Japanese real‐world study of sequential nivolumab and ipilimumab treament in melanoma

Optimal strategy in managing advanced melanoma

The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors and combination therapy with BRAF inhibitors and MEK inhibitors has dramatically improved the prognosis of advanced melanoma. However, since acral melanoma and mucosal melanoma, which are rare in Western countries but are major subtypes of melanoma in East Asia, including Japan, have a low frequency of BRAF mutations, there are currently no treatment options other than immune checkpoint inhibitors in most such cases. Furthermore, owing to a lower tumor mutation burden, immune checkpoint inhibitors are less effective in acral and mucosal melanoma than in cutaneous melanoma. The aim of this review was to summarize the current status and future prospects for the treatment of advanced melanoma, comparing cutaneous melanoma, acral melanoma, and mucosal melanoma.

Neoadjuvant therapy for melanoma: A critical appraisal

The treatment of advanced melanoma has significantly changed since the development of targeted and immune therapy. To date, these agents have primarily been used in the adjuvant or metastatic setting. Given several theoretical advantages, there is increased interest in the use of these new therapeutics in the neoadjuvant setting. In this review, we detail the potential benefits and pitfalls of neoadjuvant therapy for melanoma, review the currently available data, and describe ongoing neoadjuvant trials.

Prognostic value of neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio and lactate dehydrogenase in melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) showed promising therapeutic efficacy on melanoma. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) showed predictive values on prognosis of various tumors, but not on melanoma yet. This meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the prognostic role of NLR and LDH levels in melanoma treated with ICIs.

METHODS

A search was conducted for all reports published till March 2020 in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). Studies were included if they investigated the association between pretreatment NLR/LDH and prognosis in melanoma patients treated with ICIs. Subgroup analysis, publication bias, and meta-regression were conducted to investigate heterogeneity.

RESULTS

A total of 6817 melanoma patients were included. Overall, high pretreatment NLR and LDH were associated with poor overall survival (OS) (P < .001) and PFS (P < .001). Subgroup analyses revealed that elevated NLR and LDH levels were associated with poor OS and PFS in patients treated with anti-CTLA-4 or anti-PD-1/PD-L1 alone. NLR level was superior in predicting OS if compared with LDH level in patients treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 + anti-CTLA-4. In subgroup analysis stratified by cutoff value, high NLR level was associated with poor OS and PFS regardless of cutoff value, but LDH works when cutoff value = upper normal limit (UNL). The predictive value of NLR and LDH levels on OS and PFS was partially compromised in the Asian populations, compared with the Western countries.

CONCLUSION

Blood NLR and LDH levels showed great potential to be used as early prognostic biomarkers in melanoma patients treated with ICIs.

The Predictive Potential of the Baseline C-Reactive Protein Levels for the Efficiency of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The relationship between baseline C-reactive protein (CRP) level and the prognosis of cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment remains controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to clarify whether baseline CRP level can serve as a biomarker to predict the efficiency of ICI therapy.

Methods

All associated articles published in the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed databases from the inception of the database to December 30, 2021, were retrieved. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes were meta-analyzed using the random-effects model and adjusted using the trim-and-fill method because of publication bias.

Results

Thirty-three studies (6,124 patients) conducted between 2013 and 2021 were identified. The pooled outcomes implied that high baseline CRP level patients had significantly worse OS (adjusted pooled value for univariate and multivariate analysis outcomes: HR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.41-1.56; HR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.34-1.59) and PFS (adjusted pooled value for univariate and multivariate analysis outcomes: HR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.15-1.45; HR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.02-1.40) than low baseline CRP level patients, irrespective of cancer or ICI type. Further analysis indicated that 1 mg/dl was appropriate as a cutoff value for determining the low or high level of baseline CRP to predict the OS or PFS of cancer patients receiving ICI treatment (univariate analysis: HR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.24-1.97, P = 0.909; multivariate analysis: HR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.23-2.03, P = 0.521).

Conclusions

High baseline CRP level (>1 mg/dl) may be an indicator for worse OS and PFS of cancer patients treated with ICIs. More high-quality prospective studies are warranted to assess the predictive value of CRP for ICI treatment.

The Prognostic Significance of Baseline Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Melanoma Patients Receiving Immunotherapy

Immunotherapy has revolutionized the treatment in metastatic melanoma, but alternative biomarkers that are economical, simple and reliable still need to be clarified. In this study, we aimed to comprehensively analyze the prognostic significance of baseline neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in melanoma patients with immunotherapy. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library until September 16, 2020. Hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled to investigate the association of baseline NLR with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Sensitivity analysis, subgroup analyses, publication bias assessment, and the Duval and Tweedie trim-and-fill method were used to evaluate the stability of results. A total of 18 studies including 2054 patients were included in our analysis. Pooled data demonstrated that higher baseline NLR was associated with a poorer OS (HR=2.46, 95% CI=1.77, 3.43) and PFS (HR=2.38, 95% CI=1.95, 2.89) of melanoma patients receiving immunotherapy. Subgroup analysis according to immunotherapy type showed that the prognostic effects of baseline NLR existed in all the subtypes of immunotherapy, including anticytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4 therapy (OS HR=2.26, 95% CI=1.43, 3.59; PFS HR=2.68, 95% CI=1.79, 4.02), antiprogrammed cell death-1 therapy (OS HR=3.08, 95% CI=2.21, 4.27; PFS HR=2.01, 95% CI=1.64, 2.47), and combination therapy (OS HR=1.75, 95% CI=1.13, 2.72; PFS HR=3.13, 95% CI=1.63, 6.03). Conclusions were still consistent in subgroup analyses stratified by study year, region, study type, sample size, analysis of HR and cuttoff of baseline NLR. Altogether, baseline NLR is a promising prognostic biomarker for melanoma patients receiving immunotherapy.

Rechallenge of immune checkpoint inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) rechallenge in cancer patients is not defined. When ICIs are discontinued due to treatment completion or toxicity, another course of ICIs is feasible in clinical practice, but the amount of data is still quite limited to draw definitive conclusions. Here we report the results of a meta-analysis evaluating efficacy and safety of ICI rechallenge.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library were searched for studies reporting efficacy and safety of ICI rechallenge. Pooled analysis of response rate (ORR), median progression-free survival (mPFS) and median overall survival (mOS) were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 49 studies were included in qualitative and quantitative pooled analysis Overall response rate, mPFS and mOS were 21.8 % (range 0-70 %), 4.9 months (range 0-19.1 months) and 15.6 months (range 5.1-39 months), respectively. Incidence of any grade and grade 3-4 adverse events were 52.2 % (range 4-100 %) and 21.5 % (range 0-97.8 %), respectively. In the subgroup of patients who had previously discontinued ICI because of disease progression ORR, mPFS and mOS were 15.2 %, 2.9 and 7.9 months. Patients who had previously discontinued ICI because of toxicity achieved an ORR of 44 % and a mPFS of 13.2 months with the rechallenge.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that rechallenge ICI is an active and feasible strategy, and it could be considered on an individual basis. However, this analysis is based on non-randomized studies. Prospective studies are needed to clarify the role of rechallenge after disease progression or adverse events.

Systematic review and meta-analysis efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced melanoma patients with anti-PD-1 progression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

More than half of melanoma patients taking first-line anti-PD-1 therapy either express transient or no response at all. The efficacy and safety of secondary treatments for these patients are still not well established. Here, we evaluate the efficacy and safety of different melanoma FDA-approved ICI modalities used in post-anti-PD-1 refractory settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched the PubMed database and the ASCO meetings library for studies on advanced melanoma patients with cancer progression on anti-PD-1 therapy and were then treated with ipilimumab, nivolumab/ipilimumab combination, or retreated with anti-PD-1. Primary and secondary endpoints were efficacy and toxicity, respectively. Pooled estimates for each treatment group were obtained using a random or fixed effects model according to detected heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies, of which 10 on ipilimumab, 2 on anti-PD-1 treatment, and 6 on combination therapies, were included, involving a total of 1460 patients. Twelve studies reported objective response rates (ORRs) and nine of them reported immune-related adverse events (irAEs). As for ORR, patients experienced a response that was inferior compared to the same therapy in treatment -naïve patients, with combination therapy having the best ORR of a pooled 23.08% (95% CI: 16.75% to 30.03%), followed by ipilimumab with a pooled ORR of 8.19% (95% CI: 5.78% to 10.92%). Survival data were also inferior in the ipilimumab cohort (mOS: 5.1 to 7.4 months) compared to ipilimumab in anti-PD-1 naive patients. As for grade 3/4 irAE occurrence, the ipilimumab cohort showed an estimate of 43.77% (95% CI 22.55% to 66.19%).

CONCLUSION

Our findings provide the best current evidence that patients who progress on anti-PD-1 can still respond to different ICI modalities (ipilimumab with or without nivolumab, and retreatment or continuation beyond progression with anti-PD-1) with tolerable grade 3/4 irAEs. However, more prospective clinical trials are needed to confirm these results.

Immunotherapy for advanced melanoma: current situation in Japan

Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors provides long-term survival for patients with advanced melanoma. Improvements in the overall survival of advanced melanoma patients have been achieved with anti-PD-1 monotherapy and anti-PD-1+ CTLA4 combination therapy, but there are still many issues to resolve. Acral, mucosal and uveal melanoma have been less responsive to immune checkpoint inhibitors than cutaneous melanoma. For patients who have achieved a good response, it is still not known how long the anti-PD-1 therapy should be administered. Moreover, there is limited treatment for patients who relapse during or after adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy. Here, we review the current evidence regarding the clinical effects of immunotherapy for advanced melanoma. Moreover, we review previous studies of acral, mucosal and uveal melanoma, and we discuss the recent findings regarding durable response after the cessation of anti-PD-1 therapy, and treatment options for recurrence after adjuvant therapy.

Ultraviolet Radiation and Melanomagenesis: From Mechanism to Immunotherapy

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

Real-world safety and efficacy data of ipilimumab in Japanese radically unresectable malignant melanoma patients: A postmarketing surveillance

Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors has improved prognosis among patients with cutaneous melanoma, but there are still unmet medical needs in Japan, especially for mucosal melanoma and acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM) subtypes. Ipilimumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody that specifically blocks cytotoxic T‐lymphocyte‐associated antigen 4 and potentiates antitumor T‐cell response, was approved in Japan in 2015 for the treatment of radically unresectable malignant melanoma. This postmarketing surveillance (prospective, non‐interventional, multicenter, observational study) evaluated the safety (occurrence of adverse drug reactions [ADR]) and efficacy (overall survival [OS]) of ipilimumab in a real‐world setting in Japan. All patients with radically unresectable malignant melanoma undergoing treatment with ipilimumab in Japan during the registration period between August 2015 and February 2017 were enrolled. In total, 547 patients were analyzed; 67.5% were 60 years old or more, 85.7% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–1, 50.3% had melanoma of the skin (mainly of the ALM subtype) and 73.5% had negative BRAF mutation status. Most patients had experienced recurrence and received multiple treatments. The overall incidence of ADR and serious ADR was 69.5% and 40.8%, respectively. The most common ADR and serious ADR were liver disorder, colitis and diarrhea. The most common ADR of special interest were liver‐related ADR (22.5%), skin‐related ADR (22.1%), gastrointestinal‐related ADR (20.3%) and endocrine system‐related ADR (16.3%). Most of these events had recovered or were in remission by the last evaluation. The median OS was 7.52 months (95% confidence interval, 6.47–8.74). Median OS was 6.31 and 8.44 months in patients with mucosal melanoma and melanoma of the skin; 9.43 and 3.75 months in patients with and without ADR; and 10.32 and 6.11 months in patients with and without serious ADR, respectively. Ipilimumab was tolerable and showed efficacy in improving OS for these patients.