Melanoma brain metastases that progress on BRAF-MEK inhibitors demonstrate resistance to ipilimumab-nivolumab that is associated with the Innate PD-1 Resistance Signature (IPRES)

Symptomatic brain metastases in melanoma

Although clinical outcomes in metastatic melanoma have improved in recent years, the morbidity and mortality of symptomatic brain metastases remain challenging. Response rates and survival outcomes of patients with symptomatic melanoma brain metastases (MBM) are significantly inferior to patients with asymptomatic disease. This review focusses upon the specific challenges associated with the management of symptomatic MBM, discussing current treatment paradigms, obstacles to improving clinical outcomes and directions for future research.

Targeted therapy or immunotherapy in BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma: a Spanish center's decade of experience

Background

Targeted therapies and immunotherapy are currently considered the mainstay first-line treatment for advanced BRAF-mutated melanoma. However, the impact of treatment (targeted therapy and immunotherapy) and the prognostic factors are still not clear.

Material and methods

Medical records of 140 patients diagnosed with advanced melanoma between 2011 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed to extract demographic, BRAF status, treatment, performance status, and survival data. ORR, PFS, and OS were compared between patients diagnosed with advanced melanoma and treated with first-line IT or BRAF/MEKi. The prognostic factors were assessed using Cox regression models.

Results

In all patients and those treated with immunotherapy, we did not find any effect of BRAF status on ORR, PFS, or OS. In patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma, ORR was 43.8% vs. 70% (P=0.04), PFS was 19.2 vs. 11.5 months (p=0.22), and OS was 33.4 vs. 16.4 months for the immunotherapy and targeted therapy groups, respectively (P=0.04). ECOG, presence of brain metastases, and high LDH level from initiation of first-line treatment were all associated with differences in PFS and OS.

Conclusion

Patients with advanced BRAF-mutated melanoma treated with first-line immunotherapy had a significantly longer PFS and OS than those treated with first-line BRAF/MEKi; however, first-line BRAF/MEKi treatment had a significantly higher ORR than first-line immunotherapy.

Brain metastases and next-generation anticancer therapies: a survival guide for clinicians

Historically, patients with brain metastases (BMs) have been characterized by few systemic treatment options and poor prognosis. The recent introduction of next-generation anticancer therapies such as molecular targeted agents and immunotherapy have revolutionized the clinical decision-making process of this sub-population, posing new challenges to physicians. In this review, current evidence for the use of checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies in patients with BMs are discussed, with a focus on lung cancer, breast cancer, melanoma and renal cell carcinoma, providing suggestions and potential workflows for daily clinical practice. Several other on-going and future challenges, such as clinical trials design, ways to improve CNS penetration of novel drugs and unique molecular characteristics of BMs, are also discussed. The aim is producing an updated and easy-to-read guide for physicians, to improve decision-making in clinical practice.

Efficacy and safety of the combined use of ipilimumab and nivolumab for melanoma patients with brain metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have advanced immunotherapy for melanoma patients.Objective: This study evaluates efficacy and safety of ipilimumab and nivolumab combination (IN) for melanoma brain metastases (MBM) patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature search was conducted in electronic databases and studies were included if they reported efficacy and safety of IN in MBM patients or prognostic information related to brain metastases. Outcomes evaluated were objective response rate (ORR), complete remission/stable disease/progressive disease rates, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), incidence rates of adverse events, and hazard ratios of disease progression or mortality between IN-treated patients with and without brain metastasis.

RESULTS

Intracranial ORR was higher in IN-treated MBM patients than with control therapies (nivolumab or ipilimumab plus fotemustine). IN treatment led to longer PFS and OS in than control treatments. Five-year OS of IN-treated MBM patients was up to 51% compared to 34% for nivolumab. Outcomes were better for treatment naïve and asymptomatic patients. Whereas many studies reported significantly higher mortality or progression risk with IN treatment in MBM patients compared to non-MBM melanoma patients, many others did not find this risk significant. Incidence of grade 3/4 adverse events in IN-treated MBM patients was: diarrhea or colitis (16%), hepatitis (15%), rash (8%), increased alanine transaminase (8%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (7%), increased lipase (6%), increased amylase (4%), fatigue (3%), hypophysitis (2%), pneumonitis (2%), headache (2%), nausea or vomiting (1%), and neutropenia (1%).

CONCLUSION

IN is an efficacious and safer treatment option for MBM patients, especially for asymptomatic and treatment naïve patients.

Brain metastasis and survival outcomes after first-line therapy in metastatic melanoma: a multicenter DeCOG study on 1704 patients from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG

BACKGROUND

Despite the availability of effective systemic therapies, a significant number of advanced melanoma patients develops brain metastases. This study investigated differences in incidence and time to diagnosis of brain metastasis and survival outcomes dependent on the type of first-line therapy.

METHODS

Patients with metastatic, non-resectable melanoma (AJCCv8 stage IIIC-V) without brain metastasis at start of first-line therapy (1L-therapy) were identified from the prospective multicenter real-world skin cancer registry ADOREG. Study endpoints were incidence of brain metastasis, brain metastasis-free survival (BMFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Of 1704 patients, 916 were BRAF wild-type (BRAFwt) and 788 were BRAF V600 mutant (BRAFmut). Median follow-up time after start of 1L-therapy was 40.4 months. BRAFwt patients received 1L-therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) against CTLA-4+PD-1 (n=281) or PD-1 (n=544). In BRAFmut patients, 1L-therapy was ICI in 415 patients (CTLA-4+PD-1, n=108; PD-1, n=264), and BRAF+MEK targeted therapy (TT) in 373 patients. After 24 months, 1L-therapy with BRAF+MEK resulted in a higher incidence of brain metastasis compared with PD-1±CTLA-4 (BRAF+MEK, 30.3%; CTLA-4+PD-1, 22.2%; PD-1, 14.0%). In multivariate analysis, BRAFmut patients developed brain metastases earlier on 1L-therapy with BRAF+MEK than with PD-1±CTLA-4 (CTLA-4+PD-1: HR 0.560, 95% CI 0.332 to 0.945, p=0.030; PD-1: HR 0.575, 95% CI 0.372 to 0.888, p=0.013). Type of 1L-therapy, tumor stage, and age were independent prognostic factors for BMFS in BRAFmut patients. In BRAFwt patients, tumor stage was independently associated with longer BMFS; ECOG Performance status (ECOG-PS), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and tumor stage with OS. CTLA-4+PD-1 did not result in better BMFS, PFS, or OS than PD-1 in BRAFwt patients. For BRAFmut patients, multivariate Cox regression revealed ECOG-PS, type of 1L-therapy, tumor stage, and LDH as independent prognostic factors for PFS and OS. 1L-therapy with CTLA-4+PD-1 led to longer OS than PD-1 (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.122 to 3.455, p=0.018) or BRAF+MEK (HR 2.41, 95% CI 1.432 to 4.054, p=0.001), without PD-1 being superior to BRAF+MEK.

CONCLUSIONS

In BRAFmut patients 1L-therapy with PD-1±CTLA-4 ICI resulted in a delayed and less frequent development of brain metastasis compared with BRAF+MEK TT. 1L-therapy with CTLA-4+PD-1 showed superior OS compared with PD-1 and BRAF+MEK. In BRAFwt patients, no differences in brain metastasis and survival outcomes were detected for CTLA-4+PD-1 compared with PD-1.

Melanoma Brain Metastases: A Systematic Review of Opportunities for Earlier Detection, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Introduction: Melanoma continues to represent the most serious skin cancer worldwide. However, few attempts have been made to connect the body of research on advanced melanoma. In the present review, we report on strides made in the diagnosis and treatment of intracranial metastatic melanoma. Methods: Relevant Cochrane reviews and randomized-controlled trials published by November 2022 were systematically retrieved from the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed databases (N = 27). Search and screening methods adhered to the 2020 revision of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Results: Although the research surrounding the earlier detection of melanoma brain metastasis is scarce, several studies have highlighted specific markers associated with MBM. Such factors include elevated BRAFV600 mutant ctDNA, high LDH concentration, and high IGF-1R. The approach to treating MBM is moving away from surgery and toward nonsurgical management, namely, a combination of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and immunotherapeutic agents. There is an abundance of emerging research seeking to identify and improve both novel and established treatment options and diagnostic approaches for MBM, however, more research is still needed to maximize the clinical efficacy, especially for new immunotherapeutics. Conclusions: Early detection is optimal for the efficacy of treatment and MBM prognosis. Current treatment utilizes chemotherapies and targeted therapies. Emerging approaches emphasize biomarkers and joint treatments. Further exploration toward preliminary identification, the timing of therapies, and methods to ameliorate adverse treatment effects are needed to advance MBM patient care.

Treatment of Recurrent Melanoma Following Adjuvant Therapy

In the era of effective therapies in melanoma, notably the widespread use of two types of adjuvant treatments: anti-PD-1 immunotherapies and therapies targeting the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway, for BRAF-mutant patients, an important question arises about how to treat these patients in case of recurrent melanoma following adjuvant therapy. Prospective data are lacking in this area and might be difficult to obtain due to the constant progress being made in the field. Therefore, we reviewed available data suggesting that the initial adjuvant treatment received and the following events provide information about the biology of the disease and the probability of response to following systemic treatments. Thus, in case of relapse during or just after adjuvant anti-PD-1, immune resistance is probable, an anti-PD-1 monotherapy rechallenge has a low likelihood of clinical benefit, and escalation with a combination of immunotherapies should be given priority. In case of relapse during treatment with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors, there may be a risk of lower efficacy of immunotherapy than in naïve patients since this relapse attests not only to a resistance to BRAF-MEK inhibition, but also the introduction of immunotherapy to rescue a progression on targeted therapy. In case of relapse long after adjuvant treatment cessation, whatever the treatment received, no conclusion can be drawn about the efficacy of these drugs, and these patients can be treated like naïve patients. Thus, a combination of anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA4 is probably the best solution, and the following line can be BRAF-MEK inhibitors in BRAF-mutated patients. Finally, in case of recurrent melanoma following adjuvant therapy, given the promising upcoming strategies, inclusion in a clinical trial should be offered as frequently as possible.

Melanoma Brain Metastases: A Retrospective Analysis of Prognostic Factors and Efficacy of Multimodal Therapies

Brain metastasis in cutaneous melanoma (CM) has historically been considered to be a dismal prognostic feature, although recent evidence has highlighted the intracranial activity of combined immunotherapy (IT). Herein, we completed a retrospective study to investigate the impact of clinical-pathological features and multimodal therapies on the overall survival (OS) of CM patients with brain metastases. A total of 105 patients were evaluated. Nearly half of the patients developed neurological symptoms leading to a negative prognosis (p = 0.0374). Both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients benefited from encephalic radiotherapy (eRT) (p = 0.0234 and p = 0.011). Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels two times higher than the upper limit normal (ULN) at the time of brain metastasis onset was associated with poor prognosis (p = 0.0452) and identified those patients who did not benefit from eRT. Additionally, the poor prognostic role of LDH levels was confirmed in patients treated with targeted therapy (TT) (p = 0.0015) concerning those who received immunotherapy (IT) (p = 0.16). Based on these results, LDH levels higher than two times the ULN at the time of the encephalic progression identify those patients with a poor prognosis who did not benefit from eRT. The negative prognostic role of LDH levels on eRT observed in our study will require prospective evaluations.

Increasing cure rates of solid tumors by immune checkpoint inhibitors

Immunotherapy has become the central pillar of cancer therapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), a major category of tumor immunotherapy, reactivate preexisting anticancer immunity. Initially, ICIs were approved only for advanced and metastatic cancers in the salvage setting after or concurrent with chemotherapy at a response rate of around 20-30% with a few exceptions. With significant progress over the decade, advances in immunotherapy have led to numerous clinical trials investigating ICIs as neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapies for resectable solid tumors. The promising results of these trials have led to the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals of ICIs as neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapies for non-small cell lung cancer, melanoma, triple-negative breast cancer, and bladder cancer, and the list continues to grow. This therapy represents a paradigm shift in cancer treatment, as many early-stage cancer patients could be cured with the introduction of immunotherapy in the early stages of cancer. Therefore, this topic became one of the main themes at the 2021 China Cancer Immunotherapy Workshop co-organized by the Chinese American Hematologist and Oncologist Network, the China National Medical Products Administration and the Tsinghua University School of Medicine. This review article summarizes the current landscape of ICI-based immunotherapy, emphasizing the new clinical developments of ICIs as curative neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies for early-stage disease.

Oncosuppressive miRNAs loaded in lipid nanoparticles potentiate targeted therapies in BRAF-mutant melanoma by inhibiting core escape pathways of resistance

BRAF-mutated melanoma relapsing after targeted therapies is an aggressive disease with unmet clinical need. Hence the need to identify novel combination therapies able to overcome drug resistance. miRNAs have emerged as orchestrators of non-genetic mechanisms adopted by melanoma cells to challenge therapies. In this context we previously identified a subset of oncosuppressor miRNAs downregulated in drug-resistant melanomas. Here we demonstrate that lipid nanoparticles co-encapsulating two of them, miR-199-5p and miR-204-5p, inhibit tumor growth both in vitro and in vivo in combination with target therapy and block the development of drug resistance. Mechanistically they act by directly reducing melanoma cell growth and also indirectly by hampering the recruitment and reprogramming of pro-tumoral macrophages. Molecularly, we demonstrate that the effects on macrophages are mediated by the dysregulation of a newly identified miR-204-5p-miR-199b-5p/CCL5 axis. Finally, we unveiled that M2 macrophages programs are molecular signatures of resistance and predict response to therapy in patients. Overall, these findings have strong translational implications to propose new combination therapies making use of RNA therapeutics for metastatic melanoma patients.

[Melanoma microenvironment-impact of modern therapies]

BACKGROUND

A considerable proportion of patients with advanced melanoma succumb to metastatic disease despite the initial success of modern therapies.

OBJECTIVES

An overview of the melanoma tumor microenvironment with special focus on approved therapies and new innovative strategies is given.

METHODS

Current clinical trials and scientific insights concerning the impact of the tumor microenvironment on progression and therapy of advanced melanoma are reviewed and discussed.

RESULTS

The tumor microenvironment with its manifold components and interactions plays a major role in the treatment of malignant melanoma.

CONCLUSION

Innovative new strategies that target an immunosuppressive microenvironment may improve the therapeutic efficacy of current treatment of advanced melanoma.

Decoding molecular programs in melanoma brain metastases

Melanoma brain metastases (MBM) variably respond to therapeutic interventions; thus determining patient's prognosis. However, the mechanisms that govern therapy response are poorly understood. Here, we use a multi-OMICS approach and targeted sequencing (TargetSeq) to unravel the programs that potentially control the development of progressive intracranial disease. Molecularly, the expression of E-cadherin (Ecad) or NGFR, the BRAF mutation state and level of immune cell infiltration subdivides tumors into proliferative/pigmented and invasive/stem-like/therapy-resistant irrespective of the intracranial location. The analysis of MAPK inhibitor-naive and refractory MBM reveals switching from Ecad-associated into NGFR-associated programs during progression. NGFR-associated programs control cell migration and proliferation via downstream transcription factors such as SOX4. Moreover, global methylome profiling uncovers 46 differentially methylated regions that discriminate BRAF^mut and wildtype MBM. In summary, we propose that the expression of Ecad and NGFR sub- classifies MBM and suggest that the Ecad-to-NGFR phenotype switch is a rate-limiting process which potentially indicates drug-response and intracranial progression states in melanoma patients.

Tissue-resident memory T cells in the era of (Neo) adjuvant melanoma management

Tissue-resident memory T (TRM) cells have emerged as key players in the immune control of melanoma. These specialized cells are identified by expression of tissue retention markers such as CD69, CD103 and CD49a with downregulation of egress molecules such as Sphingosine-1-Phosphate Receptor-1 (S1PR1) and the lymphoid homing receptor, CD62L. TRM have been shown to be integral in controlling infections such as herpes simplex virus (HSV), lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) and influenza. More recently, robust pre-clinical models have also demonstrated TRM are able to maintain melanoma in a dormant state without progression to macroscopic disease reminiscent of their ability to control viral infections. The discovery of the role these cells play in anti-melanoma immunity has coincided with the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy which has revolutionized the treatment of cancers. ICIs that target programmed death protein-1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) have led to substantial improvements in outcomes for patients with metastatic melanoma and have been rapidly employed to reduce recurrences in the resected stage III setting. While ICIs mediate anti-tumor activity via CD8+ T cells, the specific subsets that facilitate this response is unclear. TRM invariably exhibit high expression of immune checkpoints such as PD-1, CTLA-4 and lymphocyte activating gene-3 (LAG-3) which strongly implicates this CD8+ T cell subset as a crucial mediator of ICI activity. In this review, we present pre-clinical and translational studies that highlight the critical role of TRM in both immune control of primary melanoma and as a key CD8+ T cell subset that mediates anti-tumor activity of ICIs for the treatment of melanoma.

The future of targeted kinase inhibitors in melanoma

Melanoma is a cancer of the pigment-producing cells of the body and its incidence is rising. Targeted inhibitors that act against kinases in the MAPK pathway are approved for BRAF-mutant metastatic cutaneous melanoma and increase patients' survival. Response to these therapies is limited by drug resistance and is less durable than with immune checkpoint inhibition. Conversely, rare melanoma subtypes have few therapeutic options for advanced disease and MAPK pathway targeting agents show minimal anti-tumor effects. Nevertheless, there is a future for targeted kinase inhibitors in melanoma: in new applications such as adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy and in novel combinations with immunotherapies or other targeted therapies. Pre-clinical studies continue to identify tumor dependencies and their corresponding actionable drug targets, paving the way for rational targeted kinase inhibitor combinations as a personalized medicine approach for melanoma.

Efficacy and safety of anti-PD1 monotherapy or in combination with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with V600BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma have higher rates of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with first-line anti-PD1 (PD1]+anti-CTLA-4 (IPI) versus PD1. Whether this is also true after BRAF/MEKi therapy is unknown. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of PD1 versus IPI +PD1 after BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi).

METHODS

Patients with V600BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF/MEKi who had subsequent PD1 versus IPI+PD1 at eight centers were included. The endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), PFS, OS and safety in each group.

RESULTS

Of 200 patients with V600E (75%) or non-V600E (25%) mutant metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF/MEKi (median time of treatment 7.6 months; treatment cessation due to progressive disease in 77%), 115 (57.5%) had subsequent PD1 and 85 (42.5%) had IPI+PD1. Differences in patient characteristics between PD1 and IPI+PD1 groups included, age (med. 63 vs 54 years), time between BRAF/MEKi and PD1±IPI (16 vs 4 days), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) of ≥1 (62% vs 44%), AJCC M1C/M1D stage (72% vs 94%) and progressing brain metastases at the start of PD1±IPI (34% vs 57%). Median follow-up from PD1±IPI start was 37.8 months (95% CI, 33.9 to 52.9). ORR was 36%; 34% with PD1 vs 39% with IPI+PD1 (p=0.5713). Median PFS was 3.4 months; 3.4 with PD1 vs 3.6 months with IPI+PD1 (p=0.6951). Median OS was 15.4 months; 14.4 for PD1 vs 20.5 months with IPI+PD1 (p=0.2603). The rate of grade 3 or 4 toxicities was higher with IPI+PD1 (31%) vs PD1 (7%). ORR, PFS and OS were numerically higher with IPI+PD1 vs PD1 across most subgroups except for females, those with <10 days between BRAF/MEKi and PD1±IPI, and those with stage III/M1A/M1B melanoma. The combination of ECOG PS=0 and absence of liver metastases identified patients with >3 years OS (area under the curve, AUC=0.74), while ECOG PS ≥1, progressing brain metastases and presence of bone metastases predicted primary progression (AUC=0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

IPI+PD1 and PD1 after BRAF/MEKi have similar outcomes despite worse baseline prognostic features in the IPI+PD1 group, however, IPI+PD1 is more toxic. A combination of clinical factors can identify long-term survivors, but less accurately those with primary resistance to immunotherapy after targeted therapy.

Melanoma Brain Metastases: An Update on the Use of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Molecularly Targeted Agents

Brain metastases from melanoma are no longer uniformly associated with dismal outcomes. Impressive tumor tissue-based (craniotomy) translational research has consistently shown that distinct patient subgroups may have a favorable prognosis. This review provides a historical overview of the standard-of-care treatments until the early 2010s. It subsequently summarizes more recent advances in understanding the biology of melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) and treating patients with MBMs, mainly focusing upon prospective clinical trials of BRAF/MEK and PD-1/CTLA-4 inhibitors in patients with previously untreated MBMs. These additional systemic treatments have provided effective complementary treatment approaches and/or alternatives to radiation and craniotomy. The current role of radiation therapy, especially in conjunction with systemic therapies, is also discussed through the lens of various retrospective studies. The combined efficacy of systemic treatments with radiation has improved overall survival over the last 10 years and has sparked considerable research interest regarding optimal dosing and sequencing of radiation treatments with systemic treatments. Finally, the review describes ongoing clinical trials in patients with MBMs.