Toxicity of combined targeted therapy and concurrent radiotherapy in metastatic melanoma patients: a single-center retrospective analysis

Which is the best treatment for melanoma brain metastases? A Bayesian network meta-analysis and systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Melanoma has a high degree of central nervous system tropism, and there are many treatment modalities for melanoma brain metastases (MBM). The efficacy and toxicity of various treatments are still controversial. Therefore, they were evaluated by direct and indirect comparison to assist clinical decision-making in this study.

METHOD

A total of 7 therapeutic modalities for MBM were studied. Retrieval was conducted through Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Web of science databases and the quality of the included literature was evaluated. Meta-analysis and Bayesian network meta-analysis were performed using Review Manager and R language.

RESULTS

A total of 10 articles were included with 836 MBM patients. Direct comparison showed that stereotactic radiotherapy combined with immunotherapy (SRS + IT) was superior to IT (HR = 0.66, 95%CI = 0.52-0.84) or SRS (HR = 0.81, 95%CI = 0.63-1.03) alone in improving intracranial progression-free survival (PFS). In terms of overall survival (OS), SRS + IT was superior to SRS alone (HR = 0.64, 95%CI = 0.49-0.83), or IT (HR = 0.59, 95%CI = 0.29-1.21). Rank probability and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) by indirect comparison showed that SRS + IT had the best effect on improving intracranial PFS (0.88) and OS (0.98). Additionally, various combination therapies, especially SRS + IT (0.72), increased the incidence of radiation necrosis (RN). In direct comparisons, SRS + IT (RR = 0.93, 95%CI = 0.47-1.83) and SRS + TT (targeted therapy) (RR = 0.24, 95%CI = 0.10-0.56) did not increase intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) compared with SRS.

CONCLUSIONS

SRS + IT treatment was the best choice for MBM patients in both intracranial PFS and OS, even though it also led to an increased probability of RN.

Dabrafenib-Trametinib and Radiotherapy for Oligoprogressive BRAF Mutant Advanced Melanoma

The clinical management of metastatic melanoma has been changed by BRAF (BRAFi) and MEK inhibitors (MEKi), which represent a standard treatment for BRAF-mutant melanoma. In oligoprogressive melanoma patients with BRAF mutations, target therapy can be combined with loco-regional radiotherapy (RT). However, the association of BRAF/MEK inhibitors and RT needs to be carefully monitored for potential increased toxicity. Despite the availability of some reports regarding the tolerability of RT + target therapy, data on simultaneous RT and BRAFi/MEKi are limited and mostly focused on the BRAFi vemurafenib. Here, we report a series of metastatic melanoma patients who received fractioned RT regimens for oligoprogressive disease in combination with the BRAFi dabrafenib and the MEKi trametinib, which have continued beyond progression. None of the cases developed relevant adverse events while receiving RT or interrupted dabrafenib and trametinib administration. These cases suggest that a long period of dabrafenib/trametinib interruption during radiotherapy for oligoprogressive disease can be avoided. Prospective trials are warranted to assess the efficacy and safety of the contemporary administration of BRAF/MEK inhibitors and radiotherapy for oligoprogressive disease.

Continued versus Interrupted Targeted Therapy during Metastasis-Directed Stereotactic Radiotherapy: A Retrospective Multi-Center Safety and Efficacy Analysis

Simple Summary

The increasing use of targeted therapy (TT) has resulted in prolonged disease control and survival in many metastatic cancers. In parallel, stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) is increasingly performed in patients receiving TT to obtain a durable control of resistant metastases, and thereby to prolong the time to disseminated disease progression and switch of systemic therapy. The aim of this study was to analyze the safety and efficacy of SRT combined with TT in metastatic cancer patients and to assess the influence of continuous vs. interrupted TT during metastasis-directed SRT. The data of 454 SRTs in 158 patients from the international multicenter database (TOaSTT) on metastatic cancer patients treated with SRT and concurrent TT (within 30 days) were analyzed. We found that there was no significant difference in survival, progression, or severe toxicity, whether TT was interrupted during SRT or not. Although any-grade acute and late SRT-related toxicity occurred in 63 (40%) and 52 (33%) patients, severe SRT-related toxicity rates were low (3% and 4%, respectively). The highest toxicity rates were observed for the combination of SRT and EGFRi or BRAF/MEKi, and any grade of toxicity was significantly increased when EGFRi or BRAF/MEKi were continued during SRT. However, this did not account for severe toxicity.

Abstract

The increasing use of targeted therapy (TT) has resulted in prolonged disease control and survival in many metastatic cancers. In parallel, stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) is increasingly performed in patients receiving TT to obtain a durable control of resistant metastases, and thereby to prolong the time to disseminated disease progression and switch of systemic therapy. The aims of this study were to analyze the safety and efficacy of SRT combined with TT in metastatic cancer patients and to assess the influence of continuous vs. interrupted TT during metastasis-directed SRT. The data of 454 SRTs in 158 patients from the international multicenter database (TOaSTT) on metastatic cancer patients treated with SRT and concurrent TT (within 30 days) were analyzed using Kaplan–Meier and log rank testing. Toxicity was defined by the CTCAE v4.03 criteria. The median FU was 19.9 mo (range 1–102 mo); 1y OS, PFS and LC were 59%, 24% and 84%, respectively. Median TTS was 25.5 mo (95% CI 11–40). TT was started before SRT in 77% of patients. TT was interrupted during SRT in 44% of patients, with a median interruption of 7 (range 1–42) days. There was no significant difference in OS or PFS whether TT was temporarily interrupted during SRT or not. Any-grade acute and late SRT-related toxicity occurred in 63 (40%) and 52 (33%) patients, respectively. The highest toxicity rates were observed for the combination of SRT and EGFRi or BRAF/MEKi, and any-grade toxicity was significantly increased when EGFRi (p = 0.016) or BRAF/MEKi (p = 0.009) were continued during SRT. Severe (≥grade 3) acute and late SRT-related toxicity were observed in 5 (3%) and 7 (4%) patients, respectively, most frequently in patients treated with EGFRi or BRAF/MEKi and in the intracranial cohort. There was no significant difference in severe toxicity whether TT was interrupted before and after SRT or not. In conclusion, SRT and continuous vs. interrupted TT in metastatic cancer patients did not influence OS or PFS. Overall, severe toxicity of combined treatment was rare; a potentially increased toxicity after SRT and continuous treatment with EGFR inhibitors or BRAF(±MEK) inhibitors requires further evaluation.