Ipilimumab and fotemustine in patients with advanced melanoma (NIBIT-M1): an open-label, single-arm phase 2 trial

Patterns of brain metastases response to immunotherapy with pembrolizumab

PURPOSE

Central nervous system (CNS) metastases from lung cancers and melanoma, significantly contribute to morbidity and mortality. Despite advances in local therapies, there is a need for effective systemic treatments. Pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, has shown promise for some patients with untreated brain metastases from melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aims to analyze the response of brain metastasis to pembrolizumab and associate characteristics like size and location with treatment outcome.

METHODS

This retrospective study used imaging data from a phase II trial of pembrolizumab in melanoma or NSCLC patients with untreated brain metastases. MRI evaluations were conducted at 2 month intervals, with each brain metastasis treated as a distinct tumor for response assessment, based on modified RECIST criteria (maximum 5 lesions, 5 mm target lesions).

RESULTS

Of 130 individual target metastases (> 5 mm), in 65 patients with NSCLC (90 metastases) and Melanoma (40 metastases), 32 (24.6%) demonstrated complete resolution, 24 (18.5%) had partial resolution, 32 (24.6%) were SD and 42 (32.3%) demonstrated PD. Those smaller than 10 mm were more likely to show complete resolution (p = 0.0218), while those ≥ 10 mm were more likely to have PR. There was no significant association between size, number or location (supratentorial vs. infratentorial) and lesion progression. The median time to metastatic lesion progression in the brain was 5.7-7 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Pembrolizumab is effective in brain metastases from NSCLC and melanoma, showing response (CR + PR) in 43% and progression (PD) in 32% of metastases. With the median time to CNS progression of 5.7-7 weeks, careful radiographic monitoring is essential to guide timely local treatment decisions.

Genetic Silencing of AKT Induces Melanoma Cell Death via mTOR Suppression

Aberrant activation of the PI3K-AKT pathway is common in many cancers, including melanoma, and AKT1, 2 and 3 (AKT1-3) are bona fide oncoprotein kinases with well-validated downstream effectors. However, efforts to pharmacologically inhibit AKT have proven to be largely ineffective. In this study, we observed paradoxical effects following either pharmacologic or genetic inhibition of AKT1-3 in melanoma cells. Although pharmacological inhibition was without effect, genetic silencing of all three AKT paralogs significantly induced melanoma cell death through effects on mTOR. This phenotype was rescued by exogenous AKT1 expression in a kinase-dependent manner. Pharmacological inhibition of PI3K and mTOR with a novel dual inhibitor effectively suppressed melanoma cell proliferation in vitro and inhibited tumor growth in vivo. Furthermore, this single-agent-targeted therapy was well-tolerated in vivo and was effective against MAPK inhibitor-resistant patient-derived melanoma xenografts. These results suggest that inhibition of PI3K and mTOR with this novel dual inhibitor may represent a promising therapeutic strategy in this disease in both the first-line and MAPK inhibitor-resistant setting.

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.

Local and Systemic Management Options for Melanoma Brain Metastases

ABSTRACT

Development of brain metastasis is one of the most serious complications of advanced melanoma, carrying a significant burden of morbidity and mortality. Although advances in local treatment modalities such as stereotactic radiosurgery and breakthrough systemic therapies including immunotherapy and targeted therapies have improved the outcomes of patients with metastatic melanoma, management of patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) remains challenging. Notably, patients with MBMs have historically been excluded from clinical trials, limiting insights into their specific treatment responses. Encouragingly, a growing body of evidence shows the potential of systemic therapies to yield durable intracranial responses in these patients, highlighting the need for inclusion of patients with MBMs in future clinical trials. This is pivotal for expediting the advancement of novel therapies tailored to this distinct patient population. In this review, we will highlight the evolving landscape of MBM management, focusing on local and systemic treatment strategies.

The future of targeting cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein-4: Is there a role?

The 2022 yearly Think Tank Meeting in Siena, Tuscany (Italy), organized by the Italian Network for Tumor Biotherapy (NIBIT) Foundation, the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy and the World Immunotherapy Council, included a focus on the future of integrating and expanding the use of targeting cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4). The conference members exchanged their views on the lessons from targeting CTLA-4 and compared the effect to the impact of blocking Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1) or its ligand (PDL1). The increasing experience with both therapeutic approaches and their combination suggests that targeting CTLA-4 may lead to more durable responses for a sizeable proportion of patients, though the specific mechanism is not entirely understood. Overcoming toxicity of blocking CTLA-4 is currently being addressed with different doses and dose regimens, especially when combined with PD1/PDL1 blocking antibodies. Novel therapeutics targeting CTLA-4 hold the promise to reduce toxicities and thus allow different combination strategies in the future. On the whole, the consent was that targeting CTLA-4 remains an important strategy to improve the efficacy of cancer immunotherapies.

Incidence of Cutaneous Immune-Related Adverse Events and Outcomes in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Containing Regimens: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are used to treat many cancers, and cutaneous immune-related adverse events (cirAEs) are among the most frequently encountered toxic effects. Understanding the incidence and prognostic associations of cirAEs is of importance as their uses in different settings, combinations, and tumor types expand. To evaluate the incidence of cirAEs and their association with outcome measures across a variety of ICI regimens and cancers, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published trials of anti-programmed death-1/ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) and anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) ICIs, both alone and in combination with chemotherapy, antiangiogenic agents, or other ICIs in patients with melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and urothelial carcinoma. Key findings of our study include variable cirAE incidence among tumors and ICI regimens, positive association with increased cirAE incidence and response rate, as well as significant association between increased vitiligo incidence and overall survival. Across 174 studies, rash, pruritis, and vitiligo were the most reported cirAEs, with incidences of 16.7%, 18.0%, and 6.6%, respectively. Higher incidence of cirAEs was associated with ICI combination regimens and with CTLA-4-containing regimens, particularly with higher doses of ipilimumab, as compared to PD-1/L1 monotherapies. Outcome measures including response rate and progression-free survival were positively correlated with incidence of cirAEs. The response rate and incidence of pruritis, vitiligo, and rash were associated with expected rises in incidence of 0.17% (p = 0.0238), 0.40% (p = 0.0010), and 0.18% (p = 0.0413), respectively. Overall survival was positively correlated with the incidence of pruritis, vitiligo, and rash; this association was significant for vitiligo (p = 0.0483). Our analysis provides benchmark incidence rates for cirAEs and links cirAEs with favorable treatment outcomes at a study level across diverse solid tumors and multiple ICI regimens.

Immunotherapy in patients with brain metastasis: advances and challenges for the treatment and the application of circulating biomarkers

The central nervous system (CNS) is one of the most frequent metastatic sites of various cancers, including lung cancer, breast cancer and melanoma. The development of brain metastases requires a specific therapeutic approach and is associated with high mortality and morbidity in cancer patients. Advances in precision medicine and the introduction in recent years of new drugs, such as immunotherapy, have made it possible to improve the prognosis of these patients by improving survival and quality of life. New diagnostic techniques such as liquid biopsy allow real-time monitoring of tumor evolution, providing molecular information on prognostic and predictive biomarkers of response to treatment in blood or other fluids. In this review, we perform an exhaustive update of the clinical trials that demonstrate the utility of immunotherapy in patients with brain metastases and the potential of circulating biomarkers to improving the results of efficacy and toxicity in this subgroup of patients.

Long duration of immunotherapy before radiosurgery might improve intracranial control of melanoma brain metastases

PURPOSE

Despite significant advances that have been made in management of metastatic melanoma with immune checkpoint therapy, optimal timing of combination immune checkpoint therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery is unknown. We have reported toxicity and efficiency outcomes of patients treated with concurrent immune checkpoint therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2014 to December 2016, we analyzed 62 consecutive patients presenting 296 melanoma brain metastases, treated with gamma-knife and receiving concurrent immune checkpoint therapy with anti-CTLA4 or anti-PD1 within the 12 weeks of SRS procedure. Median follow-up time was 18 months (mo) (13-22). Minimal median dose delivered was 18 gray (Gy), with a median volume per lesion of 0.219 cm³.

RESULTS

The 1-year control rate per irradiated lesion was 89% (CI 95%: 80.41-98.97). Twenty-seven patients (43.5%) developed distant brain metastases after a median time of 7.6 months (CI 95% 1.8-13.3) after gamma-knife. In multivariate analysis, positive predictive factors for intracranial tumor control were: delay since the initiation of immunotherapy exceeding 2 months before gamma-knife procedure (P=0.003) and use of anti-PD1 (P=0.006). Median overall survival (OS) was 14 months (CI 95%: 11-NR). Total irradiated tumor volume<2.1 cm³ was a positive predictive factor for overall survival (P=0.003). Ten patients (16.13%) had adverse events following irradiation, with four grade≥3. Predictive factors of all grade toxicity were: female gender (P=0.001) and previous treatment with MAPK (P=0.05).

CONCLUSION

A long duration of immune checkpoint therapy before stereotactic radiosurgery might improve intracranial tumor control, but this relationship and its ideal timing need to be assessed in prospective trials.

Implications of the Organ-Specific Immune Environment for Immune Priming Effect of Radiotherapy in Metastatic Setting

With the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), the tumour immune microenvironment (TIME) has been increasingly considered to improve cancer management. The TIME of metastatic lesions is strongly influenced by the underlying immune contexture of the organ in which they are located. The metastatic location itself appears to be an important prognostic factor in predicting outcomes after ICI treatment in cancer patients. Patients with liver metastases are less likely to respond to ICIs than patients with metastases in other organs, likely due to variations in the metastatic TIME. Combining additional treatment modalities is an option to overcome this resistance. Radiotherapy (RT) and ICIs have been investigated together as an option to treat various metastatic cancers. RT can induce a local and systemic immune reaction, which can promote the patient's response to ICIs. Here, we review the differential impact of the TIME according to metastatic location. We also explore how RT-induced TIME modifications could be modulated to improve outcomes of RT-ICI combinations.

The Current Landscape of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Immunotherapy for Primary and Metastatic Brain Tumors

Antibodies against immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment of multiple aggressive malignancies, including melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer. ICIs for the treatment of primary and metastatic brain tumors have been used with varying degrees of success. Here, we discuss the available evidence for the use of ICIs in the treatment of primary and metastatic brain tumors, highlighting challenges and opportunities for furthering this type of cancer immunotherapy in neuro-oncology.

First-line Immuno-chemotherapy for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

Introduction

Many randomized controlled trials have indicated that immuno-chemotherapy could generate clinical benefits, though the cost of immuno-chemotherapy was so prohibitive and the options were varied. This investigation aimed at evaluating effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness for immuno-chemotherapy as a first-line therapeutic option for ES-SCLC patients.

Methods

Multiple scientific literature repositories were searched for clinical studies where immuno-chemotherapy was regarded as the first-line treatment for ES-SCLC, which were published in English between Jan 1, 2000, and Nov 30, 2021. This study conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) and cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) based upon US-resident payer perspectives. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated through NMA. In addition, costings, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost–benefit ratio (ICER) were estimated by CEA.

Results

We identified 200 relevant search records, of which four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (2,793 patients) were included. NMA demonstrated that the effect of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy was ranked at a more elevated position in comparison to other immuno-chemotherapy options and chemotherapy alone, within the general population. The influence of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and durvalumab plus chemotherapy was ranked higher within populations experiencing non-brain metastases (NBMs) andbrain metastases (BMs), respectively. The CEA revealed that the ICERs of immuno-chemotherapy over chemotherapyalone were higher than the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000/QALY in any population. However, treatment with atezolizumab plus chemotherapy and durvalumab plus chemotherapy were more favorable health advantages than other immuno-chemotherapy regimens and chemotherapy alone, and the results were 1.02 QALYs and 0.89 QALYs within overall populations and populations with BMs, respectively.

Conclusion

The NMA and cost-effectiveness investigation demonstrated that atezolizumab plus chemotherapy could be an optimal first-line therapeutic option for ES-SCLC when compared with other immuno-chemotherapy regimens. Durvalumab plus chemotherapy is likely to be the most favorable first-line therapeutic option for ES-SCLC with BMs.

Neoantigens: promising targets for cancer therapy

Recent advances in neoantigen research have accelerated the development and regulatory approval of tumor immunotherapies, including cancer vaccines, adoptive cell therapy and antibody-based therapies, especially for solid tumors. Neoantigens are newly formed antigens generated by tumor cells as a result of various tumor-specific alterations, such as genomic mutation, dysregulated RNA splicing, disordered post-translational modification, and integrated viral open reading frames. Neoantigens are recognized as non-self and trigger an immune response that is not subject to central and peripheral tolerance. The quick identification and prediction of tumor-specific neoantigens have been made possible by the advanced development of next-generation sequencing and bioinformatic technologies. Compared to tumor-associated antigens, the highly immunogenic and tumor-specific neoantigens provide emerging targets for personalized cancer immunotherapies, and serve as prospective predictors for tumor survival prognosis and immune checkpoint blockade responses. The development of cancer therapies will be aided by understanding the mechanism underlying neoantigen-induced anti-tumor immune response and by streamlining the process of neoantigen-based immunotherapies. This review provides an overview on the identification and characterization of neoantigens and outlines the clinical applications of prospective immunotherapeutic strategies based on neoantigens. We also explore their current status, inherent challenges, and clinical translation potential.

Immunotherapy for brain metastases and primary brain tumors

During the V Siena Immuno-Oncology (IO) Think Tank meeting in 2021, conditions were discussed which favor immunotherapy responses in either primary or secondary brain malignancies. Core elements of these discussions have been reinforced by important publications in 2021 and 2022. In primary brain tumors (such as glioblastoma) current immunotherapies have failed to deliver meaningful clinical benefit. By contrast, brain metastases frequently respond to current immunotherapies. The main differences between both conditions seem to be related to intrinsic factors (e.g., type of driver mutations) and more importantly extrinsic factors, such as the blood brain barrier and immune suppressive microenvironment (e.g., T cell counts, functional differences in T cells, myeloid cells). Future therapeutic interventions may therefore focus on rebalancing the immune cell population in a way which enables the host to respond to current or future immunotherapies.

Immunotherapy as a New Therapeutic Approach for Brain and Spinal Cord Tumors

Historically, the central nervous system (CNS) was considered an immune-privileged organ. However, recent studies have shown that the immune system plays a significant role in the CNS. Thus, there is renewed interest in applying cancer immunotherapy to CNS malignancies with the hope of generating a robust anti-tumor immune response and creating long-lasting immunity in patients. There has been some work with non-specific immunotherapy such as IL-2 for brain metastasis. Unfortunately, the results from non-specific immunotherapy studies were lackluster, so the focus has shifted to more specific CNS immunotherapies including cancer vaccines, immune checkpoint inhibitors, oncolytic virus therapy, and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy. With respect to cancer vaccines, rindopepimut has been well-studied in glioblastoma (GBM) patients with the EGFRvIII mutation, with early results from phase II trials showing possible efficacy in carefully selected GBM patients. Other antigen-specific CNS tumor vaccines are still in the early stages. Immune checkpoint inhibitors are amongst the most promising and widely studied CNS immunotherapy strategies. Anti-PD-1 showed promising results in many non-CNS solid tumors, however, results from early clinical trials show poor efficacy for anti-PD-1 in GBM patients. Anti-PD-1 is also under investigation for CNS metastasis and showed some efficacy in non-small cell lung cancer and renal cell carcinoma patients. Anti-PD-1 is under early stage investigation for other CNS tumors such as chordoma. Oncolytic virus therapy is the strategy of infecting tumor cells with a virus that in turn triggers an innate immune response leading to tumor cell lysis. Oncolytic viruses currently under investigation include several adenovirus-based therapies and a herpes simplex virus-based therapy. Phase I studies have demonstrated the safety of oncolytic virus therapies in GBM patients. Current studies are evaluating the efficacy of these therapies both alone and in combination with other immunotherapy approaches such as checkpoint inhibition in patients with CNS tumors. CAR T cell therapy is a newer immunotherapy approach. CAR T cell therapies, directed against EGFRvIII mutation and HER-2 mutation, demonstrate an acceptable safety profile, although there is no conclusive evidence of the survival benefit of these therapies in early trials. Studies are currently underway to determine optimal tumor-specific antigen selection and modality of administration for CAR T cell therapy. Overall, the prognosis is generally poor for patients with CNS malignancies. The promising results of cancer immunotherapy for non-CNS tumors have created significant interest in applying these therapies for CNS malignancies. Preliminary results have not demonstrated robust efficacy for CNS immunotherapy. However, it is important to keep in mind that the field is still in its infancy and many clinical trials are still early-phase. Several, clinical trials are currently underway to further explore the role of immunotherapy for CNS malignancies.

Tumour inhibitory activity on pancreatic cancer by bispecific nanobody targeting PD-L1 and CXCR4

Background:

Antibodies and derivative drugs targeting immune checkpoints have been approved for the treatment of several malignancies, but there are fewer responses in patients with pancreatic cancer. Here, we designed a nanobody molecule with bi-targeting on PD-L1 and CXCR4, as both targets are overexpressed in many cancer cells and play important roles in tumorigenesis. We characterized the biochemical and anti-tumour activities of the bispecific nanobodies in vitro and in vivo.

Methods:

A nanobody molecule was designed and constructed. The nanobody sequences targeting PD-L1 and CXCR4 were linked by the (G₄S)₃ flexible peptide to construct the anti-PD-L1/CXCR4 bispecific nanobody. The bispecific nanobody was expressed in E. coli cells and purified by affinity chromatography. The purified nanobody was biochemically characterized by mass spectrometry, Western blotting and flow cytometry to confirm the molecule and its association with both PD-L1 and CXCR4. The biological function of the nanobody and its anti-tumour effects were examined by an in vitro tumour cell-killing assay and in vivo tumour inhibition in mouse xenograft models.

Results:

A novel anti-PD-L1/CXCR4 bispecific nanobody was designed, constructed and characterized. The molecule specifically bound to two targets on the surface of human cancer cells and inhibited CXCL12-induced Jurkat cell migration. The bispecific nanobody increased the level of IFN-γ secreted by T-cell activation. The cytotoxicity of human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (hPBMCs) against pancreatic cancer cells was enhanced by the molecule in combination with IL-2. In a human pancreatic cancer xenograft model, the anti-PD-L1/CXCR4 nanobody markedly inhibited tumour growth and was superior to the combo-treatment by anti-PD-L1 nanobody and anti-CXCR4 nanobody or treatment with atezolizumab as a positive control. Immunofluorescence and immunohistochemical staining of xenograft tumours showed that the anti-tumour effects were associated with the inhibition of angiogenesis and the infiltration of immune cells.

Conclusion:

These results clearly revealed that the anti-PD-L1/CXCR4 bispecific nanobody exerted anti-tumour efficacy in vitro and inhibited tumour growth in vivo. This agent can be further developed as a therapeutic reagent to treat human pancreatic cancer by simultaneously blocking two critical targets.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-10165-7.

Cancer vaccines: the next immunotherapy frontier

After several decades, therapeutic cancer vaccines now show signs of efficacy and potential to help patients resistant to other standard-of-care immunotherapies, but they have yet to realize their full potential and expand the oncologic armamentarium. Here, we classify cancer vaccines by what is known of the included antigens, which tumors express those antigens and where the antigens colocalize with antigen-presenting cells, thus delineating predefined vaccines (shared or personalized) and anonymous vaccines (ex vivo or in situ). To expedite clinical development, we highlight the need for accurate immune monitoring of early trials to acknowledge failures and advance the most promising vaccines.

Combination of immunotherapy and other targeted therapies in advanced cutaneous melanoma

Cutaneous Melanoma (CM) is an aggressive cancer whose incidence is increasing worldwide. However, the knowledge of its biology and genes driving cell growth and survival allowed to develop new drugs that have improved PFS and OS of advanced disease. Both BRAF targeting agents and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been adopted for the treatment of metastatic disease and the adjuvant setting. Several melanoma patients show innate or acquired drug-resistance and thus new strategies are required for overcoming this complication. New ICIs have been developed, and strategies of combination or sequencing are under investigation in ongoing clinical trials. In addition, pre-clinical data have demonstrated that many strategies induce the release of neoantigens within the tumor microenvironment, thus suggesting the combination of new agents with ICIs. Here, we review the ongoing strategies in advanced CM including a dedicated section on treatment of brain metastases.

Comparison of tumor assessments using RECIST 1.1 and irRECIST, and association with overall survival

Background

Patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may experience pseudoprogression, which can be classified as progressive disease (PD) by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) V.1.1 and could lead to inappropriate treatment discontinuation. Immune-response criteria were developed to better capture novel response patterns seen with ICIs.

Methods

We pooled data from 1765 patients with 12 types of advanced solid tumors treated with avelumab (an anti-programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody) monotherapy in the JAVELIN Solid Tumor and JAVELIN Merkel 200 trials, conducted a comparative analysis of tumor assessments by investigators according to RECIST 1.1 and immune-related RECIST (irRECIST), and evaluated the correlation between progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

In total, 147 patients (8.3%) had a best overall response (BOR) of PD by RECIST 1.1 but had immune-related disease control by irRECIST (defined as immune-related BOR (irBOR) of immune-related stable disease or better). This discordance was seen irrespective of PD-L1 status and observed across all tumor types. Overall, PFS and immune-related PFS showed similar imputed rank correlations with OS.

Conclusions

The use of irRECIST identified a subset of patients with a BOR of PD by RECIST 1.1 but an irBOR of immune-related disease control by irRECIST with a distinctive survival curve, thereby providing more clinically relevant information than RECIST 1.1 alone. However, as a surrogate endpoint for OS in the whole population, immune-related PFS by irRECIST did not show improved predictive value compared with PFS by RECIST 1.1.

Immunotherapy for Neuro-oncology

Immunotherapy has changed the landscape of treatment of many solid and hematological malignancies and is at the forefront of cancer breakthroughs. Several circumstances unique to the central nervous system (CNS) such as limited space for an inflammatory response, difficulties with repeated sampling, corticosteroid use for management of cerebral edema, and immunosuppressive mechanisms within the tumor and brain parenchyma have posed challenges in clinical development of immunotherapy for intracranial tumors. Nonetheless, the success of immunotherapy in brain metastases (BMs) from solid cancers such as melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) proves that the CNS is not an immune-privileged organ and is capable of initiating and regulating immune responses that lead to tumor control. However, the development of immunotherapeutics for the most malignant primary brain tumor, glioblastoma (GBM), has been challenging due to systemic and profound tumor-mediated immunosuppression unique to GBM, intratumoral and intertumoral heterogeneity, and lack of stably expressed clonal antigens. Here, we review recent advances in the field of immunotherapy for neuro-oncology with a focus on BM, GBM, and rare CNS cancers.

Combining immune checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy in advanced solid tumours: A review

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), especially anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD1) and anti-programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), has changed practices in oncology, becoming a new standard of care in first or subsequent lines for several cancer subtypes. Recent data have highlighted the ability of standard chemotherapy to enhance immunogenicity and/or to break immunoresistance of the tumour and its microenvironment, leading to a rationale for the use of ICIs in combination with the standard chemotherapy regimen to improve efficacy of cancer treatment. Here, we propose to review randomised clinical trials evaluating concomitant administration of ICIs and chemotherapy, to assess clinical efficacy and safety profiles in advanced solid tumours. Association of these two modes of action on treatments has shown improved overall survival and better objective response rates than standard chemotherapy, especially in first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and for PD1/PD-L1 enriched tumours, highlighting a potential synergistic effect of this treatment combination in certain tumour types. However, improved survival results with the use of anti-PD-L1 avelumab as a maintenance schedule for bladder cancer raises the question of the most appropriate approach between sequential and concomitant administration of chemoimmunotherapy. To date, no trials have compared in a head-to-head protocol the administration of concomitant chemoimmunotherapy with chemotherapy, used for tumour debulking, followed by administration of ICIs. Regarding the tolerance profile, no new safety signals were found with the combination tested to date. Interestingly, recent results have shown an improved Progression Free survival 2 (PFS2) (defined as the progression after the next line of therapy) in head-and-neck cancers or NSCLC after a first-line pembrolizumab-chemotherapy combination, suggesting a potential long-lasting effect of ICIs when used in combination in the first-line setting.

Ipilimumab-Induced Enterocolitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Checkpoint inhibitor drugs including ipilimumab have been reported to induce intestinal injury.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the risk of chronic (> 6 weeks) enterocolitis following ipilimumab administration, and the likelihood that an enteritis vs colitis or enterocolitis is seen.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, and conference proceedings. We included: (1) randomized controlled trials comparing ipilimumab administration with placebo/standard care/other active chemotherapy regimens and (2) prospective observational studies. Separate meta-analyses were performed for randomized controlled trials and observational studies.

RESULTS

Of 4760 records, we included ten unique randomized controlled trials (n = 5814 subjects) and 34 unique prospective observational studies (n = 3699 subjects). In randomized controlled trials, the pooled relative risk of ≥ grade 3 enterocolitis or ≥ grade 3 diarrhea associated with ipilimumab was 13.31 (95% confidence interval 6.01-29.48, I² = 0%, ten trials) and 6.72 (95% confidence interval 3.30-13.65, I² = 63%, ten trials), respectively. In observational studies, the 3-monthly risk of developing grade 3 or higher enteritis, colitis, or enterocolitis was 4% (95% confidence interval 3-7, I² = 77.40%, 25 studies). Randomized controlled trials and observational studies did not distinguish between acute and chronic enterocolitis. Of the included observational studies, the pooled risk of incurring small bowel involvement associated with ipilimumab was 1% (95% CI 0-4, I² = 0%, four studies) per every 3-month time period.

CONCLUSIONS

Insufficient data exist to quantify or distinguish the risk of acute vs chronic enterocolitis following ipilmumab use. Because of the serious impact of chronic enterocolitis on quality of life and further cancer treatment, future trials evaluating the safety of immunotherapy should report gastrointestinal events in greater detail.

Incidence and characteristics of metastatic intracranial lesions in stage III and IV melanoma: a single institute retrospective analysis

INTRODUCTION

The study aimed to describe the brain metastases (BM) incidence, at diagnosis and follow-up, in patients initially presenting with stage III or IV melanoma and characterize their metastatic brain lesions. We also sought to describe the association of common genetic mutations and immunotherapy with BM development in advanced melanoma.

METHODS

Using our institution's tumor registry, we identified patients with initial diagnoses of stage III and stage IV melanoma. In this cohort, we obtained BM incidence at diagnosis and follow-up, characterized the metastatic brain lesions and primary tumor's genetic profile.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period, 22.9% of patients with an initial diagnosis of stage III developed BM. In this cohort, the median time for BM occurrence was 20 months; [95% CI (14-29)]. Likewise, 37.7% of patients with Stage IV melanoma presented with BM at the time of diagnosis, and 22.7% of remaining patients developed BM at follow-up over a median duration of 6 months [95% CI (4-11)]. Therefore, suggesting an overall incidence of 51.9% in stage IV melanoma. Next, we observed that the incidence of BM development during the follow-up period significantly decreased from 2012 to 2017 (p < 0.001). Lastly, we found a significantly higher frequency of mutational BRAF in the primary tumor of patients with BM (68.7% vs. 31.2%; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

While the overall incidence of BM remains high, the decreasing incidence of BM over the follow-up period is promising. Similar BM incidence in patients with an initial diagnosis of stage III or stage IV warrants appropriate imaging surveillance regimen for stage III patients.

A vision of immuno-oncology: the Siena think tank of the Italian network for tumor biotherapy (NIBIT) foundation

BACKGROUND

The yearly Think Tank Meeting of the Italian Network for Tumor Biotherapy (NIBIT) Foundation, brings together in Siena, Tuscany (Italy), experts in immuno-oncology to review the learnings from current immunotherapy treatments, and to propose new pre-clinical and clinical investigations in selected research areas. MAIN: While immunotherapies in non-small cell lung cancer and melanoma led to practice changing therapies, the same therapies had only modest benefit for patients with other malignancies, such as mesothelioma and glioblastoma. One way to improve on current immunotherapies is to alter the sequence of each combination agent. Matching the immunotherapy to the host's immune response may thus improve the activity of the current treatments. A second approach is to combine current immunotherapies with novel agents targeting complementary mechanisms. Identifying the appropriate novel agents may require different approaches than the traditional laboratory-based discovery work. For example, artificial intelligence-based research may help focusing the search for innovative and most promising combination partners.

CONCLUSION

Novel immunotherapies are needed in cancer patients with resistance to or relapse after current immunotherapeutic drugs. Such new treatments may include targeted agents or monoclonal antibodies to overcome the immune-suppressive tumor microenvironment. The mode of combining the novel treatments, including vaccines, needs to be matched to the patient's immune status for achieving the maximum benefit. In this scenario, specific attention should be also paid nowadays to the immune intersection between COVID-19 and cancer.

Impact of prior treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors on dacarbazine efficacy in metastatic melanoma

BACKGROUND

Despite its low efficacy, chemotherapy with dacarbazine remains an option in metastatic melanoma patients after failure of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) ± targeted therapy. Some observations suggested an increased efficacy of chemotherapy in melanoma or lung cancer patients previously treated with ICI; we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of dacarbazine in a controlled-group study of patients pre-treated or not with ICI.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data from all consecutive patients treated with dacarbazine for advanced cutaneous melanoma without brain metastasis, in our skin cancer centre between June 2006 and September 2019. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were overall response rates (ORR), overall survival (OS) and safety of dacarbazine.

RESULTS

Among 72 patients, 17 (23.6%) received dacarbazine after ICI and 55 (76.3%) without prior ICI. Despite less favourable prognostic factors in patients ICI-pre-treated, median PFS was 4.27 months (range 0.89-43.69) in this group versus 2.04 months (range 1.25-39.25) P = 0.03 in non-ICI-pre-treated patients; ORR were 35.3% and 12.7%, respectively. The median OS and the occurrence of adverse events were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Dacarbazine seems to offer a short-lived benefit in patients with progressive advanced disease despite ICI (±targeted therapy), and could be an alternative before considering best supportive care.

A five-gene signature is a prognostic biomarker in pan-cancer and related with immunologically associated extracellular matrix

The tumor microenvironment (TME) is related to extracellular matrix (ECM) dynamics and has a broad fundamental and mechanistic role in tumorigenesis and cancer progression. We hypothesized that ECM regulators might play an essential role in pan‐cancer attribution by causing a generic effect through its regulation of the dynamics of ECM alteration. By analyzing data from TCGA using GSEA and univariate Cox regression analysis, we found that ECM regulator genes were significantly enriched and contributed to mortality in various cancer types. Notably, UMAP analysis revealed that ECM regulator genes dominated the differences between tumor and adjacent normal tissues based on 59 or 31 pan‐survival‐related ECM gene sets. Subsequently, a five‐gene signature consisting of the predominant ECM regulators ADAM12, MMP1, SERPINE1, PLOD3, and P4HA3 was identified. We found that this five‐gene signature was pro‐mortality in 18 types of cancer in TCGA, and validated eleven other cancer types in TCGA and seven types in the TARGET and CoMMpass databases using overall survival analysis. KEGG pathway enrichment and Pearson correlation analysis indicated that these five component genes that were correlated with specific ECM proteins involved in tumorigenesis from the ECM receptor interaction gene set. Additionally, the fitted results of a linear model were applied to strengthen the discovery, demonstrating that the five genes were correlated with immune infiltration score and especially associated with typically immunologically “cold” tumors. We thus conclude that the ADAM12, MMP1, SERPINE1, PLOD3, and P4HA3 signature showed a close association with a pan‐cancer effect on prognosis and is related to ECM proteins in the TME which corresponding with immunologically “cold” cancer types.

Primary Analysis and 4-Year Follow-Up of the Phase III NIBIT-M2 Trial in Melanoma Patients With Brain Metastases

PURPOSE

Phase II trials have shown encouraging activity with ipilimumab plus fotemustine and ipilimumab plus nivolumab in melanoma brain metastases. We report the primary analysis and 4-year follow-up of the NIBIT-M2 study, the first phase III trial comparing these regimens with fotemustine in patients with melanoma with brain metastases.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This phase III study recruited patients 18 years of age and older with BRAF wild-type or mutant melanoma, and active, untreated, asymptomatic brain metastases from nine centers, randomized (1:1:1) to fotemustine, ipilimumab plus fotemustine, or ipilimumab plus nivolumab. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

From January, 2013 to September, 2018, 27, 26, and 27 patients received fotemustine, ipilimumab plus fotemustine, and ipilimumab plus nivolumab. Median OS was 8.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 4.8-12.2] in the fotemustine arm, 8.2 months (95% CI, 2.2-14.3) in the ipilimumab plus fotemustine arm (HR vs. fotemustine, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.59-1.99; P = 0.78), and 29.2 months (95% CI, 0-65.1) in the ipilimumab plus nivolumab arm (HR vs. fotemustine, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22-0.87; P = 0.017). Four-year survival rate was significantly higher for ipilimumab plus nivolumab than fotemustine [(41.0%; 95% CI, 20.6-61.4) vs. 10.9% (95% CI, 0-24.4; P = 0.015)], and was 10.3% (95% CI, 0-22.6) for ipilimumab plus fotemustine. In the fotemustine, ipilimumab plus fotemustine, and ipilimumab plus nivolumab arms, respectively, 11 (48%), 18 (69%), and eight (30%) patients had treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events, without treatment-related deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with fotemustine, ipilimumab plus nivolumab significantly improved overall and long-term survival of patients with melanoma with asymptomatic brain metastases.

Emerging principles of brain immunology and immune checkpoint blockade in brain metastases

Brain metastases are the most common type of brain tumours, harbouring an immune microenvironment that can in principle be targeted via immunotherapy. Elucidating some of the immunological intricacies of brain metastases has opened a therapeutic window to explore the potential of immune checkpoint inhibitors in this globally lethal disease. Multiple lines of evidence suggest that tumour cells hijack the immune regulatory mechanisms in the brain for the benefit of their own survival and progression. Nonetheless, the role of the immune checkpoint in the complex interplays between cancers cells and T cells and in conferring resistance to therapy remains under investigation. Meanwhile, early phase trials with immune checkpoint inhibitors have reported clinical benefit in patients with brain metastases from melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer. In this review, we explore the workings of the immune system in the brain, the immunology of brain metastases, and the current status of immune checkpoint inhibitors in the treatment of brain metastases.

Developments in therapy for brain metastases in melanoma patients

Introduction: Cutaneous melanoma brain metastases (MBM) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality. While cytotoxic agents, interferon, or interleukin-2, have been used with some success in extracranial disease, limited efficacy is demonstrated in MBM. The rare patient with long-term survival presented with limited intracranial disease amenable to surgery or radiation therapy. However, the development of targeted therapy and immunotherapy over the last decade has significantly improved overall survival in this formerly devastating presentation of metastatic melanoma.Areas covered: This article reviews the mechanism of brain metastasis, challenges with treating the central nervous system, historical treatment of MBM, and outcomes in clinical trials with targeted therapy and immunotherapy.Expert opinion: The MBM patient population now, more than ever, requires a multidisciplinary approach with surgery, radiation therapy, and the use of newer systemic therapies such as immunotherapy agents and targeted therapy agents. MBM has traditionally been excluded from clinical trials for systemic therapy due to poor survival. However, recent data show overall survival rates have significantly improved, supporting the need for inclusion of MBM patients in systemic therapy clinical trials. Understanding the mechanisms of therapeutic activity in the brain, resistance  mechanisms, and the appropriate multi-modality treatment approach requires further investigation. Nevertheless, these therapies continue to give some hope to patients with historically poor survival.

Ipilimumab and Stereotactic Radiosurgery with CyberKnife® System in Melanoma Brain Metastases: A Retrospective Monoinstitutional Experience

Simple Summary

Retrospective studies have shown a survival advantage in combining ipilimumab with radiotherapy in patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBMs). However, these studies did not clarify the correct timing between the two methods. The aims of our study were to demonstrate the efficacy and toxicity of stereotactic radiotherapy/radiosurgery on MBMs in combination with ipilimumab and estimate the correct timing of treatments to improve patients’ outcomes.

Abstract

The median overall survival (OS) and local control (LC) of patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) are poor even with immune checkpoint inhibitors and/or radiotherapy (RT). The aims of the study were to evaluate the association and timing of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT)/radiosurgery (SRS) performed with the CyberKnife^® System and ipilimumab (IPI). A total of 63 MBMs patients were analyzed: 53 received RT+IPI and 10 RT alone. Therefore, the patients were divided into four groups: RT PRE-PI (>4 weeks before IPI) (18), RT CONC-IPI (4 weeks before/between first and last cycle/within 3 months of last cycle of IPI) (20), RT POST-IPI (>3 months after IPI) (15), and NO-IPI (10). A total of 127 lesions were treated: 75 with SRS (one fraction) and 24 with SRT (three to five fractions). The median follow-up was 10.6 months. The median OS was 10.6 months for all patients, 10.7 months for RT+IPI, and 3.3 months for NO-IPI (p = 0.96). One-year LC was 50% for all patients, 56% for RT+IPI, and 18% for NO-IPI (p = 0.08). The 1-year intracranial control was 45% for all patients, 44% for RT+IPI, and 51% for NO-IPI (p = 0.73). IPI with SRS/SRT in MBMs treatment could improve LC. However, the impact and timing of the two modalities on patients’ outcomes are still unclear.

The side effects of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy on the endocrine system

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a relatively newer class of drugs approved for the treatment of malignancies such as melanoma, renal, bladder and lung cancer. Immune-related adverse events (IrAEs) involving the endocrine system are a common side effect of these drugs. The spectrum of endocrine adverse events varies by the drug class. Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen-4 inhibitors commonly cause hypophysitis/hypopituitarism, whereas the incidence of thyroid disease is higher with programmed cell death (PD)-1/ ligand (PD-L) protein 1 inhibitors. The focus of this review is to describe the individual endocrinopathies with their possible mechanisms, signs and symptoms, clinical assessment and disease management. Multiple mechanisms of IrAEs have been described in literature including type II/IV hypersensitivity reactions and development of autoantibodies. Patients with pre-existing autoimmune endocrine diseases can have disease exacerbation following ICI therapy rather than de novo IrAEs. Most of the endocrinopathies are relatively mild, and timely hormone replacement therapy allows continuation of ICIs. However, involvement of the pituitary–adrenal axis could be life-threatening if not recognized. Corticosteroids are helpful when the pituitary–adrenal axis is involved. In cases of severe endocrine toxicity (grade 3/4), ICIs should be temporarily discontinued and can be restarted after adequate hormonal therapy. Endocrinologists and general internists need to be vigilant and maintain a high degree of awareness for these adverse events.

Emerging PD-1/PD-L1 antagonists for the treatment of malignant melanoma

INTRODUCTION

Increased understanding of the interactive mechanisms between tumors and the immune system led to the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors, which have revolutioned the treatment of metastatic melanoma and subsequently many other tumors. In 2014, nivolumab and pembrolizumab, two checkpoint inhibitors binding to PD-1, were approved for the treatment of metastatic melanoma. Since then, a plethora of new molecules have enriched the armamentarium against melanoma.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the last updates about treatment with nivolumab and pembrolizumab, data on other PD-1/PDL-1 agents such as spartalizumab and atezolizumab and emerging compounds, new combinations with NKTR-214, anti LAG-3, anti IDO-1 and TVEC, new checkpoint inhibitors (e.g. TIM-3 or TIGIT) and other new molecules for the treatment of metastatic melanoma.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently, several ongoing clinical trials are investigating novel molecules, or immunotherapy combinations, in order to achieve even better survival outcomes for patients, overcoming resistance mechanisms and improving toxicity profiles. The challenge in the near future will be to select the most appropriate treatments according to the specific characteristics of the patients.

Nonsurgical Management of Melanoma Brain Metastasis: Current Therapeutics, Challenges, and Strategies for Progress

This review aims to provide an overview of nonsurgical treatment strategies for central nervous system metastases in melanoma as well as discuss treatment challenges and future directions. Recent strategies for melanoma brain metastases have involved proving the intracranial activity of approved therapies as well as identifying novel drug targets. BRAF/MEK combination therapy has intracranial activity in those with BRAF V600 mutations, though disease control is shorter for intracranial than extracranial metastases. Immunotherapy and combination immunotherapies have emerged as providing durable responses in melanoma, and newer studies combining immunotherapy with targeted therapies are emerging. Continued challenges include penetration through the blood-brain barrier and development of resistance mechanisms. Novel therapeutic targets and methods to improve central nervous system penetrance are being identified through the application of deep DNA- and RNA-sequencing analyses. Radiation therapy approaches, especially stereotactic radiosurgery in combination or in sequence with systemic therapies, are also being investigated. Both targeted therapies and immunotherapies have revolutionized the field of melanoma treatment. Multimodality approaches with multidisciplinary teams will pave the way for the future of central nervous system disease treatment in melanoma.

Back to simplicity: a four-marker blood cell score to quantify prognostically relevant myeloid cells in melanoma patients

Background

Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC), a cornerstone of cancer-related immunosuppression, influence response to therapy and disease outcomes in melanoma patients. Nevertheless, their quantification is far from being integrated into routine clinical practice mostly because of the complex and still evolving phenotypic signatures applied to define the cell subsets. Here, we used a multistep downsizing process to verify whether a core of few markers could be sufficient to capture the prognostic potential of myeloid cells in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) of metastatic melanoma patients.

Methods

In baseline frozen PBMC from a total of 143 stage IIIc to IV melanoma patients, we first assessed the relevant or redundant expression of myeloid and MDSC-related markers by flow cytometry (screening set, n=23 patients). Subsequently, we applied the identified panel to the development set samples (n=59 patients undergoing first/second-line therapy) to obtain prognostic variables associated with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) by machine learning adaptive index modeling. Finally, the identified score was confirmed in a validation set (n=61) and compared with standard clinical prognostic factors to assess its additive value in patient prognostication.

Results

This selection process led to the identification of what we defined myeloid index score (MIS), which is composed by four cell subsets (CD14⁺, CD14⁺HLA-DR^neg, CD14⁺PD-L1⁺ and CD15⁺ cells), whose frequencies above cut-offs stratified melanoma patients according to progressively worse prognosis. Patients with a MIS=0, showing no over-threshold value of MIS subsets, had the best clinical outcome, with a median survival of >33.6 months, while in patients with MIS 1→3, OS deteriorated from 10.9 to 6.8 and 6.0 months as the MIS increased (p<0.0001, c-index=0.745). MIS clustered patients into risk groups also according to PFS (p<0.0001). The inverse correlation between MIS and survival was confirmed in the validation set, was independent of the type of therapy and was not interfered by clinical prognostic factors. MIS HR was remarkably superior to that of lactate dehydrogenase, tumor burden and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio.

Conclusion

The MIS >0 identifies melanoma patients with a more aggressive disease, thus acting as a simple blood biomarker that can help tailoring therapeutic choices in real-life oncology.

Clinical efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with brain metastases

Brain metastases (BMs) represent a negative prognostic factor for patients with solid malignancies. BMs are generally approached with loco-regional treatments and the blood-brain barrier limits the efficacy of some systemic drugs. The aim of this review is to summarize current knowledge about the role of immune checkpoint inhibitors for the management of brain metastases in patients with solid malignancies. We performed a review of available literature. Immune checkpoint inhibitors represent the standard treatment for several advanced solid malignancies. However, with the exception of melanoma their clinical role in other solid malignancies is not completely clear due to the exclusion of patients with BM from approval clinical trials. Immune-checkpoint inhibitors may be an effective treatment of brain metastases of melanoma while their clinical role on brain metastases from other solid malignancies is uncertain.

A Contemporary Report of Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Melanoma Brain Metastases

Background: Brain metastases are observed in more than 40% of all patients with stage 4 melanoma. In recent years, more extensive use of stereotactic radiation (STRT) and the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors have positively impacted outcomes in patients with metastatic melanoma.brain metastases. Here, we examined real world clinical outcomes of patients presenting with melanoma brain metastases (MBMs). Methods: This retrospective review evaluated MBMs patients treated at The Ottawa Hospital from April 2000 to July 2017. Clinical, radiologic, pathologic and treatment information were gathered from the electronic medical records. The primary outcome was overall survival. The proportional Cox regression model was employed for survival data, while the Fisher’s exact and Mann–Whitney U tests analyzed the relationship between categorical and continuous data, respectively. Results: This retrospective study included 276 patients. Brain metastases were detected symptomatically in 191 patients (69.2%); the rates of detection by routine screening were 4.6% in the pre-2012 era and 11.7% in the contemporary era (p = 0.029). Median survival was three months. Predictors of overall survival were age, higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) values, multiple brain lesions, more extensive extracranial disease, neurological symptoms, infratentorial lesions and treatment type. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that stereotactic radiotherapy (STRT) was associated with a hazard ratio of 0.401 (p < 0.001) for survival; likewise, immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy was associated with a hazard ratio of 0.375 (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The findings from this study as “real world” data are consistent with results of pivotal clinical trials in MBMs patients and support contemporary locoregional and immunotherapy practices.

Current Advancements and Novel Strategies in the Treatment of Metastatic Melanoma

Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer in the world with a growing incidence in North America. Contemporary treatments for melanoma include surgical resection, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. However, apart from resection in early melanoma, the prognosis of patients using these treatments is typically poor. In the past decade, there have been significant advancements in melanoma therapies. Immunotherapies such as ipilimumab and targeted therapies such as vemurafenib have emerged as a promising option for patients as seen in both scientific and clinical research. Furthermore, combination therapies are starting to be administered in the form of polychemotherapy, polyimmunotherapy, and biochemotherapy, of which some have shown promising outcomes in relative efficacy and safety due to their multiple targets. Alongside these treatments, new research has been conducted into the evidence-based use of natural health products (NHPs) and natural compounds (NCs) on melanoma which may provide a long-term and non-toxic form of complementary therapy. Nevertheless, there is a limited consolidation of the research conducted in emerging melanoma treatments which may be useful for researchers and clinicians. Thus, this review attempts to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of current advancements in metastatic melanoma treatment by surveying new research into the molecular and cellular basis of treatments along with their clinical efficacy. In addition, this review aims to elucidate novel strategies that are currently being used and have the potential to be used in the future.

The current state of immunotherapy for primary and secondary brain tumors: similarities and differences

Treatment and resolution of primary and metastatic brain tumors have long presented a challenge to oncologists. In response to the dismal survival outcomes associated with conventional therapies, various immunotherapy modalities, such as checkpoint inhibitors, vaccine, cellular immunotherapy and viral immunotherapy have been actively explored over the past couple of decades. Although improved patient survival has been more frequently noted in treatment of brain metastases, little progress has been made in improving patient survival in cases of primary brain tumors, specifically glioblastoma, which is the representative primary brain tumor discussed in this review. Herein, we will first overview the findings of recent clinical studies for treatment of primary and metastatic brain tumors with immunotherapeutic interventions. The clinical efficacy of these immunotherapies will be discussed in the context of their ability or inability to overcome inherent characteristics of the tumor as well as restricted antigen presentation and its immunosuppressive microenvironment. Additionally, this review aims to briefly inform clinicians in the field of neuro-oncology on the relevant aspects of the immune system as it pertains to the central nervous system, with special focus on the differing modes of antigen presentation and tumor microenvironment of primary and metastatic brain tumors and the role these differences may play in the efficacy of immunotherapy in eradicating the tumor.

Managing Ipilimumab-Induced Hypophysitis: Challenges and Current Therapeutic Strategies

Over the past years, progress has been made in cancer immunotherapy following the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) that have been proved effective in the management of many malignancies. Ipilimumab, a monoclonal antibody against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), has been approved for the treatment of advanced melanoma but has been associated with the development of several endocrine immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Hypophysitis is the most common endocrine irAE related to ipilimumab with a reported incidence ranging from 1.8% to 17%. The mechanism underlying ipilimumab-induced hypophysitis implicates immune, inflammatory and genetic factors, but there are still some points that are not well understood and remain to be elucidated. The diagnosis is based mainly on clinical, biochemical and imaging data. The majority of patients display multiple hormone deficiencies that may recover or persist for a prolonged period of time with corticotroph deficiency usually being permanent. Immune-related hypopituitarism is treated with replacement of deficient hormones while in severe forms of hypophysitis treatment with high-dose glucocorticoids may be required. Proper evaluation and registration of patients in clinical trials and further investigation are needed to precisely clarify the pathophysiology of the ICI-related hypophysitis, define predictive factors and ameliorate the management and outcome of the disease.

Immune Therapy for Central Nervous System Metastasis

Brain metastases lead to substantial morbidity and mortality among patients with advanced malignancies. Although treatment options have traditionally included largely palliative measures, studies of brain metastasis response to immunotherapy are promising. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown efficacy in studies of patients with melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, and lung cancer brain metastases. Patients with brain metastases are more frequently included in clinical trials, ushering in a new era in immunotherapy and management for patients with brain metastases. Gaining an understanding of the molecular determination for response to immunotherapies remains a major challenge and is an active area of future research.

Association of Immunotherapy With Survival Among Patients With Brain Metastases Whose Cancer Was Managed With Definitive Surgery of the Primary Tumor

IMPORTANCE

Immunotherapy has shown significant control of intracranial metastases in patients with melanoma. However, the association of immunotherapy combined with other cancer treatments and overall survival (OS) of patients with brain metastases, regardless of primary tumor site, is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the association of immunotherapy with OS in patients with cancer and brain metastases who received definitive surgery of the primary site.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This comparative effectiveness study included 3112 adult patients in the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2016 with non-small cell lung cancer, breast cancer, melanoma, colorectal cancer, or kidney cancer and brain metastases at the time of diagnosis and who received definitive surgery of the primary site. Data analysis was conducted from March to April 2020.

EXPOSURES

Treatment groups were stratified as follows: (1) any treatment with or without immunotherapy, (2) chemotherapy with or without immunotherapy, (3) radiotherapy (RT) with or without immunotherapy, and (4) chemoradiation with or without immunotherapy.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The association of immunotherapy with OS was assessed with Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for age at diagnosis, race, sex, place of living, income, education, treatment facility type, primary tumor type, and year of diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of 3112 patients, 1436 (46.14%) were men, 2714 (87.72%) were White individuals, 257 (8.31%) were Black individuals, and 123 (3.98%) belonged to other racial and ethnic groups. The median (range) age at diagnosis was 61 (19-90) years. Overall, 183 (5.88%) received immunotherapy, 318 (10.22%) received chemotherapy alone, 788 (25.32%) received RT alone, and 1393 (44.76%) received chemoradiation alone; 22 (6.47%) received chemotherapy plus immunotherapy, 72 (8.37%) received RT plus immunotherapy, and 76 (5.17%) received chemoradiation plus immunotherapy. In the multivariable analysis, patients who received immunotherapy had significantly improved OS compared with no immunotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.51-0.76; P < .001). Treatment with RT plus immunotherapy was associated with significantly improved OS compared with RT alone (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.42-0.84; P = .003). Chemotherapy plus immunotherapy or chemoradiation plus immunotherapy were not associated with improved OS in the multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, the addition of immunotherapy to RT was associated with improved OS compared with radiotherapy alone in patients with brain metastases who received definitive surgery of the primary tumor site.

Melanoma brain metastases - Interdisciplinary management recommendations 2020

Melanoma brain metastases (MBM) are common and associated with a particularly poor prognosis; they directly cause death in 60-70% of melanoma patients. In the past, systemic treatments have shown response rates around 5%, whole brain radiation as standard of care has achieved a median overall survival of approximately three months. Recently, the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors and combinations of MAP-kinase inhibitors both have shown very promising response rates of up to 55% and 58%, respectively, and improved survival. However, current clinical evidence is based on multi-cohort studies only, as prospectively randomized trials have been carried out rarely in MBM, independently whether investigating systemic therapy, radiotherapy or surgical techniques. Here, an interdisciplinary expert team reviewed the outcome of prospectively conducted clinical studies in MBM, identified evidence gaps and provided recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, outcome evaluation and monitoring of MBM patients. The recommendations refer to four distinct scenarios: patients (i) with 'brain-only' disease, (ii) with oligometastatic asymptomatic intra- and extracranial disease, (iii) with multiple asymptomatic metastases, and (iv) with multiple symptomatic MBM or leptomeningeal disease. Changes in current management recommendations comprise the use of immunotherapy - preferably combined anti-CTLA-4/PD-1-immunotherapy - in asymptomatic MBM minus/plus stereotactic radiosurgery which remains the mainstay of local brain therapy being safe and effective. Adjuvant whole-brain radiotherapy provides no clinical benefit in oligometastatic MBM. Among the systemic therapies, combined MAPK-kinase inhibition provides, in BRAF^V600-mutated patients with rapidly progressing or/and symptomatic MBM, an alternative to combined immunotherapy.

Impact of Immunotherapy on the Survival of Patients With Cancer and Brain Metastases

Background: Immunotherapy has shown excellent efficacy in various cancers. However, there is a lack of knowledge regarding the significant role of immunotherapy in patients with brain metastases (BMs). The objective of this study was to investigate, using the National Cancer Database, the impact of immunotherapy on the overall survival (OS) of patients with BMs who did not receive definitive surgery of the primary tumor. Patients and Methods: Patients diagnosed with the primary cancer of non–small cell lung cancer, small cell lung cancer, other types of lung cancer, breast cancer, melanoma, colorectal cancer, or renal cancer who had BMs at the time of diagnosis were identified from the National Cancer Database. We assessed OS using a Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for age at diagnosis, sex, race, education level, income level, residential area, treatment facility type, insurance status, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity status, year of diagnosis, primary tumor type, and receipt of chemotherapy, radiation therapy (RT), and/or immunotherapy, because these factors were significantly associated with OS in the univariable analysis. Results: Of 94,215 patients who were analyzed, 3,097 (3.29%) received immunotherapy. In the multivariable analysis, immunotherapy was associated with significantly improved OS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.694; 95% CI, 0.664–0.726; P<.0001) compared with no immunotherapy. Treatment using chemotherapy plus immunotherapy was significantly associated with improved OS (HR, 0.643; 95% CI, 0.560–0.738; P<.0001) compared with chemotherapy without immunotherapy. RT plus immunotherapy was also associated with significantly improved OS (HR, 0.389; 95% CI, 0.352–0.429; P<.0001) compared with RT alone. Furthermore, chemoradiation (CRT) plus immunotherapy was associated with significantly improved OS (HR, 0.793; 95% CI, 0.752–0.836; P<.0001) compared with CRT alone. Conclusions: In this comprehensive analysis, the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy, RT, and CRT was associated with significantly improved OS in patients with BMs. The study warrants future clinical trials of immunotherapy in patients with BMs, who have historically been excluded from these trials.

Radiosurgery dose reduction for brain metastases on immunotherapy (RADREMI): A prospective phase I study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Up to 20% of patients with brain metastases treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy and concomitant stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) suffer from symptomatic radiation necrosis. The goal of this study is to evaluate Radiosurgery Dose Reduction for Brain Metastases on Immunotherapy (RADREMI) on six-month symptomatic radiation necrosis rates.

METHODS

This study is a prospective single arm Phase I pilot study which will recruit patients with brain metastases receiving ICI delivered within 30 days before SRS. All patients will be treated with RADREMI dosing, which involves SRS doses of 18 Gy for 0-2 cm lesions, 14 Gy for 2.1-3 cm lesions, and 12 Gy for 3.1-4 cm lesions. All patients will be monitored for six-month symptomatic radiation necrosis (defined as a six-month rate of clinical symptomatology requiring steroid administration and/or operative intervention concomitant with imaging findings consistent with radiation necrosis) and six-month local control. We expect that RADREMI dosing will significantly reduce the symptomatic radiation necrosis rate of concomitant SRS + ICI without significantly sacrificing the local control obtained by the present RTOG 90-05 SRS dosing schema. Local control will be defined according to the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first prospective trial to investigate the safety of dose-reduced SRS in treatment of brain metastases with concomitant ICI. The findings should provide fertile soil for future multi-institutional collaborative efficacy trials of RADREMI dosing for this patient population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04047602 (registration date: July 25, 2019).

Evolving treatment strategies of brain metastases from breast cancer: current status and future direction

Remarkable progress in breast cancer treatment has improved patient survival, resulting in an increased incidence of brain metastasis (BM). Current treatment options for BM are limited and are generally used for palliative purposes. Historically, local treatment, consisting of radiotherapy and surgery, is the standard of care due to delivery limitations of systemic treatments through the blood-brain barrier. However, as novel biological mechanisms for tumors and BM have been discovered, several innovative systemic agents, such as small-molecular-targeted therapy and immunotherapy, have begun to change the treatment paradigm. In addition, efforts to maximize antitumor effects have been attempted using combination therapy, informed by tumor biology. In this comprehensive review, we will highlight various clinical trials investigating the treatment of BM in breast cancer patients, discuss presently available treatment options, and suggest potential directions of future therapeutic targets.

Melanoma Brain Metastases in the Era of Target Therapies: An Overview

Malignant melanoma is the third most common type of tumor that causes brain metastases. Patients with cerebral involvement have a dismal prognosis and their treatment is an unmet medical need. Brain involvement is a multistep process involving several signaling pathways such as Janus kinase/signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription (JAK/STAT), Phosphoinositide 3-kinase/Protein Kinase B (PI3K/AKT), Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor and Phosphatase and Tensin Homolog (PTEN). Recently therapy that targets the MAPK signaling (BRAF/MEK inhibitors) and immunotherapy (anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1 agents) have changed the therapeutic approaches to stage IV melanoma. In contrast, there are no solid data about patients with brain metastases, who are usually excluded from clinical trials. Retrospective data showed that BRAF-inhibitors, alone or in combination with MEK-inhibitors have interesting clinical activity in this setting. Prospective data about the combinations of BRAF/MEK inhibitors have been recently published, showing an improved overall response rate. Short intracranial disease control is still a challenge. Several attempts have been made in order to improve it with combinations between local and systemic therapies. Immunotherapy approaches seem to retain promising activity in the treatment of melanoma brain metastasis as showed by the results of clinical trials investigating the combination of anti-CTL4 (Ipilimumab) and anti-PD1(Nivolumab). Studies about the combination or the sequential approach of target therapy and immunotherapy are ongoing, with immature results. Several clinical trials are ongoing trying to explore new approaches in order to overcome tumor resistance. At this moment the correct therapeutic choices for melanoma with intracranial involvement is still a challenge and new strategies are needed.

Systemic Therapies for Melanoma Brain Metastases: A Primer for Radiologists

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to provide a primer for radiologists outlining the modern systemic therapies used in melanoma brain metastases, including tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors. The role of radiologic treatment response evaluation will be discussed from the standpoint of both modern systemic therapies and more traditional treatments.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the role of systemic treatments in melanoma brain metastases is critical for oncologic imaging interpretation in this unique patient population.

Combination treatments with immunotherapy in brain metastases patients

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized the treatment of many advanced cancers. However, in most pivotal trials, patients with brain metastases (BM) were either excluded, or only selected patients were allowed. Therefore, there are still some concerns about the safety/efficacy ratio of ICI in patients with BM. In this special report we will provide an overview on the biological rationale for using ICI in the treatment of BM, the reported BM-related outcomes of clinical trials with a focus on ICI plus chemotherapy and ICI plus ICI combinations. Last, we will provide future challenges with this strategy, as well as directions for future research.

Current Treatment of Melanoma Brain Metastasis

OPINION STATEMENT

With greater understanding of underlying biology and development of effective BRAF-targeted therapy and immunotherapy, along with remarkable advances in local treatment such as stereotactic radiosurgery, melanoma brain metastasis (MBM) is witnessing continually improving outcome, with 1-year overall survival rate approaching 85%. Given disease complexity and myriad treatment options, all patients with MBM should ideally be evaluated in a multidisciplinary setting to allow an individualized treatment approach based on prognostic groups, molecular classification, number and size of brain metastasis, and performance status. With improving outcome, pendulum has now swayed to focus more on effective treatment modalities with minimal neurological toxicity while maintaining quality of life. Surgery is usually considered in symptomatic and large MBMs, while stereotactic radiosurgery considered in 1-4 lesions, and now also being explored for up to 15 brain metastases for improved local control. The role of whole brain radiotherapy is diminishing given its neurocognitive toxicities and is reserved for patients with diffuse brain involvement. Cytotoxic chemotherapy has largely been ineffective without evidence for survival benefit. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have become the cornerstone of management for melanoma brain metastasis with durable intracranial tumor control and excellent toxicity profile. For patients with asymptomatic MBMs, ipilimumab and nivolumab have shown intracranial response near 60% and provides comparable clinical benefit in MBMs as for extracranial metastases. For patients with driver BRAF mutation, BRAFi-/MEKi-targeted agents are proven to be effective in MBM with high rate intracranial responses (44-59%). However, the durability of intracranial responses induced by BRAFi/MEKi seems to be shorter than that of extracranial disease. Emerging data support novel combination of systemic therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery, which appears to be safe and effective; however, potential benefits and risks should be evaluated prospectively. Promising ongoing trials will further expand therapeutic evidence in MBM, and patients should be encouraged to participate in clinical trials.

The Current Status of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Neuro-Oncology: A Systematic Review

The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), as a novel treatment modality, has transformed the field of oncology with unprecedented successes. However, the efficacy of ICI for patients with glioblastoma or brain metastases (BMs) from any tumor type is under debate. Therefore, we systematically reviewed current literature on the use of ICI in patients with glioblastoma and BMs. Prospective and retrospective studies evaluating the efficacy and survival outcomes of ICI in patients with glioblastoma or BMs, and published between 2006 and November 2019, were considered. A total of 88 studies were identified (n = 8 in glioblastoma and n = 80 in BMs). In glioblastoma, median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of all studies were 2.1 and 7.3 months, respectively. In patients with BMs, intracranial responses have been reported in studies with melanoma and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The median intracranial and total PFS in these studies were 2.7 and 3.0 months, respectively. The median OS in all studies for patients with brain BMs was 8.0 months. To date, ICI demonstrate limited efficacy in patients with glioblastoma or BMs. Future research should focus on increasing the local and systemic immunological responses in these patients.