Combined vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAF-mutated melanoma

BACKGROUND

The combined inhibition of BRAF and MEK is hypothesized to improve clinical outcomes in patients with melanoma by preventing or delaying the onset of resistance observed with BRAF inhibitors alone. This randomized phase 3 study evaluated the combination of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib and the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 495 patients with previously untreated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic BRAF V600 mutation-positive melanoma to receive vemurafenib and cobimetinib (combination group) or vemurafenib and placebo (control group). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival.

RESULTS

The median progression-free survival was 9.9 months in the combination group and 6.2 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death or disease progression, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.68; P<0.001). The rate of complete or partial response in the combination group was 68%, as compared with 45% in the control group (P<0.001), including rates of complete response of 10% in the combination group and 4% in the control group. Progression-free survival as assessed by independent review was similar to investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Interim analyses of overall survival showed 9-month survival rates of 81% (95% CI, 75 to 87) in the combination group and 73% (95% CI, 65 to 80) in the control group. Vemurafenib and cobimetinib was associated with a nonsignificantly higher incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher, as compared with vemurafenib and placebo (65% vs. 59%), and there was no significant difference in the rate of study-drug discontinuation. The number of secondary cutaneous cancers decreased with the combination therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of cobimetinib to vemurafenib was associated with a significant improvement in progression-free survival among patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma, at the cost of some increase in toxicity. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; coBRIM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01689519.).

Encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib or encorafenib in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma (COLUMBUS): a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Combined BRAF-MEK inhibitor therapy is the standard of care for BRAF^V600-mutant advanced melanoma. We investigated encorafenib, a BRAF inhibitor with unique target-binding properties, alone or in combination with the MEK inhibitor binimetinib, versus vemurafenib in patients with advanced BRAF^V600-mutant melanoma.

METHODS

COLUMBUS was conducted as a two-part, randomised, open-label phase 3 study at 162 hospitals in 28 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had histologically confirmed locally advanced (American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV), unresectable or metastatic cutaneous melanoma, or unknown primary melanoma; a BRAF^V600E or BRAF^V600K mutation; an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1; and were treatment naive or had progressed on or after previous first-line immunotherapy. In part 1 of the study, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) via interactive response technology to receive either oral encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus oral binimetinib 45 mg twice daily (encorafenib plus binimetinib group), oral encorafenib 300 mg once daily (encorafenib group), or oral vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily (vemurafenib group). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by blinded independent central review for encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib. Efficacy analyses were by intention-to-treat. Safety was analysed in patients who received at least one dose of study drug and one postbaseline safety assessment. The results of part 2 will be published separately. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01909453, and EudraCT, number 2013-001176-38.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 30, 2013, and April 10, 2015, 577 of 1345 screened patients were randomly assigned to either the encorafenib plus binimetinib group (n=192), the encorafenib group (n=194), or the vemurafenib group (n=191). With a median follow-up of 16·6 months (95% CI 14·8-16·9), median progression-free survival was 14·9 months (95% CI 11·0-18·5) in the encorafenib plus binimetinib group and 7·3 months (5·6-8·2) in the vemurafenib group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·54, 95% CI 0·41-0·71; two-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events seen in more than 5% of patients in the encorafenib plus binimetinib group were increased γ-glutamyltransferase (18 [9%] of 192 patients), increased creatine phosphokinase (13 [7%]), and hypertension (11 [6%]); in the encorafenib group they were palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (26 [14%] of 192 patients), myalgia (19 [10%]), and arthralgia (18 [9%]); and in the vemurafenib group it was arthralgia (11 [6%] of 186 patients). There were no treatment-related deaths except for one death in the combination group, which was considered possibly related to treatment by the investigator.

INTERPRETATION

Encorafenib plus binimetinib and encorafenib monotherapy showed favourable efficacy compared with vemurafenib. Overall, encorafenib plus binimetinib appears to have an improved tolerability profile compared with encorafenib or vemurafenib. Encorafenib plus binimetinib could represent a new treatment option for patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma.

FUNDING

Array BioPharma, Novartis.

Overall survival in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma receiving encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib or encorafenib (COLUMBUS): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Encorafenib plus binimetinib and encorafenib alone improved progression-free survival compared with vemurafenib in patients with BRAF^V600-mutant melanoma in the COLUMBUS trial. Here, we report the results of the secondary endpoint of overall survival.

METHODS

COLUMBUS was a two-part, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study done at 162 hospitals in 28 countries. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed, locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic cutaneous melanoma, or unknown primary melanoma, BRAF^V600E or BRAF^V600K mutation, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and were treatment naive or had progressed on or after first-line immunotherapy. In part 1 of the study, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by use of interactive response technology to receive oral encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus oral binimetinib 45 mg twice daily (encorafenib plus binimetinib group), oral encorafenib 300 mg once daily (encorafenib group), or oral vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily (vemurafenib group). Randomisation was stratified by the American Joint Committee on Cancer stage, ECOG performance status, and BRAF mutation status. The primary outcome of the trial, progression-free survival with encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib, was reported previously. Here we present the prespecified interim overall survival analysis. Efficacy analyses were by intent to treat. Safety was analysed in patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Part 2 of the study was initiated at the request of the US Food and Drug Administration to better understand the contribution of binimetinib to the combination therapy by comparing encorafenib 300 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily with encorafenib 300 mg once daily alone. Results of part 2 will be published separately. This trial is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01909453, and EudraCT, number 2013-001176-38.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 30, 2013, and April 10, 2015, 577 of 1345 screened patients were randomly assigned to receive encorafenib plus binimetinib (n=192), encorafenib (n=194), or vemurafenib (n=191). Median follow-up for overall survival was 36·8 months (95% CI 35·9-37·5). Median overall survival was 33·6 months (95% CI 24·4-39·2) with encorafenib plus binimetinib and 16·9 months (14·0-24·5) with vemurafenib (hazard ratio 0·61 [95% CI 0·47-0·79]; two-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events did not change substantially from the first report; those seen in more than 5% of patients treated with encorafenib plus binimetinib were increased γ-glutamyltransferase (18 [9%] of 192 patients), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (14 [7%]), and hypertension (12 [6%]); those seen with encorafenib alone were palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (26 [14%] of 192 patients), myalgia (19 [10%]), and arthralgia (18 [9%]); and with vemurafenib the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event was arthralgia (11 [6%] of 186 patients). One death in the combination treatment group was considered by the investigator to be possibly related to treatment.

INTERPRETATION

The combination of encorafenib plus binimetinib provided clinically meaningful efficacy with good tolerability as shown by improvements in both progression-free survival and overall survival compared with vemurafenib. These data suggest that the combination of encorafenib plus binimetinib is likely to become an important therapeutic option in patients with BRAF^V600-mutant melanoma.

FUNDING

Array BioPharma, Novartis.

Ipilimumab 10 mg/kg versus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma: a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

A phase 2 trial suggested increased overall survival and increased incidence of treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg compared with ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in patients with advanced melanoma. We report a phase 3 trial comparing the benefit-risk profile of ipilimumab 10 mg/kg versus 3 mg/kg.

METHODS

This randomised, double-blind, multicentre, phase 3 trial was done in 87 centres in 21 countries worldwide. Patients with untreated or previously treated unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, without previous treatment with BRAF inhibitors or immune checkpoint inhibitors, were randomly assigned (1:1) with an interactive voice response system by the permuted block method using block size 4 to ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or 3 mg/kg, administered by intravenous infusion for 90 min every 3 weeks for four doses. Patients were stratified by metastasis stage, previous treatment for metastatic melanoma, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. The patients, investigators, and site staff were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population and safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is completed and was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01515189.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 29, and July 9, 2012, 727 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to ipilimumab 10 mg/kg (365 patients; 364 treated) or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (362 patients; all treated). Median follow-up was 14·5 months (IQR 4·6-42·3) for the ipilimumab 10 mg/kg group and 11·2 months (4·9-29·4) for the ipilimumab 3 mg/kg group. Median overall survival was 15·7 months (95% CI 11·6-17·8) for ipilimumab 10 mg/kg compared with 11·5 months (9·9-13·3) for ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (hazard ratio 0·84, 95% CI 0·70-0·99; p=0·04). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were diarrhoea (37 [10%] of 364 patients in the 10 mg/kg group vs 21 [6%] of 362 patients in the 3 mg/kg group), colitis (19 [5%] vs nine [2%]), increased alanine aminotransferase (12 [3%] vs two [1%]), and hypophysitis (ten [3%] vs seven [2%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 133 (37%) patients in the 10 mg/kg group and 66 (18%) patients in the 3 mg/kg group; four (1%) versus two (<1%) patients died from treatment-related adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with advanced melanoma, ipilimumab 10 mg/kg resulted in significantly longer overall survival than did ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, but with increased treatment-related adverse events. Although the treatment landscape for advanced melanoma has changed since this study was initiated, the clinical use of ipilimumab in refractory patients with unmet medical needs could warrant further assessment.

FUNDING

Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Prognostic impact of B-cell density in cutaneous melanoma

Studies on the prognostic importance of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes have mainly focused on T cells, while little is known about the role of tumor-infiltrating B lymphocytes. We investigated the prevalence of CD20(+) B cells by immunohistochemistry in primary melanoma samples of 106 patients and analyzed in relation to clinicopathological parameters and patients' survival. The majority of samples contained a significant amount of B lymphocytes, predominantly dispersed in the stroma surrounding tumor deposits (mean peritumoral and intratumoral densities: 178.7 ± 156.1 vs. 4.9 ± 6.9 cells/mm², respectively). B cells organized in follicle-like aggregates were also observed in 26% of the samples. B-cell density correlated with that of activated (CD25(+) or OX40(+)) T lymphocytes. Infiltration by CD20(+) lymphocytes did not correlate with tumor thickness, while the presence of B-cell aggregates was observed more frequently in thick melanomas. On the other hand, B-cell infiltration was more pronounced in nonmetastatic or lymph node metastatic tumors, compared to visceral metastatic ones. Accordingly, high number of these cells provided significant survival advantage (P = 0.0391 and P = 0.0136 for intra- and peritumoral infiltration, respectively). Furthermore, combination of peritumoral B-cell density with the number of activated T lymphocytes identified patient subgroups with different disease outcome, which was most favorable in the case of high density, while very poor in the case of low density of both cell types. Multivariate survival analysis identified tumor thickness and CD20(+)/OX40(+) cell density combination as significant independent prognostic factors. Taken together, our results show correlation between low number of CD20(+) B lymphocytes and melanoma progression, indicating a possible role of tumor-infiltrating B cells in antitumoral immune response. It was also reflected in better outcome of the disease since the density of B lymphocytes alone as well as in combination with that of activated T cells proved of prognostic importance in patients with malignant melanoma.

Update on tolerability and overall survival in COLUMBUS: landmark analysis of a randomised phase 3 trial of encorafenib plus binimetinib vs vemurafenib or encorafenib in patients with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma

BACKGROUND

BRAF/MEK inhibitor combinations are established treatments for BRAF V600-mutant melanoma based on demonstrated benefits on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Here, we report an updated analysis of the COLUMBUS (COmbined LGX818 [encorafenib] Used with MEK162 [binimetinib] in BRAF mutant Unresectable Skin cancer) trial with long-term follow-up.

METHODS

In part 1 of the COLUMBUS trial, 577 patients with advanced/metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma, untreated or progressed after first-line immunotherapy, were randomised 1:1:1 to 450 mg of encorafenib QD + 45 mg of binimetinib BID (COMBO450) vs 960 mg of vemurafenib BID (VEM) or 300 mg of encorafenib ENCO QD (ENCO300). An updated analysis was conducted that included PFS, OS, objective response rate, safety and tolerability and analyses of results by prognostic subgroups.

RESULTS

At data cutoff, there were 116, 113 and 138 deaths in the COMBO450, ENCO300 and VEM treatment arms, respectively. The median OS was 33.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 24.4-39.2) for COMBO450, 23.5 months (95% CI, 19.6-33.6) for ENCO300 and 16.9 months (95% CI, 14.0-24.5) for VEM. Compared with VEM, COMBO450 decreased the risk of death by 39% (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.48-0.79). The updated median PFS for COMBO450 was 14.9 months (95% CI, 11.0-20.2), ENCO300 was 9.6 months (95% CI, 7.4-14.8) and VEM was 7.3 months (95% CI, 5.6-7.9). PFS was longer for COMBO450 vs VEM (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.39-0.67). Landmark OS and PFS results show consistent results for each year analysed. Subgroups all favoured COMBO450 vs VEM.

CONCLUSIONS

Updated PFS and OS results for COMBO450 from the COLUMBUS trial demonstrate a long-term benefit in patients with advanced BRAF V600-mutated melanoma.

5-Year Outcomes with Cobimetinib plus Vemurafenib in BRAFV600 Mutation-Positive Advanced Melanoma: Extended Follow-up of the coBRIM Study

PURPOSE

The randomized phase III coBRIM study (NCT01689519) demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with addition of cobimetinib to vemurafenib compared with vemurafenib in patients with previously untreated BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. We report long-term follow-up of coBRIM, with at least 5 years since the last patient was randomized.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either oral cobimetinib (60 mg once daily on days 1-21 in each 28-day cycle) or placebo in combination with oral vemurafenib (960 mg twice daily).

RESULTS

495 patients were randomized to cobimetinib plus vemurafenib (n = 247) or placebo plus vemurafenib (n = 248). Median follow-up was 21.2 months for cobimetinib plus vemurafenib and 16.6 months for placebo plus vemurafenib. Median OS was 22.5 months (95% CI, 20.3-28.8) with cobimetinib plus vemurafenib and 17.4 months (95% CI, 15.0-19.8) with placebo plus vemurafenib; 5-year OS rates were 31% and 26%, respectively. Median PFS was 12.6 months (95% CI, 9.5-14.8) with cobimetinib plus vemurafenib and 7.2 months (95% CI, 5.6-7.5) with placebo plus vemurafenib; 5-year PFS rates were 14% and 10%, respectively. OS and PFS were longest in patients with normal baseline lactate dehydrogenase levels and low tumor burden, and in those achieving complete response. The safety profile remained consistent with previously published reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended follow-up of coBRIM confirms the long-term clinical benefit and safety profile of cobimetinib plus vemurafenib compared with vemurafenib monotherapy in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma.

COLUMBUS 5-Year Update: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial of Encorafenib Plus Binimetinib Versus Vemurafenib or Encorafenib in Patients With BRAF V600-Mutant Melanoma

PURPOSE

Combination treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors has demonstrated benefits on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and is a standard of care for the treatment of advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma. Here, we report the 5-year update from the COLUMBUS trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01909453).

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma, untreated or progressed after first-line immunotherapy, were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily, vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily, or encorafenib 300 mg once daily. An updated analysis was conducted 65 months after the last patient was randomly assigned.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventy-seven patients were randomly assigned: 192 to encorafenib plus binimetinib, 191 to vemurafenib, and 194 to encorafenib. The 5-year PFS and OS rates with encorafenib plus binimetinib were 23% and 35% overall and 31% and 45% in those with normal lactate dehydrogenase levels, respectively. In comparison, the 5-year PFS and OS rates with vemurafenib were 10% and 21% overall and 12% and 28% in those with normal lactate dehydrogenase levels, respectively. The median duration of response with encorafenib plus binimetinib was 18.6 months, with disease control achieved in 92.2% of patients. In comparison, the median duration of response with vemurafenib was 12.3 months, with disease control achieved in 81.2% of patients. Long-term follow-up showed no new safety concerns, and results were consistent with the known tolerability profile of encorafenib plus binimetinib. Interactive visualization of the data presented in this article is available at COLUMBUS dashboard.

CONCLUSION

In this 5-year update of part 1 of the COLUMBUS trial, encorafenib plus binimetinib treatment demonstrated continued long-term benefits and a consistent safety profile in patients with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma.

Adverse events associated with encorafenib plus binimetinib in the COLUMBUS study: incidence, course and management

BACKGROUND

Dual inhibition of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway with BRAF/MEK inhibitor (BRAFi/MEKi) therapy is a standard treatment for BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma and has historically been associated with grade III pyrexia or photosensitivity depending on the combination used. The objective of this study was to fully describe adverse events from the COLUMBUS study evaluating the most recent BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination encorafenib+binimetinib.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic BRAFV600-mutant melanoma were randomised to receive encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily, encorafenib 300 mg once daily or vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily. Adverse events that represent known effects of available BRAFi and/or MEKi were evaluated.

RESULTS

The safety population included a total of 570 patients (encorafenib+binimetinib = 192; encorafenib = 192; vemurafenib = 186). Median duration of exposure was longer with encorafenib+binimetinib (51 weeks) than with encorafenib (31 weeks) or vemurafenib (27 weeks). Common BRAFi/MEKi toxicities with encorafenib+binimetinib were generally manageable, reversible and infrequently associated with discontinuation. Pyrexia was less frequent with encorafenib+binimetinib (18%) and encorafenib (16%) than with vemurafenib (30%) and occurred later in the course of therapy with encorafenib+binimetinib (median time to first onset: 85 days versus 2.5 days and 19 days, respectively). The incidence of photosensitivity was lower with encorafenib+binimetinib (5%) and encorafenib (4%) than with vemurafenib (30%). The incidence of serous retinopathy was higher with encorafenib+binimetinib (20%) than with encorafenib (2%) or vemurafenib (2%), but no patients discontinued encorafenib+binimetinib because of this event.

CONCLUSION

Encorafenib+binimetinib is generally well tolerated and has a low discontinuation rate in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma, with a distinct safety profile as compared with other anti-BRAF/MEK targeted therapies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT01909453) and with EudraCT (number 2013-001176-38).

Tumor-infiltrating immune cells as potential biomarkers predicting response to treatment and survival in patients with metastatic melanoma receiving ipilimumab therapy

Monoclonal antibodies targeting immune checkpoints are gaining ground in the treatment of melanoma and other cancers, and considerable effort is made to identify biomarkers predicting the efficacy of these therapies. Our retrospective study was performed on surgical tissue samples (52 lymph nodes and 34 cutaneous/subcutaneous metastases) from 30 patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ipilimumab. Using a panel of 11 antibodies against different immune cell types, intratumoral immune cell densities were determined and evaluated in relation to response to ipilimumab treatment and disease outcome. For most markers studied, median immune cell densities were at least two times higher in lymph node metastases compared to skin/subcutaneous ones; therefore, the prognostic and predictive associations of immune cell infiltration were evaluated separately in the two groups of metastases as well as in all samples as a whole. Higher prevalence of several immune cell types was seen in lymph node metastases of the responders compared to non-responders, particularly FOXP3+ cells and CD8+ T lymphocytes. In subcutaneous or cutaneous metastases, on the other hand, significant difference could be observed only in the case of CD16 and CD68. Associations of labeled cell densities with survival were also found for most cell types studied in nodal metastases, and for CD16+ and CD68+ cells in skin/s.c. metastatic cases. Our results corroborate the previous findings suggesting an association between an immunologically active tumor microenvironment and response to ipilimumab treatment, and propose new potential biomarkers for predicting treatment efficacy and disease outcome.

FOXP3+ cell density in primary tumor has no prognostic impact in patients with cutaneous malignant melanoma

Regulatory T cells (Tregs) have been implicated as inhibitors of antitumor immune reactions. However, data on the relevance of their prevalence at tumor sites in influencing disease outcome are controversial. The aim of our study was to investigate the role in tumor progression and the prognostic impact of the density of lymphocytes expressing FOXP3, a transcription factor expressed predominantly by CD4(+)CD25(+) Tregs, in primary cutaneous melanoma. We examined the infiltration of FOXP3(+) cells by immunohistochemistry in tumor samples from 97 patients and evaluated in relation to patient and tumor parameters. The degree of infiltration by FOXP3(+) cells did not show correlation with the thickness of melanomas. Moreover, no associations were found with metastasis formation during the 5-year follow-up period, patient survival, or any other clinicopathologic parameters studied. These results suggest that the presence of FOXP3(+) lymphocytes in primary tumors is not of prognostic importance in human cutaneous melanoma.

Partial breast irradiation with interstitial 60CO brachytherapy results in frequent grade 3 or 4 toxicity. evidence based on a 12-year follow-up of 70 patients

PURPOSE

To investigate the radiation-induced toxicity and cosmesis of brachytherapy (BT) alone in early stage breast cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 70 women diagnosed with Stage I or II breast carcinoma participated in a BT study at the Municipal Oncoradiological Center, Uzsoki Hospital, Budapest, Hungary, between November 1987 and June 1992. They had undergone breast-conserving surgery with an unknown surgical margin. The postoperative tumor bed irradiation was performed with interstitial (60)Co sources with an active length of 4 cm, with 10-mm center-to-center spacing arranged in a single plane. The median number of inserted sources was 5 (range, 2-8), with a linear activity of 133-137 MBq/cm at the beginning of the study. The 50 Gy delivered dose at 5 mm from the surface of the (60)Co sources was administered during 10-22 h to the virtual postoperative lumpectomy cavity (i.e., plane). For radiobiologic considerations, the clinical target volume (CTV) was calculated retrospectively with a 10-mm safety margin, resulting in a 72-cm(3) median CTV (range, 36-108 cm(3)) irradiated with a reference dose of 28 Gy. In the assessment of the skin and subcutaneous toxicity, the RTOG late radiation morbidity scoring system was applied. The radiosensitivity of the cultured fibroblasts was determined by clonogenic assay to check whether individual radiosensitivity played a role in the development and course of radiation-induced side-effects.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 12 years (range, 10-15 years). The population of the final study (34 cases) comprised all survivors with tumor-free breasts (27 cases) and patients with breasts erroneously ablated/excised for misinterpreted radiation-induced sequelae (7 patients). A total of 97% of the cohort (33/34) had grade > or =2, and 59% (20/34) had grade > or =3 radiation-induced toxicity. By the end of the follow-up, 85% of the patients experienced Grade > or =2 telangiectasis and 41% had Grade 3 telangiectasis. Eighty-eight percent had fibrosis of some form, and 35% had grade > or =3 fibrosis. Forty-one percent of the cohort displayed fat necrosis, which was always accompanied by Grade > or =3 fibrosis or telangiectasis. The cosmetic results were poor in 50% (17/34) of the patients. The radiosensitivity of the fibroblasts was increased in only 2/24 patients (8% of the investigated cases, in agreement with data published for the general population). Comparisons of our fibrosis prevalence data with those of others allowed an estimate of 0.47 h(-1) for the rate of recovery of DNA damage in the fibroblasts.

CONCLUSIONS

Interstitial (60)Co BT of the breast tumor bed alone with a limited CTV (median, 72 cm(3)) and a total dose of 28 Gy is associated with a high rate (59%) of grade > or =3 radiation-induced toxicity and a high rate (50%) of poor cosmetic outcome at the end of a median follow-up of 12 years. A relatively high BT dose rate (1.3-2.8 Gy/h) applied during a short overall treatment time (10-22 h) and a possible geographic miss (close to skin implantation) might have contributed to the development of these sequelae.

Immune cell profile of sentinel lymph nodes in patients with malignant melanoma - FOXP3+ cell density in cases with positive sentinel node status is associated with unfavorable clinical outcome

Background

Besides being a preferential site of early metastasis, the sentinel lymph node (SLN) is also a privileged site of T-cell priming, and may thus be an appropriate target for investigating cell types involved in antitumor immune reactions.

Methods

In this retrospective study we determined the prevalence of OX40⁺ activated T lymphocytes, FOXP3⁺ (forkhead box P3) regulatory T cells, DC-LAMP⁺ (dendritic cell-lysosomal associated membrane protein) mature dendritic cells (DCs) and CD123⁺ plasmacytoid DCs by immunohistochemistry in 100 SLNs from 60 melanoma patients. Density values of each cell type in SLNs were compared to those in non-sentinel nodes obtained from block dissections (n = 37), and analyzed with regard to associations with clinicopathological parameters and disease outcome.

Results

Sentinel nodes showed elevated amount of all cell types studied in comparison to non-sentinel nodes. Metastatic SLNs had higher density of OX40⁺ lymphocytes compared to tumor-negative nodes, while no significant difference was observed in the case of the other cell types studied. In patients with positive sentinel node status, high amount of FOXP3⁺ cells in SLNs was associated with shorter progression-free (P = 0.0011) and overall survival (P = 0.0014), while no significant correlation was found in the case of sentinel-negative patients. The density of OX40⁺, CD123⁺ or DC-LAMP⁺ cells did not show significant association with the outcome of the disease.

Conclusions

Taken together, our results are compatible with the hypothesis of functional competence of sentinel lymph nodes based on the prevalence of the studied immune cells. The density of FOXP3⁺ lymphocytes showed association with progression and survival in patients with positive SLN status, while the other immune markers studied did not prove of prognostic importance. These results, together with our previous findings on the prognostic value of activated T cells and mature DCs infiltrating primary melanomas, suggest that immune activation-associated markers in the primary tumor may have a higher impact than those in SLNs on the prognosis of the patients. On the other hand, FOXP3⁺ cell density in SLNs, but not in the primary tumor, was found predictive of disease outcome in melanoma patients.

Overall survival at 5 years of follow-up in a phase III trial comparing ipilimumab 10 mg/kg with 3 mg/kg in patients with advanced melanoma

BACKGROUND

We have previously reported significantly longer overall survival (OS) with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg versus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg in patients with advanced melanoma, with higher incidences of adverse events (AEs) at 10 mg/kg. This follow-up analysis reports a 5-year update of OS and safety.

METHODS

This randomized, multicenter, double-blind, phase III trial included patients with untreated or previously treated unresectable stage III or IV melanoma. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for 4 doses. The primary end point was OS.

RESULTS

At a minimum follow-up of 61 months, median OS was 15.7 months (95% CI 11.6 to 17.8) at 10 mg/kg and 11.5 months (95% CI 9.9 to 13.3) at 3 mg/kg (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99; p=0.04). In a subgroup analysis, median OS of patients with asymptomatic brain metastasis was 7.0 months (95% CI 4.0 to 12.8) in the 10 mg/kg group and 5.7 months (95% CI 4.2 to 7.0) in the 3 mg/kg group. In patients with wild-type or mutant BRAF tumors, median OS was 13.8 months (95% CI 10.2 to 17.0) and 33.2 months (95% CI 19.4 to 45.2) in the 10 mg/kg group, and 11.2 months (95% CI 9.2 to 13.8) and 19.7 months (95% CI 11.6 to 25.3) in the 3 mg/kg group, respectively. The incidence of grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs was 36% in the 10 mg/kg group vs 20% in the 3 mg/kg group, and deaths due to treatment-related AEs occurred in four (1%) and two patients (1%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This 61-month follow-up of a phase III trial showed sustained long-term survival in patients with advanced melanoma who started metastatic treatment with ipilimumab monotherapy, and confirmed the significant benefit for those who received ipilimumab 10 mg/kg vs 3 mg/kg. These results suggest the emergence of a plateau in the OS curve, consistent with previous ipilimumab studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01515189.

Atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib in patients with melanoma with CNS metastases (TRICOTEL): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

Targeted therapy and immunotherapy have shown intracranial activity in melanoma with CNS metastases, but there remains an unmet need, particularly for patients with symptomatic CNS metastases. We aimed to evaluate atezolizumab in combination with cobimetinib or vemurafenib plus cobimetinib in patients with melanoma with CNS metastases.

METHODS

TRICOTEL was a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study done in two cohorts: a BRAFV600 wild-type cohort and a BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort, recruited at 21 hospitals and oncology centres in Brazil, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with previously untreated metastatic melanoma, CNS metastases of 5 mm or larger in at least one dimension, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less. Patients in the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort received intravenous atezolizumab (840 mg, days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle) plus oral cobimetinib (60 mg once daily, days 1-21). Patients in the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort received intravenous atezolizumab (840 mg, days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle) plus oral vemurafenib (720 mg twice daily) plus oral cobimetinib (60 mg once daily, days 1-21); atezolizumab was withheld in cycle 1. Treatment was continued until progression, toxicity, or death. The primary outcome was intracranial objective response rate confirmed by assessments at least 4 weeks apart, as assessed by independent review committee (IRC) using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1. Because of early closure of the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort, the primary endpoint of intracranial objective response rate by IRC assessment was not done in this cohort; intracranial objective response rate by investigator assessment was reported instead. Efficacy and safety were analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is closed to enrolment and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03625141.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 13, 2018, and Dec 7, 2020, 65 patients were enrolled in the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort; the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort was closed early after enrolment of 15 patients. Median follow-up was 9·7 months (IQR 6·3-15·0) for the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort and 6·2 months (3·5-23·0) for the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort. Intracranial objective response rate was 42% (95% CI 29-54) by IRC assessment in the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort and 27% (95% CI 8-55) by investigator assessment in the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort. Treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 41 (68%) of 60 patients who received atezolizumab plus vemurafenib plus cobimetinib in the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort, the most common of which were lipase increased (15 [25%] of 60 patients) and blood creatine phosphokinase increased (ten [17%]). Eight (53%) of 15 patients treated with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib in the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort had treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse events, most commonly anaemia (two [13%]) and dermatitis acneiform (two [13%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 14 (23%) of 60 patients in the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort and two (13%) of 15 in the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort. One death in the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort (limbic encephalitis) was considered to be related to atezolizumab treatment.

INTERPRETATION

Adding atezolizumab to vemurafenib plus cobimetinib provided promising intracranial activity in patients with BRAFV600-mutated melanoma with CNS metastases.

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib in patients with melanoma with CNS metastases (TRICOTEL): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

Targeted therapy and immunotherapy have shown intracranial activity in melanoma with CNS metastases, but there remains an unmet need, particularly for patients with symptomatic CNS metastases. We aimed to evaluate atezolizumab in combination with cobimetinib or vemurafenib plus cobimetinib in patients with melanoma with CNS metastases.

METHODS

TRICOTEL was a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study done in two cohorts: a BRAFV600 wild-type cohort and a BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort, recruited at 21 hospitals and oncology centres in Brazil, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with previously untreated metastatic melanoma, brain metastases of 5 mm or larger in at least one dimension, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less. Patients in the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort received intravenous atezolizumab (840 mg, days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle) plus oral cobimetinib (60 mg once daily, days 1-21). Patients in the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort received intravenous atezolizumab (840 mg, days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle) plus oral vemurafenib (720 mg twice daily) plus oral cobimetinib (60 mg once daily, days 1-21); atezolizumab was withheld in cycle 1. Treatment was continued until progression, toxicity, or death. The primary outcome was intracranial objective response rate confirmed by assessments at least 4 weeks apart, as assessed by independent review committee (IRC) using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1. Because of early closure of the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort, the primary endpoint of intracranial objective response rate by IRC assessment was not done in this cohort; intracranial objective response rate by investigator assessment was reported instead. Efficacy and safety were analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study medication. This trial is closed to enrolment and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03625141.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 13, 2018, and Dec 7, 2020, 65 patients were enrolled in the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort; the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort was closed early after enrolment of 15 patients. Median follow-up was 9·7 months (IQR 6·3-15·0) for the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort and 6·2 months (3·5-23·0) for the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort. Intracranial objective response rate was 42% (95% CI 29-54) by IRC assessment in the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort and 27% (95% CI 8-55) by investigator assessment in the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort. Treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse events occurred in 41 (68%) of 60 patients who received atezolizumab plus vemurafenib plus cobimetinib in the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort, the most common of which were lipase increased (15 [25%] of 60 patients) and blood creatine phosphokinase increased (11 [18%]). Eight (53%) of 15 patients treated with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib in the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort had treatment-related grade 3 or worse adverse events, most commonly anaemia (two [13%]) and dermatitis acneiform (two [13%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 14 (23%) of 60 patients who received triplet therapy in the BRAFV600 mutation-positive cohort and two (13%) of 15 in the BRAFV600 wild-type cohort. No treatment-related deaths occurred.

INTERPRETATION

Atezolizumab plus vemurafenib and cobimetinib provided intracranial activity in patients with BRAFV600-mutated melanoma with CNS metastases.

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Serum concentration of 5-S-cysteinyldopa in patients with melanoma

BACKGROUND

5-S-cysteinyldopa (5-S-DC) is a precursor of melanin. Its serum and urinary level can reflect melanoma progression. In this study we examined the concentration changes of 5-S-CD in melanomas of different clinical stages and in patients with different symptoms of melanoma, during and after treatment.

METHOD

Serum samples were taken from 252 melanoma patients on 765 occasions, from June 1996 to July 1998. Levels of 5-S-CD were determined by HPLC.

RESULTS

The value of 5-S-CD in patients with primary melanoma and in patients without symptoms ranged around the normal level. There was a significant difference between the values of patients with or without symptoms. There was also a significant difference between the 5-S-CD values at clinical Stage I and Stage III, as well as at clinical Stage II and Stage III, respectively. Analysing the values of patients with symptoms we found a significant difference between the mean values of primary tumour and stage III, between values in lymph node metastasis and stage III, between values in lung metastasis and stage III. The tumour burden was found to correlate with a rising marker level. In 7% of the symptomatic patients that had a marker level under the upper limit, amelanotic primary tumour was detected.

CONCLUSION

According to the high marker level in lung and liver metastases, the marker might be useful in monitoring both patients with disease free ocular melanomas, to detect liver metastasis and high-risk patients after surgical removal of the primary tumour to reveal lung metastases.

PET identifies transitional metabolic change in the spinal cord following a subthreshold dose of irradiation

Positron emission tomographic (PET) investigations were performed to obtain in vivo information on symptomless radiation-induced pathological changes in the human spinal cord. PET investigations were carried out prior to radiotherapy and during the regular follow-up in an early hypopharyngeal cancer patient (the spinal cord was irradiated with a biologically effective dose of 80 Gy2), with [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG), [11C]methionine and [15O]butanol as tracers; radiosensitivity and electroneuronographic (ENG) studies were also performed. A very low background FDG accumulation (mean standardized uptake values, i.e. SUV: 0.84) was observed in the spinal cord before the initiation of radiotherapy. An increased FDG uptake was measured 2 months after the completion of radiotherapy (mean SUV: 1.69), followed by a fall-off, as measured 7 months later (mean SUV: 1.21). By 44 months after completion of irradiation, the FDG accumulation in the irradiated segments of the spinal cord had decreased to a level very close to the initial value (mean SUV: 1.11). The simultaneous [15O]butanol uptake results demonstrated a set of perfusion changes similar to those observed in connection with the FDG accumulation. The patient exhibited an extremely low [11C]methionine uptake within the irradiated and the nonirradiated spinal cord during the clinical course. She has not had any neurological symptoms, and the results of central ENG measurements before radiotherapy and 2 months following its completion proved normal. Radiobiological investigations did not reveal unequivocal signs of an increased radiosensitivity. A transitory increased spinal cord FDG uptake following radiotherapy may be related to the posttherapeutic mild inflammatory and regenerative processes. The normal [11C]methionine accumulation observed is strong evidence against intensive cell proliferation. The high degree of normalization of the temporarily increased FDG uptake of the irradiated spinal cord segments by 44 months is in good agreement with the results of monkey studies, which demonstrated a nearly complete recovery from radiation-induced spinal cord injury.

Relationship between sentinel lymph node status and regression of primary malignant melanoma

The prognostic significance of spontaneous regression of primary melanoma is a controversial issue. Studies on sentinel lymph node status and circulating tumour cells may represent a step towards a better understanding. The clinical details of 269 melanoma patients who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy were analysed. Correlation was sought between the parameters of the primary tumour, particularly tumours showing a partial intermediate level of regression, and sentinel lymph node status. The presence of circulating tumour cells was studied by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction for tyrosinase messenger RNA preoperatively in 94 patients. Of the examined tumours, 27.8% showed histological features of a partial intermediate level of regression. Regressive tumours were localized predominantly on the trunk (P=0.006), were significantly thinner (P<0.0000) and were less frequently ulcerated (P=0.003) than tumours without regression. Moreover, the majority of regressive melanomas were of the superficial spreading type (P<0.0000) and their sentinel node status was more favourable (P=0.026). We demonstrated the presence of circulating tumour cells in five of 26 (19.2%) regressive and 19 of 68 (29.4%) non-regressive tumours. The difference was not significant (P=0.32). By multivariate analysis, however, the Breslow thickness and ulceration of the primary tumour were predictors of the sentinel lymph node status, in agreement with literature data. A partial intermediate level of regression of the primary tumour did not affect unfavourably the sentinel lymph node status in our study. We failed to demonstrate a significant relationship between the presence of circulating tumour cells and either primary tumour regression or the sentinel lymph node status.

Biomarkers Associated with Clinical Outcome of Advanced Melanoma Patients Treated with Ipilimumab

Ipilimumab was the first immunotherapy approved for metastatic melanoma in decades and is currently registered as a second-line treatment. However, new immunotherapies, in combination with ipilimumab, offer even better clinical outcomes for patients compared with single-agent treatments, at the expense of improved toxicity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of ipilimumab outside the clinical trials and to identify survival predictors for treatment benefit. Data were collected on 47 advanced melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab between 2010 and 2015 at a single center. Association of clinical characteristics (including primary tumor characteristics), serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), erythrocyte sedimentation rate, absolute eosinophil, lymphocyte, and neutrophil count, neutrophil/lymphocyte and eosinophil/lymphocyte ratio with toxicity and clinical outcome were assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis. Median progression-free survival at a median follow-up of 10 months was 2.7 months and median overall survival was 9.8 months. Objective response was observed in 17% of patients and the disease control rate at week 24 was 40%. The 1- and 2-year survival rates documented were 40 and 28%, respectively. Significant association between high LDH level (>1.5× upper limit of normal) and decreased overall survival was demonstrated in uni- and multivariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.554, 95% CI: 1.225-10.306, p = 0.019). Neither biomarkers nor clinical outcome were associated with toxicity. Using baseline serum LDH to identify patients most likely to benefit from ipilimumab therapy could serve as a simple and inexpensive biomarker of clinical outcome.

Five-year overall survival (OS) in COLUMBUS: A randomized phase 3 trial of encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib or encorafenib in patients (pts) with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma

9507

Background: Combined BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy has demonstrated benefits on progression-free survival (PFS) and OS and is standard of care for the treatment of advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma. Here we report a 5-year update from the COLUMBUS trial. Methods: In Part 1 of COLUMBUS, 577 pts with advanced/metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma, untreated or progressed after first-line immunotherapy, were randomized 1:1:1 to encorafenib 450 mg QD + binimetinib 45 mg BID (COMBO450), encorafenib 300 mg QD (ENCO300), or vemurafenib 960 mg BID (VEM). An updated analysis including PFS, OS, objective response rate (ORR; by blinded independent central review), and safety was conducted after minimum follow-up of 65.2 months (mo). Data are as is; study is ongoing. Results: At data cut-off (Sep 15, 2020), there were 131 (68%), 117 (60%), and 145 (76%) deaths in the COMBO450, ENCO300, and VEM treatment arms, respectively. The median OS (95% CI) and 5-year OS rate (95% CI) with COMBO450 were 33.6 (24.4–39.2) mo and 34.7% (28.0–41.5), respectively (median follow-up: 70.4 mo). The 5-year OS rate (95% CI) in COMBO450 pts who had normal lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels at baseline was 45.1% (36.5–53.2). Median OS and 5-year OS rates for ENCO300 and VEM, as well as for pts with normal and high LDH levels and > 3 organs involved at baseline, are shown in the table. For COMBO450, ENCO300, and VEM, the 5-year PFS rate was 22.9%, 19.3%, and 10.2%; ORR (95% CI) was 64.1% (56.8–70.8), 51.5% (44.3–58.8), and 40.8% (33.8–48.2); and the median duration of response (DOR) was 18.6, 15.5, and 12.3 mo, respectively. Safety results were consistent with the known tolerability profile of COMBO450. Additional efficacy and updated safety analyses will be presented. Following study drug discontinuation, the most common subsequent treatment in all arms was checkpoint inhibitors. Conclusions: Updated OS and DOR results with COMBO450 demonstrate continued long-term benefits in pts with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma. Clinical trial information: NCT01909453. [Table: see text]