the margin, all who recurred locally had Stage I-II disease.

Conclusion

Preinvasive disease at the surgical margins may play an important role in local recurrence in patients with Stage I-II vulvovaginal melanoma. Patients with early (Stage 0) and advanced (Stage III) disease rarely recur locally and may not benefit from re-resection.

Role of immunotherapy for lymph node positive vulvar melanoma: utilization and outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the utilization and outcomes of adjuvant immunotherapy for patients with vulvar melanoma and inguinal lymph node metastases.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was accessed and patients with vulvar melanoma diagnosed between 2004 and 2015 who did not have distant metastases, underwent inguinal lymphadenectomy, had positive lymph nodes, and at least 1 month of follow-up were identified. Administration of immunotherapy was evaluated and clinicopathological characteristics were compared. Median overall survival was compared with the log-rank test. Stratified analysis based on clinical status of lymph nodes was performed. A Cox model was constructed to evaluate survival after controlling for confounders.

RESULTS

A total of 300 patients were identified; the rate of immunotherapy use was 25% (75 patients). Patients who received immunotherapy were younger (median 58 vs 70 years, p<0.001); however, the two groups were comparable in terms of clinical lymph node status, rate of positive tumor margins, presence of tumor ulceration, tumor size, Breslow thickness, and performance of comprehensive lymphadenectomy. There was no overall survival difference between patients who did (median 31.08 months) and did not (median 22.77 months) receive immunotherapy (p=0.18). Following stratification by clinical lymph node status, immunotherapy did not improve overall survival of patients with clinically negative (median 35.35 vs 33.22, p=0.75) or positive lymph nodes (median 23.33 vs 16.99, p=0.64). After controlling for confounders, administration of immunotherapy was not associated with better overall survival (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.14).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study approximately one in four patients received adjuvant immunotherapy. Immunotherapy was not associated with improved overall survival.