Cisplatin, dacarbazine with or without subcutaneous interleukin-2, and interferon alpha-2b in advanced melanoma outpatients: results from an Italian multicenter phase III randomized clinical trial

Targeting ferroptosis as a cell death pathway in Melanoma: From molecular mechanisms to skin cancer treatment

Melanoma, the most aggressive form of human skin cancer, has been under investigation to reach the most efficient treatment. Surgical resection for early-diagnosed primary melanoma, targeted therapies, and immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced/metastatic melanoma is the best clinical approach. Ferroptosis, a newly identified iron-dependent cell death pathway, which is morphologically and biochemically different from apoptosis and necrosis, has been reported to be involved in several cancers. Ferroptosis inducers could provide therapeutic options in case of resistance to conventional therapies for advanced/metastatic melanoma. Recently developed ferroptosis inducers, MEK and BRAF inhibitors, miRNAs such as miR-137 and miR-9, and novel strategies for targeting major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II in melanoma can provide new opportunities for melanoma treatment. Combining ferroptosis inducers with targeted therapies or immune checkpoint inhibitors increases patient response rates. Here we review the mechanisms of ferroptosis and its environmental triggers. We also discuss the pathogenesis and current treatments of melanoma. Moreover, we aim to elucidate the relationship between ferroptosis and melanoma and ferroptosis implications to develop new therapeutic strategies against melanoma.

Application of Approved Cisplatin Derivatives in Combination Therapy against Different Cancer Diseases

The problems with anticancer therapy are resistance and toxicity. From 3000 Cisplatin derivatives tested as antitumor agents, most of them have been rejected, due to toxicity. The aim of current study is the comparison of therapeutic combinations of the currently applied in clinical practice: Cisplatin, Carboplatin, Oxaliplatin, Nedaplatin, Lobaplatin, Heptaplatin, and Satraplatin. The literature data show that the strategies for the development of platinum anticancer agents and bypassing of resistance to Cisplatin derivatives and their toxicity are: combination therapy, Pt IV prodrugs, the targeted nanocarriers. The very important strategy for the improvement of the antitumor effect against different cancers is synergistic combination of Cisplatin derivatives with: (1) anticancer agents-Fluorouracil, Gemcitabine, Cytarabine, Fludarabine, Pemetrexed, Ifosfamide, Irinotecan, Topotecan, Etoposide, Amrubicin, Doxorubicin, Epirubicin, Vinorelbine, Docetaxel, Paclitaxel, Nab-Paclitaxel; (2) modulators of resistant mechanisms; (3) signaling protein inhibitors-Erlotinib; Bortezomib; Everolimus; (4) and immunotherapeutic drugs-Atezolizumab, Avelumab, Bevacizumab, Cemiplimab, Cetuximab, Durvalumab, Erlotinib, Imatinib, Necitumumab, Nimotuzumab, Nivolumab, Onartuzumab, Panitumumab, Pembrolizumab, Rilotumumab, Trastuzumab, Tremelimumab, and Sintilimab. An important approach for overcoming the drug resistance and reduction of toxicity of Cisplatin derivatives is the application of nanocarriers (polymers and liposomes), which provide improved targeted delivery, increased intracellular penetration, selective accumulation in tumor tissue, and enhanced therapeutic efficacy. The advantages of combination therapy are maximum removal of tumor cells in different phases; prevention of resistance; inhibition of the adaptation of tumor cells and their mutations; and reduction of toxicity.

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy for melanoma

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy has emerged as a cancer treatment. After initial therapeutic success for hematologic malignancies, this approach has been extended for the treatment of solid tumors including melanoma.

AREAS COVERED

T cells need to be reprogramed to recognize specific antigens expressed only in tumor cells, a difficult problem since cancer cells are simply transformed normal cells. Tumor antigens, namely, CSPG4, CD70, and GD2 have been targeted by CAR-T cells for melanoma. Moreover, different co-stimulatory signaling domains need to be selected to direct T cell fate. In this review, various approaches for the treatment of melanoma and their effectiveness are comprehensively reviewed and the current status, challenges, and future perspective of CAR-T cell therapy for melanoma are discussed. Literature search was accomplished in three databases (PubMed, Google scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov). Published papers and clinical trials were screened and relevant documents were included by checking pre-defined eligibility criteria.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite obstacles and the risk of adverse events, CAR T cell therapy could be used for patients with treatment-resistant cancer. Clinical trials are underway to determine the efficacy of this approach for the treatment of melanoma.

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.

Long-term Survival of Metastatic Melanoma to the Ileum with Evidence of Primary Cutaneous Disease after 15 years of follow-up: A Case Report

The small bowel is the most common site of gastrointestinal metastasis from cutaneous melanoma. Malignant melanoma has a poor prognosis, especially if distant metastases appear. Although rare primary melanoma of the small bowel has been described, more frequently these lesions originate from unknown cutaneous melanoma. Here we report the case of a 58-year-old man with a diagnosis of melanoma of the ileum without evidence of primary cutaneous disease. After 15 years, during the clinical and radiological follow-up, a cutaneous melanoma in the left parietal side of the scalp, probably corresponding to the primary lesion with abdominal node metastasis, was diagnosed. After 6 months of chemotherapy with fotemustine, the patient showed a complete response. At present, he is still alive 18 years after the diagnosis of intestinal metastasis.

The changing landscape of dermatology practice: melanoma and pump-probe laser microscopy

To present current melanoma diagnosis, staging, prognosis, and treatment algorithms and how recent advances in laser pump-probe microscopy will fill in the gaps in our clinical understanding. Expert opinion and significantly cited articles identified in SCOPUS were used in conjunction with a pubmed database search on Melanoma practice guidelines from the last 10 years. Significant advances in melanoma treatment have been made over the last decade. However, proper treatment algorithm and prognostic information per melanoma stage remain controversial. The next step for providers will involve the identification of patient population(s) that can benefit from recent advances. One method of identifying potential patients is through new laser imaging techniques. Pump-probe laser microscopy has been shown to correctly identify nevi from melanoma and furthermore stratify melanoma by aggressiveness. The recent development of effective adjuvant therapies for melanoma is promising and should be utilized on appropriate patient populations that can potentially be identified using pump-probe laser microscopy.

Melanoma immunotherapy dominates the field

The incidence of melanoma is increasing worldwide and despite early detection and intervention, the number of patients dying from metastatic disease continues to rise. The prognosis of advanced melanoma remains poor, with median survival between 6 and 9 months. Over the past 30 years and despite extensive clinical research, the treatment options for metastatic disease were limited and melanoma is still considered as one of the most therapy-resistant malignancies. Single-agent and combination chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, biochemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted agent therapy and combination regimens failed to show a significant improvement in overall survival (OS). Recent advances and in-depth understanding of the biology of melanoma, have contributed to the development of new agents. Based on the molecular and immunological background of the disease, these new drugs have shown benefit in overall and progression-free survival (PFS). As the picture of the disease begins to change, oncologists need to alter their approach to melanoma treatment and consider disease biology together with targeted individualized treatment. In this review the authors attempt to offer an insight in the present and past melanoma treatment options, with a focus on the recently approved immunotherapeutic agents and the clinical perspectives of these new weapons against metastatic melanoma.

Handling dropout and clustering in longitudinal multicentre clinical trials

Many clinical trials enrol patients from different medical centres. Multi-centre studies are particularly helpful in cancer research as they allow researchers to evaluate the efficacy of a therapy in a variety of patients and settings, making it possible to investigate the effect of treatments in those cases when it is difficult, or even impossible, for a single centre to recruit the required number of patients. It is often argued, however, that despite agreement among different centres to follow common standardized protocols, variation may occur in both baseline characteristics of the recruited patients and in treatment effects. This heterogeneity should be detected and, if present, accounted for in the data analysis. Furthermore, the longitudinal nature of these types of experimental studies raises the problem of attrition, that is, patients may dropout of the study for a number of reasons mainly death or disease progression. In this paper, we consider the health related quality of life of advanced melanoma patients in a longitudinal multi-centre randomized clinical trial comparing two different anti-tumoural treatments. We propose a Heckman type model to account for the possibility that patients dropout according to a non-ignorable mechanism. The model is extended to a multilevel setting to account both for the longitudinal nature and the multi-centre structure of the design. We found a strong variation across centres in the quality of life evaluation. The effect of centres on the dropout was not found to be relevant in the considered data although dropout does depend on patient′s characteristics.

Role of IL-2 in cancer immunotherapy

Interleukin-2 (IL-2) is one of the key cytokines with pleiotropic effects on immune system. It has been approved for the treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma and metastatic melanoma. Recent progress has been made in our understanding of IL-2 in regulating lymphocytes that has led to exciting new directions for cancer immunotherapy. While improved IL-2 formulations might be used as monotherapies, their combination with other anticancer immunotherapies, such as adoptive cell transfer regimens, antigen-specific vaccination, and blockade of immune checkpoint inhibitory molecules, for example cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed death 1 (PD-1) mono-antibodies, would held the promise of treating metastatic cancer. Despite the comprehensive studies of IL-2 on immune system have established the application of IL-2 for cancer immunotherapy, a number of poignant obstacles remain for future research. In the present review, we will focus on the key biological features of IL-2, current applications, limitations, and future directions of IL-2 in cancer immunotherapy.

Modelling the distribution of health-related quality of life of advanced melanoma patients in a longitudinal multi-centre clinical trial using M-quantile random effects regression

Health-related quality of life assessment is important in the clinical evaluation of patients with metastatic disease that may offer useful information in understanding the clinical effectiveness of a treatment. To assess if a set of explicative variables impacts on the health-related quality of life, regression models are routinely adopted. However, the interest of researchers may be focussed on modelling other parts (e.g. quantiles) of this conditional distribution. In this paper, we present an approach based on quantile and M-quantile regression to achieve this goal. We applied the methodologies to a prospective, randomized, multi-centre clinical trial. In order to take into account the hierarchical nature of the data we extended the M-quantile regression model to a three-level random effects specification and estimated it by maximum likelihood.

Regulatory T cells in the immunotherapy of melanoma

Patients with melanoma are supposed to develop spontaneous immune responses against specific tumor antigens. However, several mechanisms contribute to the failure of tumor antigen-specific T cell responses, inducing immune escape. Importantly, immunosuppression mediated by regulatory T cells (Tregs) in tumor lesions is a dominant mechanism of tumor immune evasion. Based on this information, several therapies targeting Tregs such as cyclophosphamide, IL-2-based therapies, and antibodies against the surface molecular of Tregs have been developed. However, only some of these strategies showed clinical efficacy in patients with melanoma in spite of their success in shifting immune systems to antitumor responses in animal models. In the future, strategies specifically depleting local Tregs, inhibiting Treg migration to the tumor lesion, and Treg depletion in combination with other chemotherapies or immune modulation will hopefully bring benefits to melanoma patients.

Novel dendritic cell-based vaccination in late stage melanoma

Dendritic cells (DCs) are professional antigen-presenting cells (APCs) that play an important role in stimulating an immune response of both CD4(+) T helper cells and CD8(+) cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs). As such, DCs have been studied extensively in cancer immunotherapy for their capability to induce a specific anti-tumor response when loaded with tumor antigens. However, when the most relevant antigens of a tumor remain to be identified, alternative approaches are required. Formation of a dentritoma, a fused DC and tumor cells hybrid, is one strategy. Although initial studies of these hybrid cells are promising, several limitations interfere with its clinical and commercial application. Here we present early experience in clinical trials and an alternative approach to manufacturing this DC/tumor cell hybrid for use in the treatment of late stage and metastatic melanoma.

The past, present and future of immunotherapy against tumor

Tumor is one of the most common lethal diseases in the world. Current progress of therapy remains insufficient survival benefit. Tumor immunotherapies have been proposed for more than a century. With the improvement in the understanding of the role of the immune system in the tumorigenesis and immune response to tumor, immunotherapy has obtained a rapid development and plays the significant role in tumor therapy nowadays. This review designs to provide a general overview of immunotherapy in tumors. We will introduce the landmark events in the past research of immunotherapy and elaborate a range of strategies using different immune response mechanism, which have been demonstrated successfully and even some of them have been approved by US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to certain tumor therapy. Finally, we will discuss the future direction of immunotherapy so that we can predict the possible and valuable strategies for future tumor therapy.

What is the role of chemotherapy in the treatment of melanoma?

The approval of ipilimumab and inhibitors of the BRAF pathway for the treatment of melanoma has provided multiple therapeutic options for patients. Although these new agents improve survival compared with chemotherapy alone, the majority of patients will progress and will receive chemotherapy at some point in the course of their disease. Whether the clinical efficacy of chemotherapy can be improved by targeting resistance mechanisms is an area of active investigation. In addition, chemotherapy may be of use modulating the efficacy of the newer agents.

Treatment of unresectable stage IV metastatic melanoma with aviscumine after anti-neoplastic treatment failure: a phase II, multi-centre study

Background

Aviscumine, a recombinant plant protein, is an immune modulator that induces ribotoxic stress at the 28S ribosomal RNA subunit. In this way cytokine release and T-cell responses are enhanced. This phase II trial was conducted to test the efficacy and safety of aviscumine in patients with systemically pre-treated metastatic melanoma stage IV.

Methods

A total of 32 patients with progressive stage IV melanoma after failure of standard therapy were enrolled onto a single-arm, multi-centre, open-label, phase II trial. All patients had an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. Patients received 350 ng aviscumine twice weekly by subcutaneous injection until progression. The primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Safety was assessed as adverse events (AEs). Tumor response was assessed every eight weeks and survival of patients was followed up to one year after the end of therapy. Thirty one patients (intent-to-treat population (ITT)) were assessed for efficacy; safety was assessed in the whole population.

Results

One patient achieved a partial response (PR) and 10 patients showed stable disease/no change (SD). The median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 63 days (95% CI 57–85) and median overall survival (mOS) was 335 days (95% CI 210–604). In total 210 treatment-emergent adverse events were recorded. Grade 1 or 2 AEs occurred in 72% of patients and were mostly application-site effects such as pruritus Grade 3–4 treatment-emergent drug-related adverse events occurred in 9% of patients.

Conclusion

These results suggest that aviscumine may have a clinical impact in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma and provide rationale for further clinical evaluation of this agent. In the light of effective new immune checkpoint blockers it might be a candidate for combinations with these agents.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00658437

Latest advances in chemotherapeutic, targeted, and immune approaches in the treatment of metastatic melanoma

Melanoma is the most dangerous form of skin cancer owing to its metastatic potential and is an important public health concern. The melanoma incidence has been increasing worldwide. Although potentially curable when diagnosed early, metastatic melanoma carries a poor prognosis. Until recently, systemic therapy for metastatic melanoma was ineffective, but the recent successes in the development of new therapies for metastatic melanoma, such as mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway inhibitors, anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4), and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) pathway blocking antibodies, as well as combination strategies of cytotoxic chemotherapy and inhibitors of angiogenesis, have all yielded promising results, changing the continually evolving landscape of therapeutic options for patients with this disease. The aim of this review was to summarize the evolution of and recent advances in the treatment of metastatic melanoma. Therefore, we conducted a comprehensive PubMed search between January 1, 1960, and February 1, 2014, using the search term melanoma or metastatic melanoma combined with terms such as chemotherapy, immunotherapy, CTLA-4, PD-1, PD-L1, adoptive T cell, targeted therapy, MAPK, molecular biology, and survival.

Chemo-immunotherapy with oxaliplatin and interleukin-7 inhibits colon cancer metastasis in mice

Combination of immunotherapy and chemotherapy has shown promise for cancer. Interleukin-7 (IL-7) can potentially enhance immune responses against tumor, while oxaliplatin (OXP), a platinum-based drug, can promote a favorable immune microenvironment and stimulate anticancer immune responses. We evaluated the anti-tumor activity of IL-7 combining OXP against a murine colon carcinoma in vitro and in vivo and studied the tumor immune microenvironment to investigate whether the combined treatment affects on the local immune cell populations. Utilizing lung and abdomen metastasis models by inoculation of CT26 mice colon cancer cells, we evaluated the anti-tumor efficacy of combining IL-7 and OXP in mice models. Tumor immune microenvironment was evaluated by flow cytometric analysis and immunohistochemical staining. Our study showed that the in vivo administration of IL-7 combined with OXP markedly inhibited the growth of tumors in lung and abdomen metastasis models of colon cancer. IL-7 alone had no effect on tumor growth in mice and IL-7 did not alter cell sensitivity to OXP in culture. The antitumor effect of combining IL-7 and OXP correlated with a marked increase in the number of tumor-infiltrating activated CD8+ T cells and a marked decrease in the number of regulatory T (Treg) cells in spleen. Our data suggest that OXP plus IL-7 treatment inhibits tumor cell growth by immunoregulation rather than direct cytotoxicity. Our findings justify further evaluation of combining IL-7 and chemotherapy as a novel experimental cancer therapy.

Chemotherapy in the management of advanced cutaneous malignant melanoma

The recent past has witnessed unprecedented clinical progress in the treatment of advanced malignant melanoma through targeting of mutant BRAF in approximately 50% of patients and immune check point blockade in all patients. As has been well documented, responses to targeted therapy are of limited duration, and rates of clinical benefit to immunotherapy are modest. Given these factors, palliation of patients with chemotherapy remains an essential aspect of melanoma oncology. Many chemotherapeutics (and combinations with other agents, such as immunotherapy) have been evaluated in melanoma, although no chemotherapy regimen has been documented to provide an overall survival benefit in a prospective, randomized, well-controlled phase III study. We provide an overview of the development of the most common chemotherapy regimens for melanoma, discuss the clinical trial evidence supporting and contrasting them, and highlight appropriate clinical situations in which they might be used. We also discuss the future of chemotherapy for melanoma, noting the potential for combinations of chemotherapy with either targeted or immunotherapeutic agents.

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.

Central nervous system failure in melanoma patients: results of a randomised, multicentre phase 3 study of temozolomide- and dacarbazine- based regimens

Background:

This study compared the central nervous system (CNS) metastasis incidence between a temozolomide- and a dacarbazine-based regimen in untreated stage IV melanoma patients.

Methods:

A total of 150 patients were randomly assigned to receive either oral temozolomide (200 mg m⁻² per day; days 1–5) or intravenous dacarbazine (800 mg m⁻²; day 1), in combination with intravenous cisplatin (75 mg m⁻²; day 1) and subcutaneous interleukin-2 (3 MU twice daily; days 9–18), every 28 days (CTI and CDI).

Results:

A total of 149 patients were eligible for an intention-to-treat analysis (CTI: n=74, CDI: n=75). The 1-year cumulative CNS incidence failure was 20.6% for CTI and 31.1% for CDI (P=0.22). In all 24 patients in CTI (32%) and 34 (45%) in CDI developed CNS metastases; 31 patients died of early systemic progression, before CNS evaluation. Median survival time was 8.4 months in the CTI and 8.7 in the CDI arm; in patients with CNS metastases the median survival time was 13.5 months in the CTI and 11.5 in the CDI arm. No difference in toxicity was observed between the two arms.

Conclusion:

The incidence of CNS failures in metastatic melanoma was not significantly reduced and the clinical course was not modified substituting a dacarbazine-based regimen with a temozolomide–based regimen. Patients who developed CNS metastases did not have a worse prognosis than patients progressing in other sites and should not be excluded from new investigational studies.

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.

Unexpected high response rate to traditional therapy after dendritic cell-based vaccine in advanced melanoma: update of clinical outcome and subgroup analysis

We reviewed the clinical results of a dendritic cell-based phase II clinical vaccine trial in stage IV melanoma and analyzed a patient subgroup treated with standard therapies after stopping vaccination. From 2003 to 2009, 24 metastatic melanoma patients were treated with mature dendritic cells pulsed with autologous tumor lysate and keyhole limpet hemocyanin and low-dose interleukin-2. Overall response (OR) to vaccination was 37.5% with a clinical benefit of 54.1%. All 14 responders showed delayed type hypersensitivity positivity. Median overall survival (OS) was 15 months (95% CI, 8–33). Eleven patients underwent other treatments (3 surgery, 2 biotherapy, 2 radiotherapy, 2 chemotherapy, and 4 biochemotherapy) after stopping vaccination. Of these, 2 patients had a complete response and 5 a partial response, with an OR of 63.6%. Median OS was 34 months (range 16–61). Our results suggest that therapeutic DC vaccination could favor clinical response in patients after more than one line of therapy.

Melanoma: a model for testing new agents in combination therapies

Treatment for both early and advanced melanoma has changed little since the introduction of interferon and IL-2 in the early 1990s. Recent data from trials testing targeted agents or immune modulators suggest the promise of new strategies to treat patients with advanced melanoma. These include a new generation of B-RAF inhibitors with greater selectivity for the mutant protein, c-Kit inhibitors, anti-angiogenesis agents, the immune modulators anti-CTLA4, anti-PD-1, and anti-CD40, and adoptive cellular therapies. The high success rate of mutant B-RAF and c-Kit inhibitors relies on the selection of patients with corresponding mutations. However, although response rates with small molecule inhibitors are high, most are not durable. Moreover, for a large subset of patients, reliable predictive biomarkers especially for immunologic modulators have not yet been identified. Progress may also depend on identifying additional molecular targets, which in turn depends upon a better understanding of the mechanisms leading to response or resistance. More challenging but equally important will be understanding how to optimize the treatment of individual patients using these active agents sequentially or in combination with each other, with other experimental treatment, or with traditional anticancer modalities such as chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery. Compared to the standard approach of developing new single agents for licensing in advanced disease, the identification and validation of patient specific and multi-modality treatments will require increased involvement by several stakeholders in designing trials aimed at identifying, even in early stages of drug development, the most effective way to use molecularly guided approaches to treat tumors as they evolve over time.

Large randomized study of thymosin alpha 1, interferon alfa, or both in combination with dacarbazine in patients with metastatic melanoma

PURPOSE

Thymosin alpha 1 (Talpha1) is an immunomodulatory polypeptide that enhances effector T-cell responses. In this large randomized study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of combining Talpha1 with dacarbazine (DTIC) and interferon alfa (IFN-alpha) in patients with metastatic melanoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Four hundred eighty-eight patients were randomly assigned to five treatment groups: DTIC+IFN-alpha+Talpha1 (1.6 mg); DTIC+IFN-alpha+Talpha1 (3.2 mg); DTIC+IFN-alpha+Talpha1 (6.4 mg); DTIC+Talpha1 (3.2 mg); DTIC+IFN-alpha (control group). The primary end point was best overall response at study end (12 months). Secondary end points included duration of response, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Patients were observed for up to 24 months.

RESULTS

Ten and 12 tumor responses were observed in the DTIC+IFN-alpha+Talpha1 (3.2 mg) and DTIC+Talpha1 (3.2 mg) groups, respectively, versus four in the control group, which was sufficient to reject the null hypothesis that P(0) < or = .05 (expected response rate of standard therapy) in these two arms. Duration of response ranged from 1.9 to 23.2 months in patients given Talpha1 and from 4.4 to 8.4 months in the control group. Median OS was 9.4 months in patients given Talpha1 versus 6.6 months in the control group (hazard ratio = 0.80; 9% CI, 0.63 to 1.02; P = .08). An increase in PFS was observed in patients given Talpha1 versus the control group (hazard ratio = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.01; P = .06). Addition of Talpha1 to DTIC and IFN-alpha did not lead to any additional toxicity.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest Talpha1 has activity in patients with metastatic melanoma and provide rationale for further clinical evaluation of this agent.

Phase II Trial of Temozolomide and Sorafenib in Advanced Melanoma Patients with or without Brain Metastases

PURPOSE: The combination of the oral alkylating agent temozolomide and the oral multikinase inhibitor sorafenib was evaluated in advanced melanoma patients. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with metastatic melanoma (n = 167) were treated on four arms. All patients received sorafenib at 400 mg p.o. twice daily without interruption. Patients without brain metastases or prior temozolomide were randomized between arm A: extended dosing of temozolomide (75 mg/m(2) temozolomide daily for 6 of every 8 weeks) and arm B: standard dosing (150 mg/m(2) temozolomide daily for 5 of every 28 days). Patients previously treated with temozolomide were enrolled on arm C: extended dosing of temozolomide. Patients with brain metastases and no prior temozolomide were assigned to arm D: standard dosing. The primary end point was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate. Secondary end points included response rate, toxicity rates, and the rates of BRAF or NRAS mutations. RESULTS: The 6-month PFS rate for arms A, B, C, and D were 50%, 40%, 11%, and 23%. The median PFS for patients on arm A, B, C, and D was 5.9, 4.2, 2.2, and 3.5 months, respectively. No significant differences were observed between arms A and B in 6-month PFS rate, median PFS, or response rates. Treatment was well tolerated in all arms. No significant differences in toxicity were observed between arms A and B except for more grade 3 to 4 lymphopenia in arm A. CONCLUSION: Temozolomide plus sorafenib was well tolerated and showed activity in melanoma patients without prior history of temozolomide. The activity of this combination regimen warrants further investigation. (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(24):7711-8).

Biochemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic melanoma in selected patients

INTRODUCTION

Bioimmunochemotherapy (BCT) is a combination of biological agents and cytostatics that has shown an increase in response rate (RR) in metastatic melanoma patients. The aim of the study is to evaluate RR, progression- free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and treatment toxicity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 11 metastatic melanoma patients treated from January 2002 to June 2008 with cisplatin 20 mg/m(2) i.v. days 1.4, dacarbazine 800 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1, vinblastine 1.5 mg/m(2) i.v. days 1.4, interleukin (IL)-2 9 MIU/m(2) s.c. 5.8 days and interferon (IFN)-alpha-2b 5 MIU/m2 s.c. days 5.9, 11, 13 and 15, with the support of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and antibiotics. Patients with ECOG 0, age < or = 65 years and with measurable disease were included. The planned number of courses was 4. RR was measured by Revised Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumour (RECIST) criteria (computed tomography [CT]+/-proton emission tomography [PET]). Toxicity was measured according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) common toxicity criteria.

RESULTS

Observed RRs were 18% complete response (CR), 27% partial response (PR), 9% stable disease (SD) and 46% disease progression. The median PFS was 4 months (95% CI, 0.10 m), with a 23% one-year PFS. Median OS was 4.6 months (95% CI, 0.9.19 m), with a 29% one-year OS. Eighty-three percent of patients experienced grade 3-4 toxicity, mainly due to neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and flu-like syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with BCT shows an increase in RR, some achieving durable CR; nevertheless it cannot be considered a standard treatment and should be employed only in selected patients.

Non-toxic melanoma therapy by a novel tubulin-binding agent

(S)-3-((R)-9-bromo-4-methoxy-6-methyl-5,6,7,8-tetrahydro-[1,3]dioxolo[4,5-g]isoquino-lin-5-yl)-6,7-dimethoxyisobenzofuran-1(3H)-one (EM011) is a tubulin-binding agent with significant anticancer activity. Here we show that EM011 modulates microtubule dynamics at concentrations that do not alter the total polymer mass of tubulin. In particular, EM011 decreases the transition frequencies between growth and shortening phases and increases the duration microtubules spend in an idle 'pause' state. Using B16LS9 murine melanoma cells, we show that EM011 briefly arrests cell-cycle progression at the G2/M phase by formation of multiple aster spindles. An aberrant mitotic exit without cytokinesis then occurs, leading to the accumulation of abnormal multinucleated cells prior to apoptosis. Our pharmacokinetic studies conformed to a linear dose-response relationship upto 150 mg/kg. However, non-linearity was observed at 300 mg/kg. In a syngeneic murine model of subcutaneous melanoma, better antitumor responses were seen at 150 mg/kg compared to 300 mg/kg of EM011. Unlike currently available chemotherapeutics, EM011 is non-toxic to normal tissues and most importantly, does not cause any immunosuppression and neurotoxicity. Our data thus warrant a clinical evaluation of EM011 for melanoma therapy.

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.

Phase II assessment of talabostat and cisplatin in second-line stage IV melanoma

BACKGROUND

Metastatic melanoma is an incurable disease with an average survival of less than one year. Talabostat is a novel dipeptidyl peptidase inhibitor with immunostimulatory properties.

METHODS

This phase II, open label, single arm study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 75-100 mg/m2 cisplatin combined with 300-400 mcg talabostat bid for 6, 21-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response. The rate of complete responses, duration of overall objective response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival were the secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

Six objective partial responses were recorded in the 74 patients (8.1%) in the intention-to-treat population. Five of these responses involved the 40 evaluable patients (12.5%). Thirty-one percent of patients reported SAEs to the combination of talabostat and cisplatin.

CONCLUSION

Acceptable tolerability was observed in the intention-to-treat population and antitumor activity was observed in 12.5% of evaluable patients, which is not greater than historical expectation with cisplatin alone.

A phase I-II study of the histone deacetylase inhibitor valproic acid plus chemoimmunotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma

We explored in a phase I/II clinical trial the combination of valproic acid (VPA), a clinically available histone deacetylase inhibitor, with standard chemoimmunotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma, to evaluate its clinical activity, to correlate the clinical response with the biological activity of VPA and to assess toxicity. Patients were treated initially with VPA alone for 6 weeks. The inhibition of the target in non-tumour peripheral blood cells (taken as a potential surrogate marker) was measured periodically, and valproate dosing adjusted with the attempt to reach a measurable inhibition. After the treatment with valproate alone, dacarbazine plus interferon-alpha was started in combination with valproate. Twenty-nine eligible patients started taking valproate and 18 received chemoimmunotherapy and are assessable for response. We observed one complete response, two partial remissions and three disease stabilisations lasting longer than 24 weeks. With the higher valproate dosages needed to reach a measurable inhibition of the target, we observed an increase of side effects in those patients who received chemoimmunotherapy. The combination of VPA and chemoimmunotherapy did not produce results overtly superior to standard therapy in patients with advanced melanoma and toxicity was not negligible, casting some doubts on the clinical use of VPA in this setting (at least in the administration schedule adopted).

Current management of metastatic melanoma

PURPOSE

Metastatic melanoma and current treatments are reviewed.

SUMMARY

Despite the many advances in cancer treatment that have occurred over the last several decades, the prognosis for patients with advanced melanoma remains poor. The 5-year survival rate for patients with distant metastases is less than 10%. For these patients, surgery and radiation therapy are primarily used to palliate symptoms. Most patients with advanced melanoma receive systemic therapy. Single-agent cytotoxic chemotherapy with dacarbazine is the standard of care in community practice, although the response rate is generally low and few patients attain complete remission. Temozolomide is an orally active congener of dacarbazine that is at least as effective as dacarbazine when used as single-agent cytotoxic therapy. Low-dose extended temozolomide regimens may provide greater antitumor efficacy. Combinations of dacarbazine or temozolomide with other cytotoxic therapies have not markedly improved patient survival. Newer agents (e.g., lomeguatrib and decitabine) have been developed to overcome mechanisms of drug resistance. Biotherapy using high-dose interleukin-2 has been shown to induce durable responses lasting 5 years or more in some patients, although the overall response rate is not substantially better than that with dacarbazine. Interferon alpha is also used for the treatment of metastatic melanoma, despite lack of approval by the FDA for this indication. Some evidence suggests that combining chemotherapy and biotherapy agents (biochemotherapy) increases the rate of treatment response but does not significantly extend overall survival.

CONCLUSION

New strategies are needed to improve treatment response rates and duration of overall survival in patients with metastatic melanoma.

Phase III trial comparing concurrent biochemotherapy with cisplatin, vinblastine, dacarbazine, interleukin-2, and interferon alfa-2b with cisplatin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine alone in patients with metastatic malignant melanoma (E3695): a trial coordinated by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

PURPOSE

Phase II trials with biochemotherapy (BCT) have shown encouraging response rates in metastatic melanoma, and meta-analyses and one phase III trial have suggested a survival benefit. In an effort to determine the relative efficacy of BCT compared with chemotherapy alone, a phase III trial was performed within the United States Intergroup.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive cisplatin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (CVD) either alone or concurrent with interleukin-2 and interferon alfa-2b (BCT). Treatment cycles were repeated at 21-day intervals for a maximum of four cycles. Tumor response was assessed after cycles 2 and 4, then every 3 months.

RESULTS

Four hundred fifteen patients were enrolled, and 395 patients (CVD, n = 195; BCT, n = 200) were deemed eligible and assessable. The two study arms were well balanced for stratification factors and other prognostic factors. Response rate was 19.5% for BCT and 13.8% for CVD (P = .140). Median progression-free survival was significantly longer for BCT than for CVD (4.8 v 2.9 months; P = .015), although this did not translate into an advantage in either median overall survival (9.0 v 8.7 months) or the percentage of patients alive at 1 year (41% v 36.9%). More patients experienced grade 3 or worse toxic events with BCT than CVD (95% v 73%; P = .001).

CONCLUSION

Although BCT produced slightly higher response rates and longer median progression-free survival than CVD alone, this was not associated with either improved overall survival or durable responses. Considering the extra toxicity and complexity, this concurrent BCT regimen cannot be recommended for patients with metastatic melanoma.

Immunotherapy for advanced melanoma

Immunotherapy for melanoma has undergone significant change since the first attempts to treat patients with high dose IL-2. Herein, strategies to boost patient antitumor immunity through vaccination, treatment with agents that augment host immunity, and adoptive cell transfer will be discussed. The first two strategies have yielded only limited clinical success, but adoptive cell transfer therapy, particularly following a lymphodepleting, preconditioning regimen has resulted in objective response rates approaching 50%. For a number of reasons, lymphodepletion appears to be critical for maintenance of circulating antitumor T cells following adoptive cell transfer. Balancing antitumor efficacy, autoimmunity, and reconstitution of a functioning immune system remain challenging and potentially life-threatening issues.

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.

Biochemotherapy of metastatic melanoma in patients with or without recently diagnosed brain metastases

BACKGROUND

Brain metastases are an alarming complication of advanced melanoma, frequently contributing to patient demise. The authors performed a retrospective analysis to determine whether the treatment of metastatic melanoma with biochemotherapy would result in similar outcomes if brain metastases were first controlled with aggressive, central nervous system (CNS)-directed treatment.

METHODS

Seventy melanoma patients were treated with biochemotherapy for metastatic melanoma between 1999 and 2005. Of these, 20 patients had recently diagnosed brain metastases, whereas 50 did not. Brain metastases (if present) were treated with stereotactic radiosurgery >or=28 days prior to systemic therapy. All patients were treated with biochemotherapy consisting of either dacarbazine or temozolomide in combination with a 96-hour continuous intravenous infusion of interleukin-2 and subcutaneous interferon-alpha-2B. The primary endpoint was survival from the time of the initial diagnosis of metastatic disease.

RESULTS

Median survival from the time of the diagnosis of metastatic melanoma was 15.8 months for patients with brain metastases and 11.1 months for those without CNS involvement (P = .26 by the log-rank test; P = .075 by the Gehan Wilcoxon test). Dacarbazine-based and temozolomide-based regimens appeared similar with regard to their effect on overall survival and CNS disease progression. A plateau in further brain recurrences was observed in patients who survived for > 20 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from the current study suggest that the outcome of biochemotherapy is comparable in patients with and those without brain metastases, if brain metastases are controlled with multidisciplinary treatment. Prolonged survival can be achieved in approximately 15% of patients, regardless of whether or not brain metastases are present.

Chemotherapy for metastatic melanoma: time for a change?

Melanoma is a neoplasm with a rising incidence. Early-stage melanoma is curable, but advanced, metastatic melanoma almost uniformly is fatal, and patients with such advanced disease have a short median survival. Systemic therapy remains unsatisfactory, inducing complete durable responses in a small minority of patients. For the current review, the authors focused on the current role of cytotoxic chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic melanoma and the future prospects for improvements for multiagent chemotherapy and chemotherapy combined with immunomodulatory and/or molecularly targeted agents. They discuss roles of single-agent chemotherapy, combination chemotherapy, combinations of chemotherapy with immunomodulatory or hormone agents, biochemotherapy, and combination chemotherapy with targeted therapies.

Complex Combination Biochemotherapy Regimen in Advanced Metastatic Melanoma in a Non-intensive Care Unit: Toxicity or Benefit?

BACKGROUND

There is currently no chemotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy regimen that has shown impact on survival in patients with metastatic melanoma. Different biochemotherapy protocols showed promise with high response rates, but again without significant impact on survival.

METHODS

We report the results of a retrospective analysis of a regimen consisting of dacarbazine, cisplatin, vindesine, interleukin-2 and interferon-alpha2b in 25 consecutively treated patients with regard to toxicity, efficacy and practicability. The treatment was performed on a regular dermatological ward.

RESULTS

Grade III and IV toxicities were mainly haematological, with few cases of infection because of neutropenia seen. Best overall responses were CR 2/25, PR 2/25 and SD 9/25. The median progression free interval was 4 months (range 0-19) for all patients and the median survival time was 12 months (range 2-26). From a safety and practical point of view, there was no draw-back on treating patients in a non-intensive care unit. The median survival time is in the range of the one reported for monochemotherapy regimen. While there are some responding patients, the responses are short lived and go in parallel with high toxicity and impaired performance status.

CONCLUSION

This complex and highly toxic chemoimmunotherapeutic regimen should not be considered as standard therapy in patients with metastatic malignant melanoma.

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.

Basal level and behaviour of cytokines in a randomized outpatient trial comparing chemotherapy and biochemotherapy in metastatic melanoma

Cytokines play a crucial role in the host's immune response. In melanoma patients, cytokine profiles seems to be related to the clinical course and their imbalance could be associated to tumour progression. Thus, we studied a panel of baseline cytokines and their behaviour during treatment in order to verify their correlation with clinical outcomes. Interleukin-6, interleukin-8, interleukin-10, interleukin-12 and soluble receptor of interleukin-2 were evaluated in 90 out of 176 metastatic melanoma patients enrolled in a phase III study comparing chemotherapy and biochemotherapy. We divided patients into three different groups according to their own cytokine levels (low, intermediate and high) and then we correlated these groups with some clinical features. We also monitored the cytokines during the treatment in a subgroup of 37 patients. In univariate analysis, higher values of interleukin-6 (P = 0.005), soluble receptor of interleukin-2 (P = 0.001) and interleukin-12 (P = 0.010) were correlated with a worse survival. Conversely, interleukin-8 was unable to discriminate patients with different prognoses, and interleukin-10 was undetectable in the majority of patients. In multivariate analysis, only soluble receptor of interleukin-2 maintained its independent role in survival. The impact of baseline cytokines on response was insignificant. Regarding the behaviours of cytokines during treatment, the most remarkable aspect was a progressive increase of interleukin-12 and soluble receptor of interleukin-2 in patients with a better survival. In our metastatic melanoma patients, higher basal levels of interleukin-6, interleukin-12 and soluble receptor of interleukin-2 were associated with a worse survival. In contrast, a progressive increase of interleukin-12 and soluble receptor of interleukin-2 was observed during treatment in patients with a better survival.

Phase II multicentre study of temozolomide in combination with interferon alpha-2b in metastatic malignant melanoma

OBJECTIVE

Temozolomide is a novel oral alkylating agent, active against metastatic melanoma. Combinations of chemotherapy and biological response modifiers have been associated with increased antitumour activity. A multicentre phase II study was performed to assess the activity and toxicity of temozolomide in combination with interferon alpha-2b.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients had histologically confirmed metastatic melanoma. Previously untreated patients received temozolomide administered orally at a dose of 150 mg/m/day for 5 days every 4 weeks, in combination with interferon given continuously subcutaneously twice a week at a dose of 10 MU/m. Treatment continued until disease progression or for a maximum of 12 months.

RESULTS

From June 1999 to August 2002, 27 eligible patients were included in the study at six centres. Median age was 59 (28-77) years; 17 male and 10 female patients were recruited; the median Karnofsky performance score was 90 (70-100); three patients had received prior adjuvant interferon; the majority of patients had fewer than three involved sites. A total of 96 cycles were administered; there were one complete response, four partial response and five stable disease (overall response rate: 18.5%, 95% confidence interval: 6.3-38.1). All responses were seen in patients with exclusively lymph node and pulmonary disease [M1a (one patient); M1b (four patients)]. The median response duration was 6.9 months. One patient remains in complete remission at 4 years. The median time to progression and the median survival were 1.87 and 9.5 months, respectively. Haematological toxicity was neutropenia G-IV: 1, G-III: 4, thrombocytopenia G-III: 2, and anaemia G-III: 2. Predominant non-haematological toxicity was hepatotoxicity G-III: 4. Other toxicities were mild or moderate. Dose reduction was required for nine cycles of interferon, one of temozolomide and two of both drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Temozolomide in combination with interferon is a well-tolerated palliative regimen that has moderate activity against metastatic melanoma. Further evaluation of this regimen in comparative studies or in combination with other drugs is warranted.