A randomized phase 2 trial of bevacizumab with or without daily low-dose interferon alfa-2b in metastatic malignant melanoma

Advancements in Melanoma Therapies: From Surgery to Immunotherapy

OPINION STATEMENT

Melanoma is defined as the most aggressive and deadly form of skin cancer. The treatment of melanoma depends on the disease stage, tumor location, and extent of its spread from its point of origin. Melanoma treatment has made significant advances, notably in the context of targeted and immunotherapies. Surgical resection is the main therapeutic option for earlystage melanoma, and it provides favourable outcomes. With disease metastasis, systemic treatments such as immunotherapy and targeted therapy become increasingly important. The identification of mutations that lead to melanoma has influenced treatment strategies. Targeted therapies focusing on these mutations offer improved response rates and fewer toxicities than conventional chemotherapy. Furthermore, developing immunotherapies, including checkpoint inhibitors and tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapies, has demonstrated encouraging outcomes in effectively combating cancer cells. These therapeutic agents demonstrate superior effectiveness and a more tolerable side-effect profile, improving the quality of life for patients receiving treatment. The future of melanoma treatment may involve a multimodal approach consisting of a combination of surgery, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy adapted to each patient's profile. This approach may improve survival rates and health outcomes.

VEGF/VEGFR axis and its signaling in melanoma: Current knowledge toward therapeutic targeting agents and future perspectives

Melanoma is responsible for most skin cancer-associated deaths globally. The progression of melanoma is influenced by a number of pathogenic processes. Understanding the VEGF/VEGFR axis, which includes VEGF-A, PlGF, VEGF-B, VEGF-C, and VEGF-D and their receptors, VEGFR-1, VEGFR-2, and VEGFR-3, is of great importance in melanoma due to its crucial role in angiogenesis. This axis generates multifactorial and complex cellular signaling, engaging the MAPK/ERK, PI3K/AKT, PKC, PLC-γ, and FAK signaling pathways. Melanoma cell growth and proliferation, migration and metastasis, survival, and acquired resistance to therapy are influenced by this axis. The VEGF/VEGFR axis was extensively examined for their potential as diagnostic/prognostic biomarkers in melanoma patients and results showed that VEGF overexpression can be associated with unfavorable prognosis, higher level of tumor invasion and poor response to therapy. MicroRNAs linking to the VEGF/VEGFR axis were identified and, in this review, divided into two categories according to their functions, some of them promote melanoma angiogenesis (promotive group) and some restrict melanoma angiogenesis (protective group). In addition, the approach of treating melanoma by targeting the VEGF/VEGFR axis has garnered significant interest among researchers. These agents can be divided into two main groups: anti-VEGF and VEGFR inhibitors. These therapeutic options may be a prominent step along with the modern targeting and immune therapies for better coverage of pathological processes leading to melanoma progression and therapy resistance.

Unexpected "Lazarus response" to single-agent bevacizumab in heavily pretreated patients with HER2-positive breast cancer

Early clinical trials aimed to halt cancer progression by inhibiting the growth of new blood vessels in tumors through single-agent targeted therapy with bevacizumab. These trials largely proved unsuccessful. However, bevacizumab turned out to be efficient when administered in combination with other anticancer drugs. The efficacy of this approach is explained by the ability of bevacizumab to eliminate immature blood vessels thus normalizing intratumoral blood flow and improving the delivery of cytotoxic or targeted agents. This report describes four cases of heavily pretreated patients with metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer, who had no meaningful treatment options left, and who received single-agent bevacizumab as an empirical last-resort therapy. Three of these patients had severe complaints, and they demonstrated striking symptomatic relief within the first day of this treatment. In addition to the observed "Lazarus response", which was likely attributed to the bevacizumab-driven resolution of edema, some evidence of a direct antitumor effect was observed. These data may call for the reconsideration of bevacizumab monotherapy in patients with HER2-associated breast cancer, and perhaps in some other categories of cancer patients.

Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in patients with malignant melanoma: a systematic review and PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and non-comparative clinical studies

Background: Malignant melanoma is a highly aggressive cancer that spreads and metastasizes quickly. In recent years, the antiangiogenic drug bevacizumab has been trialed to treat malignant melanoma. We conducted the first meta-analysis to examine the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab combined with other drugs in malignant melanoma. Methods: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-comparative clinical studies of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy, targeted medicine, and interferon to treat malignant melanoma in PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Meta-analysis of RCT was performed using Review Manager (version 5.4), and non-comparative meta-analysis was performed using R (version 4.0.3). The primary outcome was the objective response rate. Depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies, the pooled outcomes and 95% CI were calculated using either random-effects or fixed-effect models. Subgroup outcomes were calculated with possible relevant variables. Sensitivity analyses were carried out by excluding each study from the highly heterogeneous pooled results in turn. Funnel plot and Begg's test were used to test the included studies' potential publication bias. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: This meta-analysis included 20 trials: five RCTs and 15 non-comparative clinical studies with a total of 23 bevacizumab intervention arms. In 14 treatment arms, bevacizumab was combined with chemotherapy drugs such as fotemustine, dacarbazine, carboplatin/paclitaxel, and temozolomide. In six treatment arms, bevacizumab was combined with targeted medicines such as imatinib, everolimus, sorafenib, erlotinib, and temsirolimus. There were also six treatment arms that used bevacizumab in combination with interferon. The pooled objective response rate was 15.8% (95% CI, 11.4%-20.2%). Bevacizumab plus carboplatin/paclitaxel significantly increased the overall survival compared to carboplatin/paclitaxel (HR = 0.64, 95% CI, 0.49-0.85, p < 0.01). Fatigue, nausea, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia were the most common adverse events. The pooled incidence of hypertension of all bevacizumab arms in malignant melanoma was 32.4% (95% CI, 24.5%-40.3%). Conclusion: This study showed that bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy might be effective and well-tolerated in patients with stage III or IV unresectable malignant melanoma. Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=304625], identifier [CRD42022304625].

Neoadjuvant treatment for stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma

BACKGROUND

Cutaneous melanoma is amongst the most aggressive of all skin cancers. Neoadjuvant treatment is a form of induction therapy, given to shrink a cancerous tumour prior to the main treatment (usually surgery). The purpose is to improve survival and surgical outcomes. This review systematically appraises the literature investigating the use of neoadjuvant treatment for stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of neoadjuvant treatment in adults with stage III or stage IV melanoma according to the seventh edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 10 August 2021 inclusive: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and four trials registers, together with reference checking and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We also handsearched proceedings from specific conferences from 2016 to 2020 inclusive.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people with stage III and IV melanoma, comparing neoadjuvant treatment strategies (using targeted treatments, immunotherapies, radiotherapy, topical treatments or chemotherapy) with any of these agents or current standard of care (SOC), were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and adverse effects (AEs). Secondary outcomes included time to recurrence (TTR), quality of life (QOL), and overall response rate (ORR). We used GRADE to evaluate the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight RCTs involving 402 participants. Studies enrolled adults, mostly with stage III melanoma, investigated immunotherapies, chemotherapy, or targeted treatments, and compared these with surgical excision with or without adjuvant treatment. Duration of follow-up and therapeutic regimens varied, which, combined with heterogeneity in the population and definitions of the endpoints, precluded meta-analysis of all identified studies. We performed a meta-analysis including three studies. We are very uncertain if neoadjuvant treatment increases OS when compared to no neoadjuvant treatment (hazard ratio (HR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 1.21; 2 studies, 171 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Neoadjuvant treatment may increase the rate of AEs, but the evidence is very uncertain (26% versus 16%, risk ratio (RR) 1.58, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.55; 2 studies, 162 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain if neoadjuvant treatment increases TTR (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.17; 2 studies, 171 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Studies did not report ORR as a comparative outcome or measure QOL data. We are very uncertain whether neoadjuvant targeted treatment with dabrafenib and trametinib increases OS (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.25; 1 study, 21 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or TTR (HR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.22; 1 study, 21 participants; very low-certainty evidence) when compared to surgery. The study did not report comparative rates of AEs and overall response, and did not measure QOL. We are very uncertain if neoadjuvant immunotherapy with talimogene laherparepvec increases OS when compared to no neoadjuvant treatment (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.64; 1 study, 150 participants, very low-certainty evidence). It may have a higher rate of AEs, but the evidence is very uncertain (16.5% versus 5.8%, RR 2.84, 95% CI 0.96 to 8.37; 1 study, 142 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain if it increases TTR (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.79; 1 study, 150 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report comparative ORRs or measure QOL. OS was not reported for neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) when compared to the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab as adjuvant treatment. There may be little or no difference in the rate of AEs between these treatments (9%, RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.34; 1 study, 20 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study did not report comparative ORRs or measure TTR and QOL. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) likely results in little to no difference in OS when compared to neoadjuvant nivolumab monotherapy (P = 0.18; 1 study, 23 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). It may increase the rate of AEs, but the certainty of this evidence is very low (72.8% versus 8.3%, RR 8.73, 95% CI 1.29 to 59; 1 study, 23 participants); this trial was halted early due to observation of disease progression preventing surgical resection in the monotherapy arm and the high rate of treatment-related AEs in the combination arm. Neoadjuvant combination treatment may lead to higher ORR, but the evidence is very uncertain (72.8% versus 25%, RR 2.91, 95% CI 1.02 to 8.27; 1 study, 23 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It likely results in little to no difference in TTR (P = 0.19; 1 study, 23 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure QOL. OS was not reported for neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) when compared to neoadjuvant sequential immunotherapy (ipilimumab then nivolumab). Only Grade 3 to 4 immune-related AEs were reported; fewer were reported with combination treatment, and the sequential treatment arm closed early due to a high incidence of severe AEs. The neoadjuvant combination likely results in a higher ORR compared to sequential neoadjuvant treatment (60.1% versus 42.3%, RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.32; 1 study, 86 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure TTR and QOL. No data were reported on OS, AEs, TTR, or QOL for the comparison of neoadjuvant interferon (HDI) plus chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Neoadjuvant HDI plus chemotherapy may have little to no effect on ORR, but the evidence is very uncertain (33% versus 22%, RR 1.75, 95% CI 0.62 to 4.95; 1 study, 36 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain if neoadjuvant treatment increases OS or TTR compared with no neoadjuvant treatment, and it may be associated with a slightly higher rate of AEs. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of neoadjuvant treatment in clinical practice. Priorities for research include the development of a core outcome set for neoadjuvant trials that are adequately powered, with validation of pathological and radiological responses as intermediate endpoints, to investigate the relative benefits of neoadjuvant treatment compared with adjuvant treatment with immunotherapies or targeted therapies.

Direct and indirect effects of IFN-α2b in malignancy treatment: not only an archer but also an arrow

Interferon-α2b (IFN-α2b) is a highly active cytokine that belongs to the interferon-α (IFN-α) family. IFN-α2b has beneficial antiviral, antitumour, antiparasitic and immunomodulatory activities. Direct and indirect antiproliferative effects of IFN-α2b have been found to occur via multiple pathways, mainly the JAK-STAT pathway, in certain cancers. This article reviews mechanistic studies and clinical trials on IFN-α2b. Potential regulators of the function of IFN-α2b were also reviewed, which could be utilized to relieve the poor response to IFN-α2b. IFN-α2b can function not only by enhancing the systematic immune response but also by directly killing tumour cells. Different parts of JAK-STAT pathway activated by IFN-α2b, such as interferon alpha and beta receptors (IFNARs), Janus kinases (JAKs) and IFN‐stimulated gene factor 3 (ISGF3), might serve as potential target for enhancing the pharmacological action of IFN-α2b. Despite some issues that remain to be solved, based on current evidence, IFN-α2b can inhibit disease progression and improve the survival of patients with certain types of malignant tumours. More efforts should be made to address potential adverse effects and complications.

Melanoma Tumour Vascularization and Tissue-Resident Endothelial Progenitor Cells

The aggressiveness of solid cancers, such as melanoma, relies on their metastatic potential. It has become evident that this key cause of mortality is largely conferred by the tumour-associated stromal cells, especially endothelial cells. In addition to their essential role in the formation of the tumour vasculature, endothelial cells significantly contribute to the establishment of the tumour microenvironment, thus enabling the dissemination of cancer cells. Melanoma tumour vascularization occurs through diverse biological processes. Vasculogenesis is the formation of de novo blood vessels from endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs), and recent research has shown the role of EPCs in melanoma tumour vascularization. A more detailed understanding of the complex role of EPCs and how they contribute to the abnormal vessel structures in tumours is of importance. Moreover, anti-angiogenic drugs have a limited effect on melanoma tumour vascularization, and the role of these drugs on EPCs remains to be clarified. Overall, targeting cancer vasculature remains a challenge, and the role of anti-angiogenic drugs and combination therapies in melanoma, a focus of this review, is an area of extensive exploration.

Signal pathways of melanoma and targeted therapy

Melanoma is the most lethal skin cancer that originates from the malignant transformation of melanocytes. Although melanoma has long been regarded as a cancerous malignancy with few therapeutic options, increased biological understanding and unprecedented innovations in therapies targeting mutated driver genes and immune checkpoints have substantially improved the prognosis of patients. However, the low response rate and inevitable occurrence of resistance to currently available targeted therapies have posed the obstacle in the path of melanoma management to obtain further amelioration. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the mechanisms underlying melanoma pathogenesis more comprehensively, which might lead to more substantial progress in therapeutic approaches and expand clinical options for melanoma therapy. In this review, we firstly make a brief introduction to melanoma epidemiology, clinical subtypes, risk factors, and current therapies. Then, the signal pathways orchestrating melanoma pathogenesis, including genetic mutations, key transcriptional regulators, epigenetic dysregulations, metabolic reprogramming, crucial metastasis-related signals, tumor-promoting inflammatory pathways, and pro-angiogenic factors, have been systemically reviewed and discussed. Subsequently, we outline current progresses in therapies targeting mutated driver genes and immune checkpoints, as well as the mechanisms underlying the treatment resistance. Finally, the prospects and challenges in the development of melanoma therapy, especially immunotherapy and related ongoing clinical trials, are summarized and discussed.

RTK Inhibitors in Melanoma: From Bench to Bedside

MAPK (mitogen activated protein kinase) and PI3K/AKT (Phosphatidylinositol-3-Kinase and Protein Kinase B) pathways play a key role in melanoma progression and metastasis that are regulated by receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs). Although RTKs are mutated in a small percentage of melanomas, several receptors were found up regulated/altered in various stages of melanoma initiation, progression, or metastasis. Targeting RTKs remains a significant challenge in melanoma, due to their variable expression across different melanoma stages of progression and among melanoma subtypes that consequently affect response to treatment and disease progression. In this review, we discuss in details the activation mechanism of several key RTKs: type III: c-KIT (mast/stem cell growth factor receptor); type I: EGFR (Epidermal growth factor receptor); type VIII: HGFR (hepatocyte growth factor receptor); type V: VEGFR (Vascular endothelial growth factor), structure variants, the function of their structural domains, and their alteration and its association with melanoma initiation and progression. Furthermore, several RTK inhibitors targeting the same receptor were tested alone or in combination with other therapies, yielding variable responses among different melanoma groups. Here, we classified RTK inhibitors by families and summarized all tested drugs in melanoma indicating the rationale behind the use of these drugs in each melanoma subgroups from preclinical studies to clinical trials with a specific focus on their purpose of treatment, resulted effect, and outcomes.

Neoadjuvant intravitreal ranibizumab treatment in high-risk ocular melanoma patients: a two-stage single-centre phase II single-arm study

Despite an established history of intraocular antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents therapy in a variety of ocular pathologies as well as other cancer forms, use in the primary treatment of uveal melanoma has not been well assessed. This was a two-stage therapeutic and exploratory phase II, non-randomised, single centre trial involving intraocular treatment with 0.5 mg in 0.05 ml of ranibizumab via six intravitreous injections over 6 months in patients with primary ocular melanoma that otherwise required radical surgery because of tumour size. Seven patients were recruited with a median age of 66 years. At baseline, the longest basal diameter was 15.1 mm (mean, range 10-20.4 mm) with a height measured by ultrasonography of 9.2 mm (mean, range 6.6-12.7 mm). No patients achieved complete or partial response at any visit. All required enucleation. Histopathological analysis revealed mixed cell melanoma in 5/7 (71%) and spindle cell morphology in 2/7 (29%) with ciliary body involvement in 4/7 (57%) and the presence of closed loops also in 4/7 (57%). Genetic analysis demonstrated loss of chromosome 3 in 5/7 (71%) but abnormalities in chromosome 1,6 or 8 in all cases. Our study was terminated early as alternative treatments were clearly superior for local tumour control. There continues to be a role of intravitreal anti-VEGF for the treatment of the sequelae of local radiotherapy in the form of radiation retinopathy and so these agents may be used as adjuncts in the treatment of uveal melanoma rather than as a primary treatment.

Vascular endothelial growth factor/semaphorin-3A ratio and SEMA3A expression in cutaneous malignant melanoma

Breslow thickness and Clark level are still important factors for cutaneous melanoma, but do not provide a precise prognosis in all cases. It is necessary to find new factors capable of a more accurate prediction of the tumor course. Angiogenesis is essential for tumor development and progression and is regulated by vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) and semaphorins (SEMA), in particular, SEMA3A inhibits angiogenesis by affecting VEGF signaling. However, the prognostic role of angiogenetic factors remains unclear. To date, no information is available on SEMA3A in human melanoma. Microvessel density, immunohistochemical and mRNA VEGF and SEMA3A expression level in 60 thin (Breslow thickness ≤ 1.0 mm), 60 intermediate (1.1-4.0 mm) and 50 thick (>4.0 mm) primary human cutaneous melanomas were investigated and related to clinical/pathological parameters and disease-specific survival. No positive association between Breslow thickness, Clark level, metastasis presence and survival was identified; Clark level was poorly related to survival. VEGF and microvessel density were significantly higher in intermediate and thick melanomas and related to Breslow thickness and Clark level but not to metastasis status and survival. On the contrary, SEMA3A was significantly reduced in intermediate and thick melanomas and associated to metastasis and poor survival. VEGF/SEMA3A ratio was higher in the worst prognosis, resulting the most closely related factor with metastasis and survival. SEMA3A expression and VEGF/SEMA3A ratio turned out to be valuable prognostic biomarkers in patients affected by cutaneous melanoma, in particular with Breslow thickness >1 mm. SEMA3A might serve as a candidate tumor suppressor in cutaneous melanoma therapy.

Role of angiogenesis in melanoma progression: Update on key angiogenic mechanisms and other associated components

Angiogenesis, the formation of new blood vessels from existing blood vessels, is a complex and highly regulated process that plays a role in a wide variety of physiological and pathological processes. In malignancy, angiogenesis is essential for neoplastic cells to acquire the nutrients and oxygen critical for their continued proliferation. Angiogenesis requires a sequence of well-coordinated events mediated by a number of tightly regulated interactions between pro-angiogenic factors and their corresponding receptors expressed on various vascular components (e.g., endothelial cells and pericytes) and stromal components forming the extracellular matrix. In this review, we discuss the functional roles of key growth factors and cytokines known to promote angiogenesis in cutaneous melanoma and key factors implicated in the extracellular matrix remodeling that acts synergistically with angiogenesis to promote tumor progression in melanoma, incorporating some of the most up-to-date basic science knowledge from recently published in vivo and in vitro experimental studies.

Elevated kindlin-2 promotes tumour progression and angiogenesis through the mTOR/VEGFA pathway in melanoma

Background: In our previous study, kindlin-2 promoted skin wound healing and decreased the permeability of neovascularization during angiogenesis. Herein, we explored the biological function and underlying mechanism of kindlin-2 in cutaneous melanoma.

Methods and Results: Through a series of in vitro assays, we found that high levels of kindlin-2 promoted migration and invasion of melanoma cells without influencing cell proliferation. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and western blot analyses showed that upregulated kindlin-2 promoted the cellular epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Importantly, we found that melanoma cells overexpressing kindlin-2 promoted angiogenesis and VEGFA secretion in vitro and facilitated tumour growth and lung metastasis in vivo. To unveil the underlying mechanism, we conducted Next-generation sequencing (NGS) and differential expression analyses. Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) analysis showed that overlapping differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were primarily enriched in the TGF-β, mTOR and VEGF signalling pathways. Then, we confirmed that the mTOR/VEGFA pathway was activated during the process of kindlin-2-induced melanoma progression and angiogenesis. Moreover, we demonstrated that kindlin-2 was significantly overexpressed in clinical melanoma samples and that a high level of kindlin-2 predicted a poor prognosis.

Conclusions: Taken together, these findings showed that kindlin-2 promotes angiogenesis and tumour progression via the mTOR/VEGFA pathway.

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.

Therapeutic Antibodies in Cancer Therapy

The therapeutic arsenal in solid tumors comprises different anticancer strategies with diverse chemotherapeutic agents and a growing number of biological substances. Large clinical study-based chemotherapeutic protocols combined with biologicals have become an important component in (neo-) adjuvant therapy alongside surgery in solid cancers as well as radiation therapy in some instances. In recent years, monoclonal antibodies have entered the mainstream of cancer therapy. Their first use was as antagonists of oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases, but today monoclonal antibodies have emerged as long-sought vehicles for the targeted delivery of potent chemotherapeutic agents and as powerful tools to manipulate anticancer immune responses. There is a growing number of FDA approved monoclonal antibodies and small molecules targeting specific types of cancer suggestive of the clinical relevance of this approach.Targeted cancer therapies , also referred to as personalized medicine, are being studied for use alone, in combination with other targeted therapies, and in combination with chemotherapy. The use of monoclonal antibodies in colorectal and gastric cancer for example have shown best outcome when combined with chemotherapy, even though single agent anti-EGFR antibodies seem to be active in particular setting of metastatic colorectal cancer patients. However, it is not well defined whether the addition of anti-VEGF - and anti-EGFR strategies to chemotherapy could improve outcome in those patients susceptible to colorectal cancer-related metastases resection. Among the most promising approaches to activating therapeutic antitumor immunity is the blockade of immune checkpoints, exemplified by the recently FDA-approved agent, Ipilimumab, an antibody that blocks the coinhibitory receptor CTLA-4. Capitalizing on the success of Ipilimumab, agents that target a second coinhibitory receptor, PD-1, or its ligand, PD-L1, are in clinical development. This section attempts to discuss recent progress of targeted agents and in tackling a more general target applicable to gastrointestinal cancer .

Anti-bevacizumab idiotype antibody vaccination is effective in inducing vascular endothelial growth factor-binding response, impairing tumor outgrowth

Tumors require blood supply and, to overcome this restriction, induce angiogenesis. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) plays an important role in this process, which explains the great number of antiangiogenic therapies targeting VEGF. The research and development of targeted therapy has led to the approval of bevacizumab, a humanized anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody (mAb), in clinical settings. However, side effects have been reported, usually as a consequence of bolus-dose administration of the antibody. This limitation could be circumvented through the use of anti-idiotype (Id) antibodies. In the present study, we evaluated the efficacy of an active VEGF-binding immune response generated by an anti-bevacizumab idiotype mAb, 10.D7. The 10.D7 anti-Id mAb vaccination led to detectable levels of VEGF-binding anti-anti-Id antibodies. In order to examine whether this humoral immune response could have implications for tumor development, 10.D7-immunized mice were challenged with B16-F10 tumor cells. Mice immunized with 10.D7 anti-Id mAb revealed reduced tumor growth when compared to control groups. Histological analyses of tumor sections from 10.D7-immunized mice showed increased necrotic areas, decreased CD31-positive vascular density and reduced CD68-positive cell infiltration. Our results encourage further therapeutic studies, particularly if one considers that the anti-Id therapeutic vaccination maintains stable levels of VEGF-binding antibodies, which might be useful in the control of tumor relapse.

Angiogenesis in melanoma: an update with a focus on current targeted therapies

Angiogenesis plays a crucial role in melanoma metastasis and progression. In recent years, numerous studies have investigated the prognostic and clinical significance of this phenomenon, and the development of molecular techniques has enabled us to achieve a better understanding of angiogenesis in melanoma. Herein, we review the current state of knowledge regarding angiogenesis in melanoma, including the pathophysiological, histological and immunohistochemical aspects of this phenomenon. We also review the molecular pathways involved in angiogenesis and the interplay between different components that might be manipulated in the future development of efficient targeted therapies. Recently developed targeted antiangiogenic therapies in clinical trials and included in the treatment of advanced-stage melanoma are also reviewed.

A phase II study of cediranib, an oral VEGF inhibitor, in previously untreated patients with metastatic or recurrent malignant melanoma

PURPOSE

A two stage multi-institution Phase II study was undertaken by the Princess Margaret Hospital Consortium to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of oral cediranib, an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1 and 2, in patients with previously untreated advanced malignant melanoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between May 2006 and April 2008, 24 patients (median age 65 years) with advanced malignant melanoma were treated with oral cediranib. Cediranib was given on a continuous, oral once daily schedule of 45 mg, on a 28 day cycle.

RESULTS

Of the 17 patients evaluable for response, there was stable disease in 8 patients, and progressive disease in 9 patients, with no objective responses seen. Only 2 patients had stable disease >/= 6 months, thus the study was terminated at the end of stage 1 accrual. The overall median survival was 9.9 months, and the median time to progression was 3.5 months. The most frequent non-hematologic adverse events were hypertension (78%), fatigue (69%), diarrhea (69%) and anorexia and nausea (each 57%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although 2 patients had stable disease at 6 months, the short median time to progression and lack of any objective responses indicate that single agent cediranib at this dose and schedule is not sufficiently active to warrant study continuation.

Dacarbazine in combination with bevacizumab for the treatment of unresectable/metastatic melanoma: a phase II study

The combined treatment of dacarbazine with an antiangiogenic drug such as bevacizumab may potentiate the therapeutic effects of dacarbazine in metastatic melanoma (MM). Preliminary antitumour activity of dacarbazine plus bevacizumab is evaluated, together with the toxicity and safety profile, in MM patients. This prospective, open-label, phase II study included patients with previously untreated MM or unresectable melanoma. Patients received dacarbazine and bevacizumab until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. The primary efficacy variable was the overall response rate. The secondary efficacy parameters included duration of response, duration of stable disease, time to progression/progression-free survival, time to treatment failure and overall survival. The safety analysis included recordings of adverse events and exposure to study treatment. The intention-to-treat population included 37 patients (24 men and 13 women, mean age 54.2±13.1 years). Overall response rate was 18.9% (seven patients achieved a response) and clinical benefit was 48.6%. In patients who achieved a response, the median duration of response was 16.9 months and the median duration of stable disease was 12.5 months. The median time to progression/progression-free survival and time to treatment failure were 5.5 and 3.1 months, respectively. The median overall survival was 11.4 months. Almost all patients (94.6%) experienced at least one adverse event; however, no new area of toxicity of bevacizumab emerged. The dacarbazine/bevacizumab combination provides benefits compared with dacarbazine monotherapy in historical controls, with an acceptable safety profile. This combination appears to be a valid option in specific subgroups of patients, namely, those triple negative (BRAF, C-KIT and NRAS wild type) or with a BRAF mutation who have already received, or are not eligible for, immunomodulating or targeted agents.

Blocking FGF2 with a new specific monoclonal antibody impairs angiogenesis and experimental metastatic melanoma, suggesting a potential role in adjuvant settings

Compelling evidence suggests that fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF2), overexpressed in melanomas, plays an important role in tumor growth, angiogenesis and metastasis. In this study, we evaluated the therapeutic use of a new anti-FGF2 monoclonal antibody (mAb), 3F12E7, using for that the B16-F10 melanoma model. The FGF2 neutralizing effect of this antibody was certified by in vitro assays, which allowed the further track of its possible in vivo application. 3F12E7 mAb could be retained in B16-F10 tumors, as shown by antibody low-pH elution and nuclear medicine studies, and also led to reduction in number and size of metastatic foci in lungs, when treatment starts one day after intravenous injection of B16-F10 cells. Such data were accompanied by decreased CD34(+) tumor vascular density and impaired subcutaneous tumor outgrowth. Treatments starting one week after melanoma cell intravenous injection did not reduce tumor burden, remaining the therapeutic effectiveness restricted to early-adopted regimens. Altogether, the presented anti-FGF2 3F12E7 mAb stands as a promising agent to treat metastatic melanoma tumors in adjuvant settings.

Immunogenic, cellular, and angiogenic drivers of tumor dormancy--a melanoma view

In tumor cells, the ability to maintain viability over long time periods without proliferation is referred to as a state of dormancy. Maintenance of dormancy is controlled by numerous cellular and environmental factors, from immune surveillance and tumor-stroma interaction to intracellular signaling. Interference of dormancy (to an 'awaken' state) is associated with reduced response to therapy, resulting in relapse or in metastatic burst. Thus, maintaining a dormant state should prolong therapeutic responses and delay metastasis. Technical obstacles in studying tumor dormancy have limited our understanding of underlying mechanisms and hampered our ability to target dormant cells. In this review, we summarize the progress of research in the field of immunogenic, angiogenic, and cellular dormancy in diverse malignancies with particular attention to our current understanding in melanoma.

Metastatic melanoma treatment: Combining old and new therapies

Metastatic melanoma is an aggressive form of cancer characterised by poor prognosis and a complex etiology. Until 2010, the treatment options for metastatic melanoma were very limited. Largely ineffective dacarbazine, temozolamide or fotemustine were the only agents in use for 35 years. In recent years, the development of molecularly targeted inhibitors in parallel with the development of checkpoint inhibition immunotherapies has rapidly improved the outcomes for metastatic melanoma patients. Despite these new therapies showing initial promise; resistance and poor duration of response have limited their effectiveness as monotherapies. Here we provide an overview of the history of melanoma treatment, as well as the current treatments in development. We also discuss the future of melanoma treatment as we go beyond monotherapies to a combinatorial approach. Combining older therapies with the new molecular and immunotherapies will be the most promising way forward for treatment of metastatic melanoma.

Predicting Overall Survival in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma on Antiangiogenic Therapy and RECIST Stable Disease on Initial Posttherapy Images Using CT Texture Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to use CT texture analysis to predict overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic melanoma and stable disease (SD) according to the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) on initial posttherapy CT images.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 42 patients with metastatic melanoma who received bevacizumab therapy in the context of a randomized prospective phase II clinical trial. Target lesions on the baseline and initial posttherapy contrast-enhanced CT examinations were evaluated by CT texture analysis using TexRAD software before and after image filtering in patients with RECIST SD on initial posttherapy images. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the associations of CT texture analysis measurements and of other patient factors with OS. The AUC was used to evaluate predictive accuracy.

RESULTS

In multivariate analysis (in 23 patients with RECIST SD; median OS, 1.51 years), absolute change in mean positive pixels at spatial scaling filter of 4 mm, change in tumor size, and baseline serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level were predictors of OS (hazard ratio [HR] = 5.05 for decrease in mean positive pixels at spatial scaling filter of 4 mm vs increase, p = 0.007; HR = 4.14 for > 5% increase in tumor size vs otherwise, p = 0.025; and HR = 1.29 for every 100 IU/L increase in baseline LDH level, p = 0.068). A prognostic index containing these three factors was highly accurate for predicting OS at 18 months (AUC = 0.917).

CONCLUSION

In patients with metastatic melanoma and RECIST SD on initial post-therapy CT images, a model incorporating CT texture analysis of target lesions, tumor size changes, and baseline LDH levels was highly accurate in predicting OS.

Increased visceral to subcutaneous fat ratio is associated with decreased overall survival in patients with metastatic melanoma receiving anti-angiogenic therapy

BACKGROUND

Body fat distribution is an emerging prognostic indicator in patients treated with anti-angiogenic (AA) therapy. We sought to evaluate the association of visceral and subcutaneous fat with progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with AA therapy.

METHODS

Stage IV melanoma patients received bevacizumab ± interferon-alpha. Total abdominal fat, visceral fat area (VFA) and subcutaneous fat area (SFA) were measured at L3-L4 on CT images (cm(2)). PFS and OS were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the association of fat and clinical variables with PFS and OS. Prediction accuracy was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curve with area under the curve (AUC).

RESULTS

Forty-two patients were evaluated. Median VFA/SFA and body mass index (BMI) were used to group patients into high and low cohorts. PFS and OS were significantly decreased in patients with high VFA/SFA versus low (PFS, p=0.009; OS, p = 0.007), but not for BMI (PFS, p=0.774; OS, p=0.881). VFA/SFA, LDH and liver metastasis (LM) were predictors of PFS and OS on multivariate analysis. A prognostic score combining VFA/SFA, LDH, and presence or absence of LM had a higher accuracy for predicting PFS at 3 months (AUC 0.759) and OS at 24 months (AUC 0.846) than LDH and LM alone (PFS, AUC 0.705; OS, AUC 0.786).

CONCLUSION

Increased VFA/SFA is associated with decreased PFS and OS in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with AA therapy, indicating body fat distribution is an important prognostic factor.

Phase 2 study of sunitinib in patients with metastatic mucosal or acral melanoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with mucosal and acral melanomas have limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. Mutations of the KIT oncogene in these melanoma subtypes provide a potential therapeutic target.

METHODS

A multicenter phase 2 trial of sunitinib was conducted in patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma of a mucosal or acral primary origin. Patients were treated in 2 cohorts: cohort A received sunitinib at a dose of 50 mg daily for 4 weeks of a 6-week cycle, and cohort B received sunitinib at a dose of 37.5 mg daily on a continuous basis. Dose reductions were permitted for treatment-related toxicities, and tumor assessments were performed every 2 months.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were enrolled: 21 in cohort A and 31 in cohort B. Four patients had confirmed partial responses, which lasted 5 to 10 months (1 with a KIT mutation). In both cohorts, the proportion of patients alive and progression-free at 2 months was 52% (95% confidence interval, 38%-66%); this was significantly larger than the hypothesized null of 5%. There was no significant difference in response or overall survival between the 25% of patients with a KIT mutation and those without one (response rate, 7.7% vs 9.7%; overall survival, 6.4 vs 8.6 months). The overall disease control rate was 44%, and a high rate of toxicity was associated with the treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Sunitinib showed activity in the treatment of mucosal and acral melanoma that was not dependent on the presence of a KIT mutation. However, the medication was poorly tolerated, and there were no prolonged responses. Cancer 2015;121:4007-4015. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

Phase I/II Trial of Imatinib and Bevacizumab in Patients With Advanced Melanoma and Other Advanced Cancers

BACKGROUND

Vascular endothelial growth factor and platelet-derived growth factor signaling in the tumor microenvironment appear to cooperate in promoting tumor angiogenesis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a phase I trial combining bevacizumab (i.v. every 2 weeks) and imatinib (oral daily). Once a recommended phase II dose combination was established, a phase II trial was initiated in patients with metastatic melanoma. A Simon 2-stage design was used with 23 patients required in the first stage and 41 patients in total should the criteria to proceed be met. We required that 50% of the patients be progression-free at 16 weeks. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) and power Doppler ultrasonography were performed in patients with metastatic tumors amenable to imaging with these methods at baseline and after 4 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 17 patients were accrued to 4 dose and combination levels. Bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks could be safely combined with imatinib 800 mg daily. Common toxicities included fatigue, nausea, vomiting, edema, proteinuria, and anemia, but were not commonly severe. A total of 23 patients with metastatic melanoma (48% with American Joint Commission on Cancer stage M1c; median age, 63 years) were enrolled in the first stage of phase II. The 16-week progression-free survival rate was 35%, leading to termination of phase II after the first stage. In the small subset of patients who remained on study with lesions evaluable by DCE-MRI, significant decreases in tumor vascular permeability were noted, despite early disease progression using the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors.

CONCLUSION

Bevacizumab and imatinib can be safely combined at the maximum doses used for each agent. We did not observe significant clinical activity with this regimen in melanoma patients.

Evidence of Th2 polarization of the sentinel lymph node (SLN) in melanoma

Melanoma has a propensity for lymphatogenous metastasis. Improved understanding of the sentinel lymph node (SLN) immunological environment may improve outcomes. The immune phenotype of fresh melanoma SLNs (n = 13) were compared to fresh control lymph nodes (n = 13) using flow cytometry. RNA was isolated from CD4⁺ T cells of the SLN and control lymph node and assessed for Th1/Th2 gene expression pathways using qRT-PCR. In addition, VEGF expression was compared between primary melanoma (n = 6) and benign nevi (n = 6) using immunohistochemistry. Melanoma SLNs had fewer CD8⁺ T cells compared to controls (9.2% vs. 19.5%, p = 0.0005). The CD8⁺ T cells within the SLN appeared to have an exhausted phenotype demonstrated by increased PD-1 mRNA expression (2.2% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.004) and a five-fold increase in CTLA-4 mRNA expression. The SLN also contained an increased number of CD14 (22.7% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.009) and CD68 (9.3% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.001) macrophages, and CD20 B cells (31.1% vs. 20.7%, p = 0.008), suggesting chronic inflammation. RT-PCR demonstrated a significant Th2 bias within the SLN. In vitro studies demonstrated a similar Th2 polarization with VEGF treatment of control lymph nodes. The primary melanoma demonstrated strong VEGF expression and an increase in VEGFR1 within the SLN. Melanoma is associated with Th2-mediated “chronic inflammation,” fewer cytotoxic T cells, and an exhausted T cell phenotype within the SLN combined with VEGF overproduction by the primary melanoma. These immunologic changes precede nodal metastasis and suggests consideration of VEGF inhibitors in future immunotherapy studies.

Microvessel density, lymphovascular density, and lymphovascular invasion in primary cutaneous melanoma-correlation with histopathologic prognosticators and BRAF status

The relationship between microvessel density (MVD), lymphovascular density (LVD), and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) in primary cutaneous melanoma (PCM) remains unclear. Given this, a total of 102 PCMs were assessed for MVD (vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 and Endocan), LVD (D2-40), and LVI (immunostaining with D2-40/S-100 and hematoxylin and eosin); tumoral S-100A13, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2, and Endocan; and BRAF status. LVD was associated with MVD (P = .01). MVD was higher in PCMs with depth greater than or equal to 2 mm and ulceration (P = .04, .05), whereas LVD was higher in PCMs with depth greater than or equal to 2 mm and mitoses (P = .03, .02). After adjusting for MVD and LVD, only ulceration was associated with LVI (P < .02). A BRAF mutation was seen in 30.4% cases, and when present, both LVD and host response (P = .0008 and .04, respectively) were significantly associated with MVD. Immunostaining with S-100A13 was noted in 99% of cases and a significant association noted only with ulceration (P = .05). Immunostaining increased LVI positivity (46.5% versus 4.9% by hematoxylin and eosin, P < .0001). MVD and LVD are not associated with LVI, appear to be closely related with each other, and are associated with select markers of poor prognosticative value. The association between a host response and LVD and MVD in PCMs with a BRAF mutation suggests that they exhibit potential for strategizing immunotherapies.

Advances in targeted therapy for unresectable melanoma: new drugs and combinations

Melanoma is the most deadly cutaneous cancer primarily derived from melanocytes with a poor prognosis in advanced stage. The therapy regimen for early stage melanoma patients is surgical resection with adjuvant IFN-alpha-2b therapy. For metastatic lesions, standard chemotherapy such as dacarbazine (DTIC) has not achieved a satisfying response rate. Therefore, new approaches to manage this deadly disease are highly expected to enhance the cure rate and to extend clinical benefits to patients with unresectable melanoma. Fortunately, the targeted therapeutic drugs and immunotherapy such as vemurafenib, dabrafenib, ipilimumab, and trametinib have shown their special advantage in the treatment of advanced melanoma. This article is to overview the advances in targeted therapy for unresectable melanoma patients.

Mechanisms of tumour vascularization in cutaneous malignant melanoma: clinical implications

Malignant melanoma represents < 10% of all skin cancers but is responsible for the majority of skin-cancer-related deaths. Metastatic melanoma has historically been considered as one of the most therapeutically challenging malignancies. Fortunately, for the first time after decades of basic research and clinical investigation, new drugs have produced major clinical responses. Angiogenesis has been considered an important target for cancer treatment. Initial efforts have focused primarily on targeting endothelial and tumour-related vascular endothelial growth factor signalling. Here, we review different mechanisms of tumour vascularization described in melanoma and discuss the potential clinical implications.

Targeting SRPK1 to control VEGF-mediated tumour angiogenesis in metastatic melanoma

Background:

Current therapies for metastatic melanoma are targeted either at cancer mutations driving growth (e.g., vemurafenib) or immune-based therapies (e.g., ipilimumab). Tumour progression also requires angiogenesis, which is regulated by VEGF-A, itself alternatively spliced to form two families of isoforms, pro- and anti-angiogenic. Metastatic melanoma is associated with a splicing switch to pro-angiogenic VEGF-A, previously shown to be regulated by SRSF1 phosphorylation by SRPK1. Here, we show a novel approach to preventing angiogenesis—targeting splicing factor kinases that are highly expressed in melanomas.

Methods:

We used RT–PCR, western blotting and immunohistochemistry to investigate SRPK1, SRSF1 and VEGF expression in tumour cells, and in vivo xenograft assays to investigate SRPK1 knockdown and inhibition in vivo.

Results:

In both uveal and cutaneous melanoma cell lines, SRPK1 was highly expressed, and inhibition of SRPK1 by knockdown or with pharmacological inhibitors reduced pro-angiogenic VEGF expression maintaining the production of anti-angiogenic VEGF isoforms. Both pharmacological SRPK1 inhibitors and SRPK1 knockdown reduced growth of human melanomas in vivo, but neither affected cell proliferation in vitro.

Conclusions:

These results suggest that selective blocking of pro-angiogenic isoforms by inhibiting splice-site selection with SRPK1 inhibitors reduces melanoma growth. SRPK1 inhibitors may be used as therapeutic agents.

Antibody therapies for melanoma: new and emerging opportunities to activate immunity (Review)

The interface between malignant melanoma and patient immunity has long been recognised and efforts to treat this most lethal form of skin cancer by activating immune responses with cytokine, vaccine and also antibody immunotherapies have demonstrated promise in limited subsets of patients. In the present study, we discuss different antibody immunotherapy approaches evaluated in the context of melanoma, each designed to act on distinct targets and to employ different mechanisms to restrict tumour growth and spread. Monoclonal antibodies recognising melanoma-associated antigens such as CSPG4/MCSP and targeting elements of tumour-associated vasculature (VEGF) have constituted long-standing translational approaches aimed at reducing melanoma growth and metastasis. Recent insights into mechanisms of immune regulation and tumour-immune cell interactions have helped to identify checkpoint molecules on immune (CTLA4, PD-1) and tumour (PD-L1) cells as promising therapeutic targets. Checkpoint blockade with antibodies to activate immune responses and perhaps to counteract melanoma-associated immunomodulatory mechanisms led to the first clinical breakthrough in the form of an anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibody. Novel modalities to target key mechanisms of immune suppression and to redirect potent effector cell subsets against tumours are expected to improve clinical outcomes and to provide previously unexplored avenues for therapeutic interventions.

Phase II study evaluating the efficacy, safety, and pharmacodynamic correlative study of dual antiangiogenic inhibition using bevacizumab in combination with sorafenib in patients with advanced malignant melanoma

PURPOSE

Melanomas are vascular tumors with a high incidence of BRAF mutations driving tumor proliferation. Complete inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling has potential for enhanced antitumor efficacy.

METHODS

Patients with advanced melanoma and adequate organ function were eligible. Sorafenib was given orally at 200 mg BiD for 5 days every week; bevacizumab was administered 5 mg/kg intravenously every 14 days. The primary objective was to determine clinical biological activity. The secondary objectives were safety, tolerability, and time to progression (TTP). Pharmacodynamic analysis included serum VEGF and soluble VEGF receptor-1 and VEGF receptor-2 performed at baseline, C1D15 and C2D1. The study was terminated during the first stage of a Simon two-stage design, after 14 of planned 21 subjects were enrolled.

RESULTS

Of the 14 patients who received treatment, no objective tumor responses were observed. Stable disease (SD) ≥16 weeks was observed in 57 % patients, including three patients with SD lasting ≥1 year. Median TTP was 32 weeks. The most frequently reported drug-related adverse events (AEs) were hand-foot syndrome (57.1 %), fatigue (57.1 %), hypertension (64.3 %), and proteinuria (35.7). Grade 3/4 drug-related AEs were hypertension (14.2 %), hand-foot syndrome, proteinuria, and thrombocytopenia (7 % each). Patients with low VEGF (<300 pg/ml) experienced longer TTP than those with high VEGF [median 50 vs. 15 weeks, p = 0.02). A similar pattern was seen for VEGFR1 and VEGFR2, although it did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined VEGF/VEGFR blockade using bevacizumab with sorafenib shows clinical activity. The linkage between VEGF levels and time to tumor progression needs further exploration.

Adjuvant bevacizumab in patients with melanoma at high risk of recurrence (AVAST-M): preplanned interim results from a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody that targets VEGF, has shown restricted activity in patients with advanced melanoma. We aimed to assess the role of bevacizumab as adjuvant treatment for patients with resected melanoma at high risk of recurrence. We report results from the preplanned interim analysis.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled phase 3 trial at 48 centres in the UK between July 18, 2007, and March 29, 2012. Patients aged 16 years or older with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage (AJCC) stage IIB, IIC, and III cutaneous melanoma were randomly allocated (1:1), via a central, computer-based minimisation procedure, to receive intravenous bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg, every 3 weeks for 1 year, or to observation. Randomisation was stratified by Breslow thickness of the primary tumour, N stage according to AJCC staging criteria, ulceration of the primary tumour, and patient sex. The primary endpoint was overall survival; secondary endpoints included disease-free interval, distant-metastases interval and quality of life. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered as an International Standardised Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN81261306.

FINDINGS

1343 patients were randomised to either the bevacizumab group (n=671) or the observation group (n=672). Median follow-up was 25 months (IQR 16-37) in the bevacizumab group and 25 months (17-37) in the observation group. At the time of interim analysis, 286 (21%) of 1343 enrolled patients had died: 140 (21%) of 671 patients in the bevacizumab group, and 146 (22%) of 672 patients in the observation group. 134 (96%) of patients in the bevacizumab group died because of melanoma versus 139 (95%) in the observation group. We noted no significant difference in overall survival between treatment groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0.97, 95% CI 0.78-1.22; p=0.76); this finding persisted after adjustment for stratification variables (HR 1.03; 95% CI 0.81-1.29; p=0.83). Median duration of treatment with bevacizumab was 51 weeks (IQR 21-52) and dose intensity was 86% (41-96), showing good tolerability. 180 grade 3 or 4 adverse events were recorded in 101 (15%) of 671 patients in the bevacizumab group, and 36 (5%) of 672 patients in the observation group. Bevacizumab resulted in a higher incidence of grade 3 hypertension than did observation (41 [6%] vs one [<1%]). There was an improvement in disease-free interval for patients in the bevacizumab group compared with those in the observation group (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70-0.98, p=0.03), but no significant difference between groups for distant-metastasis-free interval (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.73-1.06, p=0.18). No significant differences were noted between treatment groups in the standardised area under the curve for any of the quality-of-life scales over 36 months. Three adverse drug reactions were regarded as both serious and unexpected: one patient had optic neuritis after the first bevacizumab infusion, a second patient had persistent erectile dysfunction, and a third patient died of a haemopericardium after receiving two bevacizumab infusions and was later identified to have had significant predisposing cardiovascular risk factors.

INTERPRETATION

Bevacizumab has promising tolerability. Longer follow-up is needed to identify an effect on the primary endpoint of overall survival at 5 years.

BRAF and beyond: Tailoring strategies for the individual melanoma patient

Until recently, options for therapy in metastatic melanoma were limited. The understanding of immune check-point blockade and the discovery of molecular pathways involving driver mutations like BRAF has transformed the therapeutic landscape in this disease. Ipilimumab was the first drug shown to improve survival while vemurafenib demonstrated rapid responses never seen before in melanoma. Drugs from these classes and others are now in advanced stages of development and primed to positively impact patient survival in an incremental fashion. In this review, we highlight some of the developments during this renaissance in melanoma therapy and discuss agents of promise. Clinical challenges we face include individualizing therapy for patients, overcoming resistance to molecularly targeted therapy and developing rationale combinations or sequences of drugs. A concerted bench and bedside effort in this direction will undoubtedly keep melanoma in the forefront in an era of personalized medicine.

Metastatic melanoma: lactate dehydrogenase levels and CT imaging findings of tumor devascularization allow accurate prediction of survival in patients treated with bevacizumab

PURPOSE

To predict survival in patients with metastatic melanoma by evaluating a combination of serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level and initial computed tomographic (CT) findings of tumor devascularization after antiangiogenic therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consent was waived for this institutional review board-approved, retrospective, secondary analysis. Forty-four patients with metastatic melanoma received bevacizumab therapy in a randomized prospective phase II trial. Target lesions on the initial posttherapy CT images were evaluated by using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, the Choi criteria, and Morphology, Attenuation, Size, and Structure (MASS) criteria. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the association of baseline clinical variables including serum LDH and imaging findings with progression-free and overall survival. The receiver operating characteristic curve with area under the curve (AUC) was used to evaluate accuracy.

RESULTS

In multivariate analysis, a high baseline serum LDH level was associated with decreased progression-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.29 for each increase of 100 IU/L; P = .002) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.44 for each increase of 100 IU/L; P = .001). Evaluation with MASS criteria of the first CT examination after therapy strongly predicted progression-free (P < .001) and overall (P < .001) survival. Baseline serum LDH level was moderately accurate for predicting progression-free survival at 9 months (AUC = 0.793) and overall survival at 18 months (AUC = 0.689). The combination of baseline serum LDH levels and evaluation with MASS criteria at the first CT examination after therapy had significantly higher accuracy for predicting progression-free survival at 9 months (AUC = 0.969) and overall survival at 18 months (AUC = 0.813) than did baseline serum LDH levels alone for prediction of progression-free survival (P = .020).

CONCLUSION

A combination of baseline serum LDH levels and evaluation with MASS criteria at the first CT examination after bevacizumab therapy had the highest accuracy for predicting survival in patients with metastatic melanoma.

Revisiting the role of systemic therapies in patients with metastatic melanoma to the CNS

The CNS is a common site of metastasis in patients with malignant melanoma. Locoregional control either with surgery or radiotherapy is first-line treatment for patients with brain metastasis should they be suitable candidates. For those patients who are not and those who progress after previous treatment, there is an unmet clinical need for effective systemic therapies. Systemic cytotoxics, such as temozolamide and fotemustine, have only modest activity, resulting in a median progression-free survival ranging from 1-2 months, in patients with metastatic melanoma to the brain. Newer systemic treatments such as vemurafenib and ipilimumab have been approved for the treatment of melanoma, but evidence regarding their activity in brain metastases is inconclusive due to the limited access of patients to clinical trials. This is now being revised and more data are emerging supporting the inclusion of patients with brain metastasis in trials. In this review, the authors present data regarding the efficacy of systemically administered therapies in patients with metastatic melanoma to the brain.

ECOG phase II trial of graded-dose peginterferon α-2b in patients with metastatic melanoma overexpressing basic fibroblast growth factor (E2602)

PURPOSE

We investigated the use of graded-dose peginterferon α-2b (Peg-IFN) in patients with stage IV melanoma overexpressing basic fibroblast growth factor (FGF-2). The primary objective was suppression of plasma FGF-2 to within reference range (≤ 7.5 pg/mL).

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Plasma FGF-2 was measured at baseline (step 1), and patients with concentrations of 15 pg/mL or more were eligible for study treatment (step 2). Peg-IFN was given weekly at a starting dose of 0.5 μg/kg/wk with increment every 3 weeks based on serial FGF-2 concentrations.

RESULTS

Two hundred seven patients entered step 1; 45 (22%) overexpressed FGF-2 (median = 22 pg/dL). Twenty-nine eligible patients entered step 2 and received treatment. Patients' median age was 64 years (range, 29-84 years). Most had more than two prior therapies. FGF-2 decreased in 28 (97%) patients, with suppression to reference range in 10 (35%). Median time to FGF-2 suppression was 30 days. The best clinical responses were partial response (7%) and stable disease (17%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.0 and 9.7 months, respectively. Patients who achieved FGF-2 suppression were more likely than those who did not to have a response or stable disease (P = 0.03). VEGF concentrations decreased in 27 patients (93%) during treatment and paralleled those of FGF-2 over time. We found no compensatory increase in VEGF among those with FGF-2 suppression.

CONCLUSIONS

Graded-dose Peg-IFN suppresses FGF-2 in patients with metastatic melanoma who overexpress FGF-2. Over one third of patients had complete suppression of plasma FGF-2, which correlated with clinical response to this therapy.

MicroRNAs induced in melanoma treated with combination targeted therapy of Temsirolimus and Bevacizumab

Background

Targeted therapies directed at commonly overexpressed pathways in melanoma have clinical activity in numerous trials. Little is known about how these therapies influence microRNA (miRNA) expression, particularly with combination regimens. Knowledge of miRNAs altered with treatment may contribute to understanding mechanisms of therapeutic effects, as well as mechanisms of tumor escape from therapy. We analyzed miRNA expression in metastatic melanoma tissue samples treated with a novel combination regimen of Temsirolimus and Bevacizumab. Given the preliminary clinical activity observed with this combination regimen, we hypothesized that we would see significant changes in miRNA expression with combination treatment.

Methods

Using microarray analysis we analyzed miRNA expression levels in melanoma samples from a Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program-sponsored phase II trial of combination Temsirolimus and Bevacizumab in advanced melanoma, which elicited clinical benefit in a subset of patients. Pre-treatment and post-treatment miRNA levels were compared using paired t-tests between sample groups (patients), using a p-value < 0.01 for significance.

Results

microRNA expression remained unchanged with Temsirolimus alone; however, expression of 15 microRNAs was significantly upregulated (1.4 to 2.5-fold) with combination treatment, compared to pre-treatment levels. Interestingly, twelve of these fifteen miRNAs possess tumor suppressor capabilities. We identified 15 putative oncogenes as potential targets of the 12 tumor suppressor miRNAs, based on published experimental evidence. For 15 of 25 miRNA-target mRNA pairings, changes in gene expression from pre-treatment to post-combination treatment samples were inversely correlated with changes in miRNA expression, supporting a functional effect of those miRNA changes. Clustering analyses based on selected miRNAs suggest preliminary signatures characteristic of clinical response to combination treatment and of tumor BRAF mutational status.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first study analyzing miRNA expression in pre-treatment and post-treatment human metastatic melanoma tissue samples. This preliminary investigation suggests miRNAs that may be involved in the mechanism of action of combination Temsirolimus and Bevacizumab in metastatic melanoma, possibly through inhibition of oncogenic pathways, and provides the preliminary basis for further functional studies of these miRNAs.

Advances in the management of melanoma: targeted therapy, immunotherapy and future directions

Metastatic melanoma is an aggressive, immunogenic and molecularly heterogeneous disease for which most patients require systemic treatment. Recently, significant clinical breakthroughs have revolutionized the treatment of advanced melanoma, leading to the licensing of ipilimumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4, and vemurafenib, a BRAF inhibitor used in patients whose tumors contain a V600 mutation in the BRAF gene. This recent success has led to optimism and momentum has gathered with updated trial results from these therapies, next-generation compounds that target validated molecular pathways and novel agents that are mechanistically distinct. This review summarizes the recent advances and updated results since the licensing of vemurafenib and ipilimumab, the benefits and limitations of these agents, future strategies to improve upon existing treatments and overcome acquired resistance, in-progress and future clinical trials, as well as novel therapeutic targets, pathways and therapies that hold promise in advancing clinical benefit.

A phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial of Endostar in patients with metastatic melanoma

Endostatin is a potent endogenous angiogenic inhibitor with implicated antitumor activity. However, efficacy of recombinant human endostatin (rhES) in clinical trials is controversial, and application of rhES in treatment of metastatic melanoma awaits further investigations. This phase II trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of a soluble and stable rhES (Endostar) plus dacarbazine in patients with metastatic melanomas that contains no mutations in c-kit and BRAF genes. A total of 110 patients received placebo plus dacarbazine (250 mg/m², n = 54) or Endostar (7.5 mg/m²) plus dacarbazine (250 mg/m², n = 56). The primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Median PFS in the Endostar plus dacarbazine arm was 4.5 months versus 1.5 months in the placebo plus dacarbazine arm (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.578; P = 0.013). There were statistically significant improvements in OS (median, 12.0 months versus 8.0 months; HR, 0.522; P = 0.005) in favor of the Endostar plus dacarbazine arm. The regimen was generally well tolerated and had a manageable toxicity profile. Our trial suggests that Endostar plus dacarbazine is well tolerated in patients with metastatic melanoma harboring no genetic mutations popular for targeted therapy and yields a significant improvement in PFS and OS.

Clinical activity and safety of combination therapy with temsirolimus and bevacizumab for advanced melanoma: a phase II trial (CTEP 7190/Mel47)

PURPOSE

A CTEP-sponsored phase II trial was conducted to evaluate safety and clinical activity of combination therapy with CCI-779 (temsirolimus) and bevacizumab in patients with advanced melanoma.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Patients with unresectable stage III to IV melanoma were treated intravenously with temsirolimus 25 mg weekly and bevacizumab 10 mg every 2 weeks. Adverse events were recorded using CTCAE v3.0. Tumor response was assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors and overall survival was recorded. Correlative studies measured protein kinases and histology of tumor biopsies and immune function in peripheral blood.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients were treated. Most patients tolerated treatment well, but 2 had grade 4 lymphopenia and 1 developed reversible grade 2 leukoencephalopathy. Best clinical response was partial response (PR) in 3 patients [17.7%, 90% confidence interval (CI) 5, 0-39.6], stable disease at 8 weeks (SD) in 9 patients, progressive disease (PD) in 4 patients, and not evaluable in 1 patient. Maximal response duration for PR was 35 months. Ten evaluable patients had BRAF(WT) tumors, among whom 3 had PRs, 5 had SD, and 2 had PD. Correlative studies of tumor biopsies revealed decreased phospho-S6K (d2 and d23 vs. d1, P < 0.001), and decreased mitotic rate (Ki67(+)) among melanoma cells by d23 (P = 0.007). Effects on immune functions were mixed, with decreased alloreactive T-cell responses and decreased circulating CD4(+)FoxP3(+) cells.

CONCLUSION

These data provide preliminary evidence for clinical activity of combination therapy with temsirolimus and bevacizumab, which may be greater in patients with BRAF(wt) melanoma. Mixed effects on immunologic function also support combination with immune therapies.

A tale of two approaches: complementary mechanisms of cytotoxic and targeted therapy resistance may inform next-generation cancer treatments

Chemotherapy and molecularly targeted approaches represent two very different modes of cancer treatment and each is associated with unique benefits and limitations. Both types of therapy share the overarching limitation of the emergence of drug resistance, which prevents these drugs from eliciting lasting clinical benefit. This review will provide an overview of the various mechanisms of resistance to each of these classes of drugs and examples of drug combinations that have been tested clinically. This analysis supports the contention that understanding modes of resistance to both chemotherapy and molecularly targeted therapies may be very useful in selecting those drugs of each class that will have complementing mechanisms of sensitivity and thereby represent reasonable combination therapies.

The effect of bevacizumab on human malignant melanoma cells with functional VEGF/VEGFR2 autocrine and intracrine signaling loops

Receptors for the angiogenic factor VEGF are expressed by tumor cancer cells including melanoma, although their functionality remains unclear. Paired human melanoma cell lines WM115 and WM239 were used to investigate differences in expression and functionality of VEGF and VEGFR2 in vitro and in vivo with the anti-VEGF antibody bevacizumab. Both WM115 and WM239 cells expressed VEGF and VEGFR2, the levels of which were modulated by hypoxia. Detection of native and phosphorylated VEGFR2 in subcellular fractions under serum-free conditions showed the presence of a functional autocrine as well as intracrine VEGF/VEGFR2 signaling loops. Interestingly, treatment of WM115 and WM239 cells with increasing doses of bevacizumab (0-300 µg/ml) in vitro did not show any significant inhibition of VEGFR2 phosphorylation. Small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor, sunitinib, caused an inhibition of VEGFR2 phosphorylation in WM239 but not in WM115 cells. An increase in cell proliferation was observed in WM115 cells treated with bevacizumab, whereas sunitinib inhibited proliferation. When xenografted to immune-deficient mice, we found bevacizumab to be an effective antiangiogenic but not antitumorigenic agent for both cell lines. Because bevacizumab is unable to neutralize murine VEGF, this supports a paracrine angiogenic response. We propose that the failure of bevacizumab to generate an antitumorigenic effect may be related to its generation of enhanced autocrine/intracrine signaling in the cancer cells themselves. Collectively, these results suggest that, for cancers with intracrine VEGF/ VEGFR2 signaling loops, small-molecule inhibitors of VEGFR2 may be more effective than neutralizing antibodies at disease control.