Combination chemotherapy with or without s.c. IL-2 and IFN-alpha: results of a prospectively randomized trial of the Cooperative Advanced Malignant Melanoma Chemoimmunotherapy Group (ACIMM)

Recurrence Patterns for Regionally Metastatic Melanoma Treated in the Era of Adjuvant Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the timing and patterns of recurrence for patients with regionally metastatic melanoma on the basis of nodal management and receipt of adjuvant therapy.

METHODS

We identified randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies published between 2010 and 2020 that reported timing and/or patterns of recurrence. We evaluated recurrence-free survival (RFS), location of recurrence, and surveillance strategy on the basis of receipt of adjuvant systemic therapy and nodal management with observation versus completion dissection. We compared differences in patterns of recurrence across studies using RevMan. RFS was evaluated graphically using point estimates and confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Among the 19 publications, there was wide variation in study populations, imaging surveillance regimens, and format of recurrence reporting. Patterns of disease recurrence did not differ between adjuvant and placebo/observation groups. A total of 11 studies reported RFS at variable time intervals, which ranged in adjuvant therapy groups (38-88% at 1 year, 29-67% at 2 years, 33-58% at 3 years, and 34-53% at 5 years) and placebo/observation groups (47-63% at 1 year, 39-47% at 2 years, 33-68% at 3 years, and 57% at 5 years). Anti-PD-1 immune therapy and BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy were superior to placebo at year 1.

DISCUSSION

We found that adjuvant treatment improved RFS but did not alter the patterns of disease recurrence compared with patients managed without adjuvant systemic treatment. Future studies should separately report sites of disease recurrence on the basis of specific adjuvant systemic treatment and surveillance practices to better advise patients about their patterns and risk of recurrence.

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.

An evaluation of encorafenib for the treatment of melanoma

Introduction: In the treatment of advanced BRAF-mutant melanoma, selective regulation of the MAPK pathway with BRAF and MEK inhibition has emerged as one of the mainstays of therapy.Areas covered: The authors present the current data on encorafenib as a compound, its pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics properties. This review includes current data on encorafenib therapy as a single agent as well as in combination with the MEK-inhibitor binimetinib and other systemic therapies.Expert opinion: BRAF inhibition with encorafenib exhibits substantial antitumor activity with less paradoxical MAPK pathway activation leading to treatment resistance. Combination therapy with MEK inhibitors improves response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival in patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma compared to prior treatment regimens. Serious adverse events, including the development of cutaneous malignancies, are reported at lower rates with combination therapy, while less severe events such as pyrexia can be more common. Existing data is lacking for a recommendation of triplet therapy, although results from multiple ongoing trials are highly anticipated.

Update on BRAF and MEK inhibition for treatment of melanoma in metastatic, unresectable, and adjuvant settings

INTRODUCTION

Selective inhibition of the MAPK pathway with BRAF and MEK inhibitors has emerged as a key component of the treatment of BRAF-mutant unresectable/locally advanced metastatic melanoma.

AREAS COVERED

Current data are presented on the efficacy and safety of BRAFi + MEKi combination therapy (dabrafenib/trametinib, vemurafenib/cobimetinib, and encorafenib/binimetinib) from phase I, II, and III trials in the unresectable/locally advanced metastatic setting, as well as neoadjuvant and adjuvant applications. The theoretical basis, pre-clinical findings, clinical trial results and current ongoing clinical studies of combined BRAF/MEK inhibition with immunotherapy, also known as 'triplet therapy,' are also explored.

EXPERT OPINION

Combination therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors dramatically improves response rates, progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma compared to historical treatments such as chemotherapy. Some serious adverse effects, including cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, are attenuated with combination therapy, while less severe and reversible effects including pyrexia, left ventricular dysfunction, and ocular events can be more common with combination therapy. Existing data are insufficient to recommend triplet therapy, or a particular treatment sequence, with respect to BRAF and MEK inhibitors and immune therapies, though results from multiple ongoing trials are anticipated.

WITHDRAWN: Chemoimmunotherapy versus chemotherapy for metastatic malignant melanoma

BACKGROUND

Malignant melanoma, one of the most aggressive of all skin cancers, is increasing in incidence throughout the world. Surgery remains the cornerstone of curative treatment in earlier stages. Metastatic disease is incurable in most affected people, because melanoma does not respond to most systemic treatments. A number of novel approaches are under evaluation and have shown promising results, but they are usually associated with increased toxicity and cost. The combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy has been reported to improve treatment results, but it is still unclear whether evidence exists to support this choice, compared with chemotherapy alone. No language restrictions were imposed.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of therapy with chemotherapy and immunotherapy (chemoimmunotherapy) versus chemotherapy alone in people with metastatic malignant melanoma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register (14 February 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (2003 to 30 January 2006 ), EMBASE (2003 to 20 July 2005) and LILACS (1982 to 20 February 2006). References, conference proceedings, and databases of ongoing trials were also used to locate trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials that compared the use of chemotherapy versus chemoimmunotherapy on people of any age, diagnosed with metastatic melanoma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed each study to determine whether it met the pre-defined selection criteria, with differences being resolved through discussion with the review team. Two authors independently extracted the data from the articles using data extraction forms. Quality assessment included an evaluation of various components associated with biased estimates of treatment effect. Whenever possible, a meta-analysis was performed on the extracted data, in order to calculate a weighed treatment effect across trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen studies met our criteria and were included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 2625 participants. We found evidence of an increase of objective response rates in people treated with chemoimmunotherapy, in comparison with people treated with chemotherapy. Nevertheless, the impact of these increased response rates was not translated into a survival benefit. We found no difference in survival to support the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy in the systemic treatment of metastatic melanoma, with a hazard ratio of 0.89 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.11, P = 0.31). Additionally, we found increased hematological and non-hematological toxicities in people treated with chemoimmunotherapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We failed to find any clear evidence that the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy increases survival of people with metastatic melanoma. Further use of combined immunotherapy and chemotherapy should only be done in the context of clinical trials.

Systemic treatments for metastatic cutaneous melanoma

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of people with metastatic cutaneous melanoma, a skin cancer, is generally poor. Recently, new classes of drugs (e.g. immune checkpoint inhibitors and small-molecule targeted drugs) have significantly improved patient prognosis, which has drastically changed the landscape of melanoma therapeutic management. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2000.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of systemic treatments for metastatic cutaneous melanoma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to October 2017: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers and the ASCO database in February 2017, and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered RCTs of systemic therapies for people with unresectable lymph node metastasis and distant metastatic cutaneous melanoma compared to any other treatment. We checked the reference lists of selected articles to identify further references to relevant trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data, and a third review author independently verified extracted data. We implemented a network meta-analysis approach to make indirect comparisons and rank treatments according to their effectiveness (as measured by the impact on survival) and harm (as measured by occurrence of high-grade toxicity). The same two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of eligible studies according to Cochrane standards and assessed evidence quality based on the GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 122 RCTs (28,561 participants). Of these, 83 RCTs, encompassing 21 different comparisons, were included in meta-analyses. Included participants were men and women with a mean age of 57.5 years who were recruited from hospital settings. Twenty-nine studies included people whose cancer had spread to their brains. Interventions were categorised into five groups: conventional chemotherapy (including single agent and polychemotherapy), biochemotherapy (combining chemotherapy with cytokines such as interleukin-2 and interferon-alpha), immune checkpoint inhibitors (such as anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies), small-molecule targeted drugs used for melanomas with specific gene changes (such as BRAF inhibitors and MEK inhibitors), and other agents (such as anti-angiogenic drugs). Most interventions were compared with chemotherapy. In many cases, trials were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies producing the tested drug: this was especially true for new classes of drugs, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and small-molecule targeted drugs.When compared to single agent chemotherapy, the combination of multiple chemotherapeutic agents (polychemotherapy) did not translate into significantly better survival (overall survival: HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.16, 6 studies, 594 participants; high-quality evidence; progression-free survival: HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.25, 5 studies, 398 participants; high-quality evidence. Those who received combined treatment are probably burdened by higher toxicity rates (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.71, 3 studies, 390 participants; moderate-quality evidence). (We defined toxicity as the occurrence of grade 3 (G3) or higher adverse events according to the World Health Organization scale.)Compared to chemotherapy, biochemotherapy (chemotherapy combined with both interferon-alpha and interleukin-2) improved progression-free survival (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.99, 6 studies, 964 participants; high-quality evidence), but did not significantly improve overall survival (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.06, 7 studies, 1317 participants; high-quality evidence). Biochemotherapy had higher toxicity rates (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.61, 2 studies, 631 participants; high-quality evidence).With regard to immune checkpoint inhibitors, anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies plus chemotherapy probably increased the chance of progression-free survival compared to chemotherapy alone (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.92, 1 study, 502 participants; moderate-quality evidence), but may not significantly improve overall survival (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.01, 2 studies, 1157 participants; low-quality evidence). Compared to chemotherapy alone, anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies is likely to be associated with higher toxicity rates (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.42, 2 studies, 1142 participants; moderate-quality evidence).Compared to chemotherapy, anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies (immune checkpoint inhibitors) improved overall survival (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.48, 1 study, 418 participants; high-quality evidence) and probably improved progression-free survival (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.61, 2 studies, 957 participants; moderate-quality evidence). Anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies may also result in less toxicity than chemotherapy (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.97, 3 studies, 1360 participants; low-quality evidence).Anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies performed better than anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies in terms of overall survival (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.66, 1 study, 764 participants; high-quality evidence) and progression-free survival (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.60, 2 studies, 1465 participants; high-quality evidence). Anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies may result in better toxicity outcomes than anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.91, 2 studies, 1465 participants; low-quality evidence).Compared to anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies alone, the combination of anti-CTLA4 plus anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies was associated with better progression-free survival (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.46, 2 studies, 738 participants; high-quality evidence). There may be no significant difference in toxicity outcomes (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.92, 2 studies, 764 participants; low-quality evidence) (no data for overall survival were available).The class of small-molecule targeted drugs, BRAF inhibitors (which are active exclusively against BRAF-mutated melanoma), performed better than chemotherapy in terms of overall survival (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.57, 2 studies, 925 participants; high-quality evidence) and progression-free survival (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.34, 2 studies, 925 participants; high-quality evidence), and there may be no significant difference in toxicity (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.48 to 3.33, 2 studies, 408 participants; low-quality evidence).Compared to chemotherapy, MEK inhibitors (which are active exclusively against BRAF-mutated melanoma) may not significantly improve overall survival (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.25, 3 studies, 496 participants; low-quality evidence), but they probably lead to better progression-free survival (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.80, 3 studies, 496 participants; moderate-quality evidence). However, MEK inhibitors probably have higher toxicity rates (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.41, 1 study, 91 participants; moderate-quality evidence).Compared to BRAF inhibitors, the combination of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors was associated with better overall survival (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.82, 4 studies, 1784 participants; high-quality evidence). BRAF plus MEK inhibitors was also probably better in terms of progression-free survival (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.71, 4 studies, 1784 participants; moderate-quality evidence), and there appears likely to be no significant difference in toxicity (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.20, 4 studies, 1774 participants; moderate-quality evidence).Compared to chemotherapy, the combination of chemotherapy plus anti-angiogenic drugs was probably associated with better overall survival (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.81; moderate-quality evidence) and progression-free survival (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.92; moderate-quality evidence). There may be no difference in terms of toxicity (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.09 to 5.32; low-quality evidence). All results for this comparison were based on 324 participants from 2 studies.Network meta-analysis focused on chemotherapy as the common comparator and currently approved treatments for which high- to moderate-quality evidence of efficacy (as represented by treatment effect on progression-free survival) was available (based on the above results) for: biochemotherapy (with both interferon-alpha and interleukin-2); anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies; anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies; anti-CTLA4 plus anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies; BRAF inhibitors; MEK inhibitors, and BRAF plus MEK inhibitors. Analysis (which included 19 RCTs and 7632 participants) generated 21 indirect comparisons.The best evidence (moderate-quality evidence) for progression-free survival was found for the following indirect comparisons:• both combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors (HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.51) and small-molecule targeted drugs (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.26) probably improved progression-free survival compared to chemotherapy;• both BRAF inhibitors (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.68) and combinations of small-molecule targeted drugs (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.39) were probably associated with better progression-free survival compared to anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies;• biochemotherapy (HR 2.81, 95% CI 1.76 to 4.51) probably lead to worse progression-free survival compared to BRAF inhibitors;• the combination of small-molecule targeted drugs probably improved progression-free survival (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.68) compared to anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies;• both biochemotherapy (HR 5.05, 95% CI 3.01 to 8.45) and MEK inhibitors (HR 3.16, 95% CI 1.77 to 5.65) were probably associated with worse progression-free survival compared to the combination of small-molecule targeted drugs; and• biochemotherapy was probably associated with worse progression-free survival (HR 2.81, 95% CI 1.54 to 5.11) compared to the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors.The best evidence (moderate-quality evidence) for toxicity was found for the following indirect comparisons:• combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (RR 3.49, 95% CI 2.12 to 5.77) probably increased toxicity compared to chemotherapy;• combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors probably increased toxicity (RR 2.50, 95% CI 1.20 to 5.20) compared to BRAF inhibitors;• the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors probably increased toxicity (RR 3.83, 95% CI 2.59 to 5.68) compared to anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies; and• biochemotherapy was probably associated with lower toxicity (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.71) compared to the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors.Network meta-analysis-based ranking suggested that the combination of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors is the most effective strategy in terms of progression-free survival, whereas anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies are associated with the lowest toxicity.Overall, the risk of bias of the included trials can be considered as limited. When considering the 122 trials included in this review and the seven types of bias we assessed, we performed 854 evaluations only seven of which (< 1%) assigned high risk to six trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found high-quality evidence that many treatments offer better efficacy than chemotherapy, especially recently implemented treatments, such as small-molecule targeted drugs, which are used to treat melanoma with specific gene mutations. Compared with chemotherapy, biochemotherapy (in this case, chemotherapy combined with both interferon-alpha and interleukin-2) and BRAF inhibitors improved progression-free survival; BRAF inhibitors (for BRAF-mutated melanoma) and anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies improved overall survival. However, there was no difference between polychemotherapy and monochemotherapy in terms of achieving progression-free survival and overall survival. Biochemotherapy did not significantly improve overall survival and has higher toxicity rates compared with chemotherapy.There was some evidence that combined treatments worked better than single treatments: anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies, alone or with anti-CTLA4, improved progression-free survival compared with anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies alone. Anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies performed better than anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies in terms of overall survival, and a combination of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors was associated with better overall survival for BRAF-mutated melanoma, compared to BRAF inhibitors alone.The combination of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors (which can only be administered to people with BRAF-mutated melanoma) appeared to be the most effective treatment (based on results for progression-free survival), whereas anti-PD1 monoclonal antibodies appeared to be the least toxic, and most acceptable, treatment.Evidence quality was reduced due to imprecision, between-study heterogeneity, and substandard reporting of trials. Future research should ensure that those diminishing influences are addressed. Clinical areas of future investigation should include the longer-term effect of new therapeutic agents (i.e. immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies) on overall survival, as well as the combination of drugs used in melanoma treatment; research should also investigate the potential influence of biomarkers.

The combination of bleomycin with suicide or interferon-β gene transfer is able to efficiently eliminate human melanoma tumor initiating cells

We explored the potential of a chemogene therapy combination to eradicate melanoma tumor initiating cells, key producers of recurrence and metastatic spread. Three new human melanoma cell lines, two obtained from lymph nodes and one from spleen metastasis were established and characterized. They were cultured as monolayers and spheroids and, in both spatial configurations they displayed sensitivity to single treatments with bleomycin (BLM) or human interferon-β (hIFNβ) gene or herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase/ganciclovir suicide gene (SG) lipofection. However, the combination of bleomycin with SG or hIFNβ gene transfer displayed greater antitumor efficacy. The three cell lines exhibited a proliferative behavior consistent with melan A and gp100 melanoma antigens expression, and BRAF V600E mutation. BLM and both genetic treatments increased the fraction of more differentiated and treatment-sensitive cells. Simultaneously, they significantly decreased the sub-population of tumor initiating cells. There was a significant correlation between the cytotoxicity of treatments with BLM and gene transfer and the fraction of cells exhibiting (i) high proliferation index, and (ii) high intracellular levels of reactive oxygen species. Conversely, the fraction of cells surviving to our treatments closely paralleled their (i) colony and (ii) melanosphere forming capacity. A very significant finding was that the combination of BLM with SG or hIFNβ gene almost abrogated the clonogenic capacity of the surviving cells. Altogether, the results presented here suggest that the combined chemo-gene treatments are able to eradicate tumor initiating cells, encouraging further studies aimed to apply this strategy in the clinic.

Perspective of Targeting Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts in Melanoma

Melanoma is known as an exceptionally aggressive and treatment-resistant human cancer. Although a great deal of progress has been made in the past decade, including the development of immunotherapy using immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy using BRAF, MEK or KIT inhibitors, treatment for unresectable stage III, stage IV, and recurrent melanoma is still challenging with limited response rate, severe side effects and poor prognosis, highlighting an urgent need for discovering and designing more effective approaches to conquer melanoma. Melanoma is not only driven by malignant melanocytes, but also by the altered communication between neoplastic cells and non-malignant cell populations, including fibroblasts, endothelial and inflammatory cells, in the tumor stroma. Infiltrated and surrounding fibroblasts, also known as cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), exhibit both phenotypical and physiological differences compared to normal dermal fibroblasts. They acquire properties of myofibroblasts, remodel the extracellular matrix (ECM) and architecture of the diseased tissue and secrete chemical factors, which all together promote the transformation process by encouraging tumor growth, angiogenesis, inflammation and metastasis and contribute to drug resistance. A number of in vitro and in vivo experiments have shown that stromal fibroblasts promote melanoma cell proliferation and they have been targeted to suppress tumor growth effectively. Evidently, a combination therapy co-targeting tumor cells and stromal fibroblasts may provide promising strategies to improve therapeutic outcomes and overcome treatment resistance. A significant benefit of targeting CAFs is that the approach aims to create a tumor-resistant environment that inhibits growth of melanomas carrying different genetic mutations. However, the origin of CAFs and precise mechanisms by which CAFs contribute to melanoma progression and drug resistance remain poorly understood. In this review, we discuss the origin, activation and heterogeneity of CAFs in the melanoma tumor microenvironment and examine the contributions of stromal fibroblasts at different stages of melanoma development. We also highlight the recent progression in dissecting and characterizing how local fibroblasts become reprogrammed and build a dynamic yet optimal microenvironment for tumors to develop and metastasize. In addition, we review key developments in ongoing preclinical studies and clinical applications targeting CAFs and tumor-stroma interactions for melanoma treatment.

State of melanoma: an historic overview of a field in transition

The last 30 years has seen a revolution in melanoma. Fundamental elements of the surgical, adjuvant medical, and systemic therapy for the disease have been significantly altered toward improved management and better outcomes. The intent of this article is to reflect on past efforts and research in melanoma and the current landscape of treatment of melanoma. The authors also hope to capture the excitement currently rippling through the field and the hope for a cure. The intent of treatment of advanced melanoma, which was once considered incurable, has changed from palliative to potentially curative.

BRAF and MEK inhibition in melanoma

INTRODUCTION

Selective inhibition of the MAPK pathway with either BRAF or MEK inhibition has emerged as a key component for the treatment of BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma. New evidence suggests that the combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors improves tumor response rate and progression-free survival, while potentially attenuating some of the serious adverse events observed with monotherapy.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers the current data on the efficacy and safety of the selective BRAF (vemurafenib and dabrafenib) and MEK (trametinib) inhibitors as well as the available data on BRAF inhibitor + MEK inhibitor combination therapy (dabrafenib + trametinib and vemurafenib + cobimetinib). The efficacy, safety and toxicity data are discussed from Phase I, Phase II and Phase III trials of these drugs.

EXPERT OPINION

Combination therapy with the BRAF and MEK inhibitors improves response rates and progression-free survival in patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma. Some of the serious adverse events, in particular, the incidence of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, are attenuated with combination therapy, whereas milder side effects such as pyrexia can be more common with combination therapy. Although dose reductions and dose interruptions are slightly more common with combination therapy, overall data supports the notion that combination therapy is safe and improves the outcomes for patients compared to single agent BRAF inhibitors.

Inflammatory adverse events are associated with disease-free survival after vaccine therapy among patients with melanoma

BACKGROUND

Multipeptide vaccines for melanoma may cause inflammatory adverse events (IAE). We hypothesize that IAE are associated with a higher rate of immune response (IR) to vaccination and improved clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Adult patients with resected, high-risk (stage IIB to IV) melanoma were vaccinated with a combination of 12 class I major histocompatibility complex (MHC)-restricted melanoma epitopes, and IAE were recorded. A separate category for hypopigmentation (vitiligo) was also assessed. CD8(+) T cell IR was assessed by direct interferon gamma ELISpot analysis. Overall survival and disease-free survival were analyzed by Cox proportional hazard modeling.

RESULTS

Out of 332 patients, 57 developed IAE, the majority of which were dermatologic (minimum Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] grade 3). Most nondermatologic IAE were CTCAE grade 1 and 2. Vitiligo developed in 23 patients (7 %). A total of 174 patients (53 %) developed a CD8(+) response. Presence of IAE was significantly associated with development of IR (70 vs. 49 %, p = 0.005) and with disease-free survival (hazard ratio 0.54, p = 0.043). There were no significant associations relating vitiligo or IR alone with clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

IAE are associated with a higher rate of CD8(+) T cell response after vaccination therapy for high-risk melanoma. Our findings suggest either that antitumor activity induced by class I MHC-restricted peptide vaccines may depend on immunologic effects beyond simple expansion of CD8(+) T cells or that the intrinsic inflammatory response of patients contributes to clinical outcome in melanoma.

Vaccine strategies for glioblastoma: progress and future directions

Recent advances in glioblastoma therapy have led to optimism that more effective therapies will improve outcomes. Immunotherapy is a promising approach that has demonstrated the potential to eradicate cancer cells with cellular-level accuracy while minimizing damage to surrounding healthy tissue. Several vaccination strategies have been evaluated for activity against glioblastoma in clinical trials. These include peptide vaccines, polyvalent dendritic cell vaccines, heat shock protein vaccines and adoptive immunotherapy. In this review, we highlight clinical trials representative of each of these approaches and discuss strategies for integrating these therapies into routine patient care.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of overall survival comparing 3 mg/kg ipilimumab with alternative therapies in the management of pretreated patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma

OBJECTIVE

To compare the overall survival (OS) of patients treated with 3 mg/kg ipilimumab versus alternative systemic therapies in pretreated unresectable stage III or IV melanoma patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant randomized clinical trials. From these trials, Kaplan-Meier survival curves for each intervention were digitized and combined by means of a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare different drug classes.

RESULTS

Of 38 trials identified, 15 formed one interlinked network by drug class to allow for an NMA. Ipilimumab, at a dose of 3 mg/kg, was associated with a greater mean OS time (18.8 months; 95% credible interval [CrI], 15.5-23.0 months) than single-agent chemotherapy (12.3 months; 95% CrI, 6.3-28.0 months), chemotherapy combinations (12.2 months; 95% CrI, 7.1-23.3 months), biochemotherapies (11.9 months; 95% CrI, 7.0-22.0 months), single-agent immunotherapy (11.1 months; 95% CrI, 8.5-16.2 months), and immunotherapy combinations (14.1 months; 95% CrI, 9.0-23.8 months).

CONCLUSION

Results of this NMA were in line with previous findings and suggest that OS with ipilimumab is expected to be greater than with alternative systemic therapies, alone or in combination, for the management of pretreated patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma.

Interferon-β lipofection I. Increased efficacy of chemotherapeutic drugs on human tumor cells derived monolayers and spheroids

We evaluated the effect of hIFNβ gene transfer alone or in combination with different antineoplastic drugs commonly used in cancer treatment. Five human tumor-derived cell lines were cultured as monolayers and spheroids. Four cell lines (Ewing sarcomas EW7 and COH, melanoma M8 and mammary carcinoma MCF-7) were sensitive to hIFNβ gene lipofection. Although this effect appeared in both culture configurations, spheroids showed a relative multicellular resistance (insensitive colon carcinoma HT-29 excluded). EW7 and M8 hIFNβ-expressing cells were exposed to different concentrations of bleomycin, bortezomib, carboplatin, doxorubicin, etoposide, methotrexate, paclitaxel and vincristine in both configuration models. In chemotherapy-sensitive EW7 monolayers, the combination of hIFNβ gene and antineoplastic drugs displayed only additive or counteractive (methotrexate) effects, suggesting that cytotoxic mechanisms triggered by hIFNβ gene lipofection could be saturating the signaling pathways. Conversely, in chemotherapy-resistant EW7 spheroids or M8 cells, the combination of hIFNβ with drugs that mainly operate at the genotoxic level (doxorubicin, methotrexate and paclitaxel) presented only additive effects. However, drugs that also increase pro-oxidant species can complement the antitumor efficacy of the hIFNβ gene and clearly caused potentiated effects (bleomycin, bortezomib, carboplatin, etoposide and vincristine). The great bystander effect induced by hIFNβ gene lipofection could be among the main causes of its effectiveness, because only 1 or 2% of EW7 or M8 hIFNβ-expressing cells killed more than 60 or 80% of cell population, respectively.

Antigen-specific versus antigen-nonspecific immunotherapeutic approaches for human melanoma: the need for integration for optimal efficacy?

Due to its immunogenecity and evidence of immune responses resulting in tumor regression, metastatic melanoma has been the target for numerous immunotherapeutic approaches. Unfortunately, based on the clinical outcomes, even the successful induction of tumor-specific responses does not correlate with efficacy. Immunotherapies can be divided into antigen-specific approaches, which seek to induce T cells specific to one or several known tumor associated antigens (TAA), or with antigen-nonspecific approaches, which generally activate T cells to become nonspecifically lytic effectors. Here the authors critically review the different immunotherapeutic approaches in melanoma.

Cancer immunotherapy

Cancer immunotherapy consists of approaches that modify the host immune system, and/or the utilization of components of the immune system, as cancer treatment. During the past 25 years, 17 immunologic products have received regulatory approval based on anticancer activity as single agents and/or in combination with chemotherapy. These include the nonspecific immune stimulants BCG and levamisole; the cytokines interferon-α and interleukin-2; the monoclonal antibodies rituximab, ofatumumab, alemtuzumab, trastuzumab, bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab; the radiolabeled antibodies Y-90 ibritumomab tiuxetan and I-131 tositumomab; the immunotoxins denileukin diftitox and gemtuzumab ozogamicin; nonmyeloablative allogeneic transplants with donor lymphocyte infusions; and the anti-prostate cancer cell-based therapy sipuleucel-T. All but two of these products are still regularly used to treat various B- and T-cell malignancies, and numerous solid tumors, including breast, lung, colorectal, prostate, melanoma, kidney, glioblastoma, bladder, and head and neck. Positive randomized trials have recently been reported for idiotype vaccines in lymphoma and a peptide vaccine in melanoma. The anti-CTLA-4 monoclonal antibody ipilumumab, which blocks regulatory T-cells, is expected to receive regulatory approval in the near future, based on a randomized trial in melanoma. As the fourth modality of cancer treatment, biotherapy/immunotherapy is an increasingly important component of the anticancer armamentarium.

Immunotherapy of melanoma: an update

The incidence of melanoma has been increasing worldwide. A relationship between melanoma and the immune system was established years ago. Modulating the immune system in the management of different stages of melanoma has been the focus of numerous large randomized trials worldwide. This article reviews the current status of immunotherapy for melanoma, with a focus on the recent promising results from using vaccines, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) antibodies, and adoptive cell therapy.

Socioeconomic status and chemotherapy use for melanoma in older people

The study objective was to examine the association, among older persons with cutaneous melanoma, between areal socioeconomic status (SES) and receiving chemotherapy. SEER-Medicare-linked database (1,239 white men and women aged ≥ 66, with invasive melanoma [regional and distant stages]; 1991-1999) was used. SES was measured by census tract poverty level (average of 1990 and 2000 Census data). Covariates were sociodemographics, tumor characteristics, and comorbidity index. Residing in poorer SES areas was associated with a lower likelihood for receiving chemotherapy among patients in the overall sample (adjusted odds ratios = OR 0.97, 95% confidence interval = CI 0.95-0.99), and those with regional stage at diagnosis (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94-0.98). These findings reflect socioeconomic disparities in chemotherapy use for melanoma among older white patients in the United States.

Systematic review of medical treatment in melanoma: current status and future prospects

The incidence of melanoma is increasing worldwide, and the prognosis for patients with high-risk or advanced metastatic melanoma remains poor despite advances in the field. Standard treatment for patients with thick (≥2.0 mm) primary melanoma with or without regional metastases to lymph nodes is surgery followed by adjuvant therapy or clinical trial enrollment. Adjuvant therapy with interferon-α and cancer vaccines is discussed in detail. Patients who progress to stage IV metastatic melanoma have a median survival of ≤1 year. Standard treatment with chemotherapy yields low response rates, of which few are durable. Cytokine therapy with IL-2 achieves durable benefits in a greater fraction, but it is accompanied by severe toxicities that require the patient to be hospitalized for support during treatment. A systematic literature review of treatments for advanced, metastatic disease was conducted to present the success of current treatments and the promise of those still in clinical development that may yield incremental improvements in the treatment of advanced, metastatic melanoma.

Immunotherapy of distant metastatic disease

Immunotherapy of metastatic melanoma consists of various approaches leading to specific or non-specific immunomodulation. The use of FDA-approved interleukin (IL)-2 alone, in combination with interferon alpha, and/or with various chemotherapeutic agents (biochemotherapy) is associated with significant toxicity and poor efficacy that does not improve overall survival of 96% of patients. Many studies with allogeneic and autologous vaccines have demonstrated no clinical benefit, and some randomised trials even showed a detrimental effect in the vaccine arm. The ongoing effort to develop melanoma vaccines based on dendritic cells and peptides is driven by advances in understanding antigen presentation and processing, and by new techniques of vaccine preparation, stabilisation and delivery. Several agents that have shown promising activity in metastatic melanoma including IL-21 and monoclonal antibodies targeting cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (anti-CTLA-4) or CD137 are discussed. Recent advances of intratumour gene transfer technologies and adoptive immunotherapy, which represents a promising although technically challenging direction, are also discussed.

Biochemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma: a clinical practice guideline

QUESTIONS

What is the role of biochemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma?What are the adverse effects and effects on quality of life of biochemotherapy as a treatment option?For the purposes of this report, "biochemotherapy" is defined as a therapeutic regimen that includes, at a minimum, chemotherapy (either single-agent or combination) and interleukin-2.

PERSPECTIVES

Although early detection, appropriate surgery, and in some cases adjuvant therapy have improved outcomes, at least one third of patients with early-stage melanoma will develop metastases. Recently, in an effort to potentially maximize outcomes, the combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy (biochemotherapy) was evaluated. The level of interest that this approach has generated, particularly with regard to the apparently high response rates seen in this otherwise devastating illness, was sufficient to merit closer examination by the Melanoma Disease Site Group (dsg) of Cancer Care Ontario's Program in Evidence-based Care (pebc).

OUTCOMES

Outcomes of interest include response rate, diseasefree survival, overall survival, quality of life, and incidence of grades 3 and 4 toxicities.

METHODOLOGY

Evidence was selected and reviewed by three members of the pebc's Melanoma dsg and by two methodologists. The present practice guideline report was reviewed and approved by the Melanoma dsg, which comprises medical and radiation oncologists, surgeons, and dermatologists. External review by Ontario practitioners was obtained through a mailed survey, the results of which were incorporated into the practice guideline. Final approval of the original guideline report was obtained from the pebc's Report Approval Panel.

RESULTS

Clinical recommendations were drafted based on the evidence identified through a systematic review. The practice guideline report with draft recommendations was mailed to Ontario practitioners for external review and to the Report Approval Panel. Feedback from both groups was incorporated into this report to create the final practice guideline.

PRACTICE GUIDELINE

The recommendations that follow apply to adult patients with metastatic malignant melanoma. Because of the inconsistent results of the available studies with regard to benefit (response, time to progression, and survival) and consistently high toxicity rates, biochemotherapy is not recommended for the treatment of metastatic melanoma.

Biochemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The incidence of malignant melanoma has increased in recent years. Current therapies for metastatic melanoma include chemotherapy and a variety of immunotherapeutic choices. With no established standard treatment option, the evaluation of biochemotherapy is warranted.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted to locate randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and evidence-based practice guidelines published up to April 2007.

RESULTS

Nine eligible randomized controlled trials were identified, including six comparing chemotherapy alone to biochemotherapy (chemotherapy combined with interleukin-2 and interferon). Response rates were significantly higher with biochemotherapy in only two trials, although when data were pooled, biochemotherapy was superior to chemotherapy on response (relative risk, 1.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-1.87; p<0.0001) but did not delay time to progression (Hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.01; p=0.06). Biochemotherapy was not associated with a statistically significant survival benefit in any of the individual trials or in a pooled analysis (Hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.17; p=0.64). Biochemotherapy is a toxic therapy, and patients are likely to experience serious hematologic, gastrointestinal, cutaneous, and constitutional toxicities, although when conducted in the correct setting, grade 3 and 4 effects appear to be manageable, and treatment-related death can be minimized.

CONCLUSION

The results of available studies are inconsistent with regard to benefit (response, time-to-progression, and survival) and show consistently high toxicity rates. Therefore, biochemotherapy is not recommended for the treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma in adults.

Chemotherapy compared with biochemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic melanoma: a meta-analysis of 18 trials involving 2,621 patients

PURPOSE

To assess the effect of adding interferon-alpha (IFN) +/- interleukin-2 (IL-2) to chemotherapy in patients with metastatic melanoma. METHODS A published data meta-analysis of trials of biochemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic melanoma was undertaken. End points evaluated were rates of partial response (PR), complete response (CR) and overall (partial + complete) response (OR); response duration; progression-free survival; overall survival (OS); and toxicity. The only subgroup analysis performed was by type of immunotherapy, with trials divided according to whether IFN only or IFN and IL-2 were administered in the biochemotherapy arm.

RESULTS

Eighteen randomized trials were identified: 11 trials of chemotherapy +/- IFN and seven trials of chemotherapy +/- IFN and IL-2. More than 2,600 patients were entered onto the trials, with 555 responses and 2,039 deaths. There was a clear benefit for biochemotherapy for PR (odds ratio = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.82; P = .0001), CR (odds ratio = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.73; P = .0003) and OR (odds ratio = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.72; P < .00001). For OR, these benefits were significant for both the IFN (odds ratio = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.79; P = .0002) and IFN + IL-2 (odds ratio = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.77; P = .0001) subgroups. In contrast, there was no benefit overall in OS (odds ratio = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.08; P = .9), but there was evidence of heterogeneity of treatment effect between the individual trials (P = .006).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis provides a comprehensive summary of all the data currently available, and shows that although biochemotherapy clearly improves response rates, this does not appear to translate into a survival benefit.

Cisplatin, gemcitabine, and treosulfan in relapsed stage IV cutaneous malignant melanoma patients

To evaluate the efficacy of cisplatin, gemcitabine, and treosulfan (CGT) in 91 patients with pretreated relapsed AJCC stage IV cutaneous malignant melanoma. Patients in relapse after first-, second-, or third-line therapy received 40 mg m⁻² intravenous (i.v.) cisplatin, 1000 mg m⁻² i.v. gemcitabine, and 2500 mg m⁻² i.v. treosulfan on days 1 and 8. Cisplatin, gemcitabine, and treosulfan therapy was repeated every 5 weeks until progression of disease occurred. A maximum of 11 CGT cycles (mean, two cycles) was administered per patient. Four patients (4%) showed a partial response; 15 (17%) patients had stable disease; and 72 (79%) patients progressed upon first re-evaluation. Overall survival of all 91 patients was 6 months (2-year survival rate, 7%). Patients with partial remission or stable disease exhibited a median overall survival of 11 months (2-year survival rate, 36%), while patients with disease progression upon first re-evaluation had a median overall survival of 5 months (2-year survival rate, 0%). Treatment with CGT was efficient in one-fifth of the pretreated relapsed stage IV melanoma patients achieving disease stabilisation or partial remission with prolonged but limited survival.

Clinical improvement of diffuse lymphangiomatosis with pegylated interferon alfa-2b therapy: case report and review of the literature

Diffuse lymphangiomatosis is a very rare congenital disease, characterized by diffuse or multifocal lymphangioma in the skeletal tissue, spleen, liver, mediastinum, and/or lung. The prognosis is usually poor, especially for children with thoracic lesion, and treatments for the disease are controversial. The authors report a 9-year-old boy with diffuse lymphangiomatosis involving the thorax with pleural effusions, the spleen, and systemic bone. The patient was treated with pegylated interferon alfa-2b, and achieved good clinical and radiological improvement.

Chemoimmunotherapy versus chemotherapy for metastatic malignant melanoma

BACKGROUND

Malignant melanoma, one of the most aggressive of all skin cancers, is increasing in incidence throughout the world. Surgery remains the cornerstone of curative treatment in earlier stages. Metastatic disease is incurable in most affected people, because melanoma does not respond to most systemic treatments. A number of novel approaches are under evaluation and have shown promising results, but they are usually associated with increased toxicity and cost. The combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy has been reported to improve treatment results, but it is still unclear whether evidence exists to support this choice, compared with chemotherapy alone. No language restrictions were imposed.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of therapy with chemotherapy and immunotherapy (chemoimmunotherapy) versus chemotherapy alone in people with metastatic malignant melanoma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register (14 February 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (2003 to 30 January 2006 ), EMBASE (2003 to 20 July 2005) and LILACS (1982 to 20 February 2006). References, conference proceedings, and databases of ongoing trials were also used to locate trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials that compared the use of chemotherapy versus chemoimmunotherapy on people of any age, diagnosed with metastatic melanoma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed each study to determine whether it met the pre-defined selection criteria, with differences being resolved through discussion with the review team. Two authors independently extracted the data from the articles using data extraction forms. Quality assessment included an evaluation of various components associated with biased estimates of treatment effect. Whenever possible, a meta-analysis was performed on the extracted data, in order to calculate a weighed treatment effect across trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen studies met our criteria and were included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 2625 participants. We found evidence of an increase of objective response rates in people treated with chemoimmunotherapy, in comparison with people treated with chemotherapy. Nevertheless, the impact of these increased response rates was not translated into a survival benefit. We found no difference in survival to support the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy in the systemic treatment of metastatic melanoma, with a hazard ratio of 0.89 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.11, p=0.31). Additionally, we found increased hematological and non-hematological toxicities in people treated with chemoimmunotherapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We failed to find any clear evidence that the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy increases survival of people with metastatic melanoma. Further use of combined immunotherapy and chemotherapy should only be done in the context of clinical trials.

Chemoimmunotherapy with dacarbazine, cisplatin, interferon-alpha2b and interleukin-2 versus two cycles of dacarbazine followed by chemoimmunotherapy in patients with metastatic melanoma: a randomised phase II study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Melanoma Group

BACKGROUND

Chemoimmunotherapy for patients with metastatic melanoma is associated with high toxicity, and only a subset of patients will benefit. This randomised phase II study was performed with the primary objective of exploring whether two cycles of dacarbazine monotherapy could select the subset of patients that would benefit most from more intensive chemoimmunotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with metastatic melanoma were randomised to either receive chemoimmunotherapy with dacarbazine, cisplatin, interferon-alpha and interleukin-2 (arm A) or initial treatment with two cycles of dacarbazine monotherapy followed irrespective of response by the same 4-drug regimen of chemoimmunotherapy (arm B). Chemoimmunotherapy was continued in the absence of disease progression for a maximum of four cycles. Primary end-point was the disease stabilisation rate.

RESULTS

A total of 93 patients were randomised, and 89 patients were eligible. Disease stabilisation (complete/partial response or stable disease) was achieved in 19 patients (42.2%) in arm A and 9 patients (20.5%) in arm B. In arm B 32 of the 44 patients continued chemoimmunotherapy after two cycles of dacarbazine. Of 20 patients with progressive disease (PD) after two cycles of dacarbazine in arm B, only 2 patients achieved an objective response. Median overall survival (OS) in arms A and B was 10.5 months and 9.5 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a lower initial stabilisation rate, the strategy of starting with 2 courses of DTIC prior to a 4-drug regimen led to comparable median overall survival. Only few transient responses were achieved with the 4-drug regimen in patients with disease progression on DTIC, suggesting frequent cross resistance. Two cycles of dacarbazine monotherapy cannot be recommended to select patients for more intensive chemoimmunotherapy.

Bcl-2 antisense (oblimersen sodium) plus dacarbazine in patients with advanced melanoma: the Oblimersen Melanoma Study Group

PURPOSE

Chemotherapy resistance in melanoma has been linked to antiapoptotic effects mediated by Bcl-2 protein. We evaluated whether targeting Bcl-2 using an antisense oligonucleotide (oblimersen sodium) could improve the efficacy of systemic chemotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We randomly assigned chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced melanoma to treatment with dacarbazine (1,000 mg/m2) alone or preceded by a 5-day continuous intravenous infusion of oblimersen sodium (7 mg/kg/d) every 3 weeks for up to eight cycles. Patients were stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, liver metastases, disease site, and serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). The primary efficacy end point was overall survival.

RESULTS

Among 771 patients randomly assigned, the addition of oblimersen to dacarbazine yielded a trend toward improved survival at 24-month minimum follow-up (median, 9.0 v 7.8 months; P = .077) and significant increases in progression-free survival (median, 2.6 v 1.6 months; P < .001), overall response (13.5% v 7.5%; P = .007), complete response (2.8% v 0.8%), and durable response (7.3% v 3.6%; P = .03). A significant interaction between baseline serum LDH and treatment was observed; oblimersen significantly increased survival in patients whose baseline serum LDH was not elevated (median overall survival, 11.4 v 9.7 months; P = .02). Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were increased in the oblimersen-dacarbazine group; however, there was no increase in serious infections or bleeding events.

CONCLUSION

The addition of oblimersen to dacarbazine significantly improved multiple clinical outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma and increased overall survival in patients without an elevated baseline serum LDH.

Expression of Fas ligand (CD95L) in primary malignant melanoma and melanoma metastases is associated with overall survival

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that the Fas/Fas ligand (FasL) system is involved in tumor-mediated immune suppression. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of Fas (CD95) as well as FasL (CD95L) expression in primary malignant melanoma and melanoma metastases on overall survival (OS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

19 patients with metastatic malignant melanoma who were treated with different dacarbazine (DTIC)-based chemotherapy regimens were included in this study. From each patient, primary melanoma biopsies and biopsies from metastases were histologically evaluated. Immunohistology was performed with antibodies to Fas/CD95 and FasL/CD95L. Differences in OS were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by the log rank test.

RESULTS

Fas/CD95 and FasL/CD95L expression was detected in 73.7 and 63.2% of primary melanomas, respectively. In metastases, expression of both Fas/CD95 (63.2%) and FasL/CD95L (47.4%) was markedly decreased. Presence of FasL/ CD95L expression in primary melanoma resulted in significantly (p = 0.024) prolonged OS compared with FasL/CD95L-negative high-risk primary melanomas. In contrast, loss of FasL/CD95L expression in melanoma metastases resected before chemotherapy was associated with significantly prolonged median survival (p = 0.0139).

CONCLUSION

Presence of FasL/CD95L expression in primary malignant melanoma and the loss of FasL/ CD95L expression in metastases seem to be positive prognostic factors.

[Malignant melanoma. Diagnosis and therapy]

In Germany, 6100 women and 5300 men contract a malignant melanoma of the skin every year. The chances of being cured are good in the early stages of the disease, but the average survival following distant metastasis is only 6 to 9 months. Therefore, early diagnosis is crucial, particularly as the skin is, by nature, a readily accessible organ. The introduction of epiluminescence microscopy has increased diagnostic accuracy significantly. In cases of doubt, complete excision of the suspect pigmented lesion is always advisable. A light skin type, presence of numerous naevi, genetic predisposition (familial history) and increased UV exposure are considered as risk factors. As a rule, adjuvant imunotherapy with interferon-alphais recommended in high-risk patients. A multidisciplinary approach consisting of surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapy has proved beneficial in advanced stages of metastasis.

Randomized Trials in Melanoma: An Update

No effective therapy for metastatic melanoma exists. Polychemotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy have not shown survival benefits. Vaccines have shown little activity in stage IV disease. To advance the identification of effective agents, new drugs can and should be offered as first-line treatment. Efforts must be made to improve understanding of the biology of malignant melanoma. Too many phase III trials have been conducted with a poor understanding of the mechanism of action of the involved drugs.

Chemotherapy for metastatic melanoma

Despite the limited efficacy of systemic chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic melanoma, it remains the gold standard in the case of patients with a good performance status and no major comorbidities for whom radical surgery is unsuitable. Various drugs have been employed as monochemotherapy with response rates ranging from 0 to 20%. Many Phase III trials have compared the role of polychemotherapy with that of single-agent chemotherapy, or evaluated the impact of biological response modifiers alone or in combination with chemotherapeutic agents. However, the current scenario does not seem to be significantly different from the situation of 20 or 30 years ago. To date, no single drug, combination chemotherapy in addition to a hormonal or biotherapy compound, has demonstrated an overall survival benefit in a randomized clinical trial.

Metastatic melanoma: is biochemotherapy the future?

Current treatment options in metastatic melanoma are of limited efficacy. Achievement of durable responses with biological agents, and the possibility to complement the higher response rate of chemotherapy and combined chemotherapy by prolonged duration of responses, led to development of biochemotherapy. Although a clear improvement in response rate (40-60% OR) resulted in some studies of the combined modality, several phase III studies had mixed results on the duration of survival. Various timeframes between the administration of chemotherapy and biologics have been tested, ranging between concurrent biochemotherapy, 1 d (immediately sequential), and up to 3 wk (long sequence or alternating). An analysis of the trend of responses and survival versus the duration of the chemobiotherapy sequence showed that, as the timeframe between chemo and bio components increases, the overall survival, survival of complete responders, and survival of partial responders appear to increase, but the effect is only present for the chemo-bio, and not for the bio-chemo sequence. Because there is no current explanation for this observation, it appears possible that the interaction between components of biochemotherapy results in a double effect: an increase in the immediate response reflected in the OR, CR, PR on one side, and an increase in survival on the other side. An analysis of mechanisms involved in the response leads us hypothesize that macrophage activation, as measured by the neopterin levels, may correlate with the survival of patients undergoing biochemotherapy, while the generation of nitric oxide, acting synergistically with chemotherapy in producing tumor cell killing, may be reflected in the overall response rate seen with the biochemotherapy combinations.

Dacarbazine, cisplatin, and interferon-alfa-2b with or without interleukin-2 in metastatic melanoma: a randomized phase III trial (18951) of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Melanoma Group

BACKGROUND

Based on phase II trial results, chemoimmunotherapy combinations have become the preferred treatment for patients with metastatic melanoma in many institutions. This study was performed to determine whether interleukin-2 (IL-2) as a component of chemoimmunotherapy influences survival of patients with metastatic melanoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with advanced metastatic melanoma were randomly assigned to receive dacarbazine 250 mg/m2 and cisplatin 30 mg/m2 on days 1 to 3 combined with interferon-alfa-2b 10 x 10(6) U/m2 subcutaneously on days 1 through 5 without (arm A) or with (arm B) a high-dose intravenous decrescendo regimen of IL-2 on days 5 through 10 (18 x 10(6) U/m2/6 hours, 18 x 10(6) U/m2/12 hours, 18 x 10(6) U/m2/24 hours, and 4.5 x 10(6) U/m2 for 3 x 24 hours). Treatment cycles were repeated in the absence of disease progression every 28 days to a maximum of four cycles.

RESULTS

Three hundred sixty-three patients with advanced metastatic melanoma were accrued. The median survival was 9 months in both arms, with a 2-year survival rate of 12.9% and 17.6% in arms A and B, respectively (P = .32; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.11). There was also no statistically significant difference regarding progression-free survival (median, 3.0 v 3.9 months) and response rate (22.8% v 20.8%).

CONCLUSION

Despite its activity in melanoma as a single agent or in combination with interferon-alfa-2b, the chosen schedule of IL-2 added to the chemoimmunotherapy combination had no clinically relevant activity.

Initial clinical response predicts outcome and is associated with dose schedule in metastatic melanoma and renal cell carcinoma patients treated with high-dose interleukin 2

BACKGROUND

High-dose interleukin (IL)-2 is an effective agent for the treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma and renal cell carcinoma. This study evaluated the outcomes of patients receiving two commonly used intravenous IL-2 schedules that have never been directly compared.

METHODS

Forty-seven metastatic malignant melanoma and renal cell carcinoma patients were identified from a prospective database who underwent high-dose IL-2 therapy (720,000 or 600,000 IU/kg) during 1999 to 2003. Disease-specific survival (DSS) was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test on an intention-to-treat basis. Multivariate Cox regression analysis of prognostic variables associated with outcome was performed. Factors associated with initial response and prevention of disease progression were determined.

RESULTS

Objective response (5 partial and 5 mixed) or disease stabilization was noted in 9 (20%) and 10 (22%), respectively, of 46 assessable patients after 1 course of therapy. Four patients (22%) achieved disease-free status after the third course of IL-2 (n = 1) or surgical resection of confined metastatic disease (n = 3). At 19.1 months' median follow-up, factors associated with improved DSS included an initial clinical response to IL-2 therapy (P < .001) and a higher administered dose (P = .04). Patients who received 720,000 IU/kg were more likely to experience an initial major objective response (P = .03) and disease stabilization (P = 0.03) independent of the tumor treated. Objective response early in the course of therapy was the only independent predictor of tumor-related mortality (P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

The initial clinical response to IL-2 therapy is an independent predictor of improved outcome associated with DSS and the 720,000 IU/kg dose. These results support further prospective trials with increased IL-2 dose schedules in a larger cohort of patients.