Randomised trial of interferon alpha-2a as adjuvant therapy in resected primary melanoma thicker than 1.5 mm without clinically detectable node metastases. French Cooperative Group on Melanoma

The Role of Radiation, Immunotherapy, and Chemotherapy in the Management of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cutaneous Malignancies

INTRODUCTION

Skin cancer impacts a significant proportion of the population. While surgical management is often the mainstay of treatment, advanced or metastatic cutaneous malignancies require additional local and/or systemic therapies.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed studying the use of radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic cutaneous malignancies.

RESULTS

A summary of the present literature on the management of locally advanced or metastatic cutaneous malignancies is presented across cutaneous head and neck basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, melanoma, and Merkel cell carcinoma. The addition of multidisciplinary therapies to resection is often associated with improved outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The management of cutaneous head and neck malignancies requires an approach integrating multiple specialties, to optimize outcomes and minimize toxicities.

Immunoediting Dynamics in Glioblastoma: Implications for Immunotherapy Approaches

Glioblastoma is an aggressive primary brain tumor that poses many therapeutic difficulties because of the high rate of proliferation, genetic variability, and its immunosuppressive microenvironment. The theory of cancer immunoediting, which includes the phases of elimination, equilibrium, and escape, offers a paradigm for comprehending interactions between the immune system and glioblastoma. Immunoediting indicates the process by which immune cells initially suppress tumor development, but thereafter select for immune-resistant versions leading to tumor escape and progression. The tumor microenvironment (TME) in glioblastoma is particularly immunosuppressive, with regulatory T cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells being involved in immune escape. To achieve an efficient immunotherapy for glioblastoma, it is crucial to understand these mechanisms within the TME. Existing immunotherapeutic modalities such as chimeric antigen receptor T cells and immune checkpoint inhibitors have been met with some level of resistance because of the heterogeneous nature of the immune response to glioblastoma. Solving these issues is critical to develop novel strategies capable of modulating the TME and re-establishing normal immune monitoring. Further studies should be conducted to identify the molecular and cellular events that underlie the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment in glioblastoma. Comprehending and modifying the stages of immunoediting in glioblastoma could facilitate the development of more potent and long-lasting therapies.

The immunogenic radiation and new players in immunotherapy and targeted therapy for head and neck cancer

Although treatment modalities for head and neck cancer have evolved considerably over the past decades, survival rates have plateaued. The treatment options remained limited to definitive surgery, surgery followed by fractionated radiotherapy with optional chemotherapy, and a definitive combination of fractionated radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Lately, immunotherapy has been introduced as the fourth modality of treatment, mainly administered as a single checkpoint inhibitor for recurrent or metastatic disease. While other regimens and combinations of immunotherapy and targeted therapy are being tested in clinical trials, adapting the appropriate regimens to patients and predicting their outcomes have yet to reach the clinical setting. Radiotherapy is mainly regarded as a means to target cancer cells while minimizing the unwanted peripheral effect. Radiotherapy regimens and fractionation are designed to serve this purpose, while the systemic effect of radiation on the immune response is rarely considered a factor while designing treatment. To bridge this gap, this review will highlight the effect of radiotherapy on the tumor microenvironment locally, and the immune response systemically. We will review the methodology to identify potential targets for therapy in the tumor microenvironment and the scientific basis for combining targeted therapy and radiotherapy. We will describe a current experience in preclinical models to test these combinations and propose how challenges in this realm may be faced. We will review new players in targeted therapy and their utilization to drive immunogenic response against head and neck cancer. We will outline the factors contributing to head and neck cancer heterogeneity and their effect on the response to radiotherapy. We will review in-silico methods to decipher intertumoral and intratumoral heterogeneity and how these algorithms can predict treatment outcomes. We propose that (a) the sequence of surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and targeted therapy should be designed not only to annul cancer directly, but to prime the immune response. (b) Fractionation of radiotherapy and the extent of the irradiated field should facilitate systemic immunity to develop. (c) New players in targeted therapy should be evaluated in translational studies toward clinical trials. (d) Head and neck cancer treatment should be personalized according to patients and tumor-specific factors.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for melanoma. Part 2: Treatment - Update 2022

A unique collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), and the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed to make recommendations on cutaneous melanoma diagnosis and treatment, based on the systematic literature reviews and the experts' experience. Cutaneous melanomas are excised with one to 2-cm safety margins. Sentinel lymph node dissection shall be performed as a staging procedure in patients with tumor thickness ≥1.0 mm or ≥0.8 mm with additional histological risk factors, although there is as yet no clear survival benefit for this approach. Therapeutic decisions in stage III/IV patients should be primarily made by an interdisciplinary oncology team ("tumor board"). Adjuvant therapies can be proposed in stage III/completely resected stage IV patients and are primarily anti-PD-1, independent of mutational status, or alternatively dabrafenib plus trametinib for BRAF mutant patients. In distant metastases (stage IV), either resected or not, systemic treatment is always indicated. For first-line treatment particularly in BRAF wild-type patients, immunotherapy with PD-1 antibodies alone or in combination with CTLA-4 antibodies shall be considered. In stage IV melanoma with a BRAF-V600  E/K mutation, first-line therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors can be offered as an alternative to immunotherapy. In patients with primary resistance to immunotherapy and harboring a BRAF-V600  E/K mutation, this therapy shall be offered as second-line therapy. Systemic therapy in stage III/IV melanoma is a rapidly changing landscape, and it is likely that these recommendations may change in the near future.

Neoadjuvant Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy in Melanoma: Efficacy, Safety and Timing

The introduction of effective systemic therapies has significantly changed the treatment of stage III and IV melanoma. Both immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies have improved recurrence-free survival in the adjuvant setting. Recent interest has sparked for neoadjuvant systemic therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors. The intended benefit of pre-operative treatment with immunotherapy is amongst others to enable tailoring of the surgery and adjuvant systemic therapy according to the treatment response. Most importantly, recurrence-free survival might be improved by neoadjuvant systemic therapy over the current standard of care of surgery followed by adjuvant systemic therapy. The first phase I and II trials investigating anti-PD1 inhibitors, both as a single agent and in combination with anti-CTLA-4 inhibitors or other therapeutic agents, have shown promising results. Pathological complete response on neoadjuvant systemic therapy seems a valid surrogate endpoint for relapse-free and overall survival. Pathological complete response rates in these trials vary between 30 and 70%. The optimal dose with respect to efficacy and toxicity and the interval between systemic and surgical treatment remain important issues to address. Accumulating follow-up data and ongoing phase III studies must prove if neoadjuvant systemic therapy is superior to surgery followed by standard-of-care adjuvant therapy.

The cure from within? a review of the microbiome and diet in melanoma

Therapy for cutaneous melanoma, the deadliest of the skin cancers, is inextricably linked to the immune system. Once thought impossible, cures for metastatic melanoma with immune checkpoint inhibitors have been developed within the last decade and now occur regularly in the clinic. Unfortunately, half of tumors do not respond to checkpoint inhibitors and efforts to further exploit the immune system are needed. Tantalizing associations with immune health and gut microbiome composition suggest we can improve the success rate of immunotherapy. The gut contains over half of the immune cells in our bodies and increasingly, evidence is linking the immune system within our gut to melanoma development and treatment. In this review, we discuss the importance the skin and gut microbiome may play in the development of melanoma. We examine the differences in the microbial populations which inhabit the gut of those who develop melanoma and subsequently respond to immunotherapeutics. We discuss the role of dietary intake on the development and treatment of melanoma. And finally, we review the landscape of published and registered clinical trials therapeutically targeting the microbiome in melanoma through dietary supplements, fecal microbiota transplant, and microbial supplementation.

The Current State of Treatment and Future Directions in Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma

Malignant melanoma is the leading cause of death among cutaneous malignancies. While its incidence is increasing, the most recent cancer statistics show a small but clear decrease in mortality rate. This trend reflects the introduction of novel and more effective therapeutic regimens, including the two cornerstones of melanoma therapy: immunotherapies and targeted therapies. Immunotherapies exploit the highly immunogenic nature of melanoma by modulating and priming the patient's own immune system to attack the tumor. Treatments combining immunotherapies with targeted therapies, which disable the carcinogenic products of mutated cancer cells, have further increased treatment efficacy and durability. Toxicity and resistance, however, remain critical challenges to the field. The present review summarizes past treatments and novel therapeutic interventions and discusses current clinical trials and future directions.

Updates in the evidence-based management of cutaneous melanoma

Treatment of cutaneous melanoma is changing with significant developments over the past several years that promise to reshape the field of melanoma surgical oncology. Modifications to the staging system based on analysis of a large international dataset, the timing and extent of regional lymphadenectomy, the emergence of effective systemic therapies in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting, and the role of adjuvant radiation are all undergoing a data-driven evolution. Surgeon engagement in multidisciplinary decision making remains an essential component of contemporary management for patients across all stages of melanoma and demands specific involvement of head and neck surgical oncologists.

Adjuvant Therapy for Melanoma: Past, Current, and Future Developments

This review describes the progress that the concept of adjuvant therapies has undergone in the last 50 years and focuses on the most recent development where an adjuvant approach has been scientifically evaluated in melanoma clinical trials. Over the past decade the development of immunotherapies and targeted therapies has drastically changed the treatment of stage IV melanoma patients. These successes led to trials studying the same therapies in the adjuvant setting, in high risk resected stage III and IV melanoma patients. Adjuvant immune checkpoint blockade with anti-CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab was the first drug to show an improvement in recurrence-free and overall survival but this was accompanied by high severe toxicity rates. Therefore, these results were bypassed by adjuvant treatment with anti-PD-1 agents nivolumab and pembrolizumab and BRAF-directed target therapy, which showed even better recurrence-free survival rates with more favorable toxicity rates. The whole concept of adjuvant therapy may be integrated with the new neoadjuvant approaches that are under investigation through several clinical trials. However, there is still no data available on whether the effective adjuvant therapy that patients finally have at their disposal could be offered to them while waiting for recurrence, sparing at least 50% of them a potentially long-term toxic side effect but with the same rate of overall survival (OS). Adjuvant therapy for melanoma has radically changed over the past few years—anti-PD-1 or BRAF-directed therapy is the new standard of care.

Systemic adjuvant therapy for adult patients at high risk for recurrent melanoma: A systematic review

Cutaneous melanoma is typically treated with wide local excision and, when appropriate, a sentinel node biopsy. Many patients are cured with this approach but for patients who have cancers with high risk features there is a significant risk of local and distant relapse and death. Interferon-based adjuvant therapy was recommended in the past but had modest results with significant toxicity. Recently, new therapies (immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies) have been found to be effective in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma and many of these therapies have been evaluated and found to be effective in the adjuvant treatment of high risk patients with melanoma. This systematic review of adjuvant therapies for cutaneous and mucosal melanoma was conducted for Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) as the basis of a clinical practice guideline to address the question of whether patients with completely resected melanoma should be considered for adjuvant systemic therapy and which adjuvant therapy should be used.

The extent of surgery for stage III melanoma: how much is appropriate?

Since the first documented lymph node dissection in 1892, many trials have investigated the potential effect of this surgical procedure on survival in patients with melanoma. Two randomised controlled trials were unable to demonstrate improved survival with completion lymph node dissection versus nodal observation in patients with sentinel node-positive disease, although patients with larger sentinel node metastases (>1 mm) might benefit more from observation than from dissection, and could potentially be considered for adjuvant systemic therapy instead of complete dissection. Adjuvant immunotherapy with high-dose ipilimumab has led to improvements in overall survival, whereas therapy with nivolumab and pembrolizumab has improved relapse-free survival with greater safety. Furthermore, adjuvant-targeted therapy with dabrafenib and trametinib has improved survival outcomes in BRAF^V600E and BRAF^V600K-mutated melanomas. Three neoadjuvant trials have all shown high response rates, including complete responses, after short-term combination therapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab with no recurrences so far, although follow-up is still short. Despite the absence of a survival benefit with completion lymph node dissection in patients with sentinel node-positive or negative disease, the use of sentinel node staging will increase because of the introduction of effective adjuvant therapies. However, routine completion lymph node dissection for sentinel node-positive disease should be reconsidered. Accordingly, existing clinical guidelines are currently being revised. For palpable (macroscopic) nodal disease, the type and extent of surgery could be reduced if the index node can accurately predict the response and if studies show that lymph node dissection can be safely foregone in patients with a complete response. Overall, the appropriate type and extent of surgery for stage III melanoma is changing and becoming more personalised.

Adjuvant therapy with pegylated interferon-alfa2b vs observation in stage II B/C patients with ulcerated primary: Results of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 18081 randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Subgroup analyses of two large EORTC adjuvant interferon-alpha2b (IFNα-2b) vs observation randomised trials demonstrated that a treatment benefit was observed only in patients with an ulcerated melanoma without palpable nodes (hazard ratio [HR] for recurrence-free survival [RFS] was 0.69). This was confirmed by a meta-analysis of 15 adjuvant IFN trials (HR: 0.79).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In the EORTC 18081 trial, sentinel node-negative stage II patients with an ulcerated primary melanoma were 1:1 randomised between pegylated (PEG)-IFNα-2b at 3 μg/kg/week subcutaneously and observation, for 2 years, or until disease recurrence or unacceptable toxicity in spite of dose adjustments to maintain an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Main end-point was RFS. Secondary end-points included distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), overall survival, and safety (EudraCT Number: 2009-010273-20).

RESULTS

Between February 2013 and January 2017, only 112 patients were randomised, 56 in each arm. The trial was stopped early for lack of recruitment. At a 3.4-year median follow-up, the estimated HR for the PEG-IFNα-2b group compared with the observation group regarding RFS was 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32-1.37), and the 3-year RFS rate was 80.0% (95% CI: 65.7-88.8%) and 72.9% (95% CI: 58.3-83.0%), respectively. DMFS was prolonged: HR: 0.39 (95% CI: 0.15-0.97), and the 3-year DMFS rate was 90.6% (95% CI: 78.9-96.0%) vs 76.4% (95% CI: 62.1-85.9%). One patient in the PEG-IFNα-2b group died compared with 4 in the observation group. Fifty-four patients started PEG-IFNα-2b treatment, 16 (29%) completed 2 years of treatment, 2 (4%) stopped due to recurrence, 23 (43%) due to toxicity and 14 (25%) due to other reasons.

CONCLUSIONS

The EORTC 18081 PEG-IFNα-2b randomised trial, observed a similar HR (0.69) for RFS as the previous EORTC trials (0.69). In countries without access to new drugs, adjuvant (PEG)-IFNα-2b treatment is an option for patients with ulcerated melanomas without palpable nodes.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for melanoma. Part 2: Treatment - Update 2019

A unique collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Dermatology Forum, the European Association of Dermato-Oncology and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed to make recommendations on cutaneous melanoma diagnosis and treatment, based on systematic literature reviews and the experts' experience. Cutaneous melanomas are excised with 1- to 2-cm safety margins. Sentinel lymph node dissection shall be performed as a staging procedure in patients with tumour thickness ≥1.0 mm or ≥0.8 mm with additional histological risk factors, although there is as yet no clear survival benefit for this approach. Therapeutic decisions in stage III/IV patients should be primarily made by an interdisciplinary oncology team ("Tumor Board"). Adjuvant therapies in stage III/IV patients are primarily anti-PD-1, independent of mutational status, or dabrafenib plus trametinib for BRAF-mutant patients. In distant metastasis, either resected or not, systemic treatment is indicated. For first-line treatment, particularly in BRAF wild-type patients, immunotherapy with PD-1 antibodies alone or in combination with CTLA-4 antibodies shall be considered. In particular scenarios for patients with stage IV melanoma and a BRAF-V600 E/K mutation, first-line therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors can be offered as an alternative to immunotherapy. In patients with primary resistance to immunotherapy and harbouring a BRAF-V600 E/K mutation, this therapy shall be offered in second-line. Systemic therapy in stage III/IV melanoma is a rapidly changing landscape, and it is likely that these recommendations may change in the near future.

Comparative efficacy and safety of dabrafenib in combination with trametinib versus competing adjuvant therapies for high-risk melanoma

Aim To conduct a systematic literature review of high-risk resectable cutaneous melanoma adjuvant therapeutics and compare safety and efficacy. Methods: The systematic literature review included randomized controlled trials investigating: dabrafenib plus trametinib (DAB + TRAM), nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, vemurafenib, chemotherapy and interferons. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival and safety. All outcomes were synthesized using Bayesian network meta-analysis. Results: Across relapse-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival and OS, DAB + TRAM had the lowest estimated hazards of respective events relative to all other treatments (exception relative to nivolumab in OS). Differences were significant relative to placebo, chemotherapy, interferons and ipilimumab. Conclusion: DAB + TRAM has improved efficacy over historical treatment options (ipilimumab, interferons and chemotherapy) and comparable efficacy with other targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Surgical Considerations and Systemic Therapy of Melanoma

Recent advances in effective medical therapies have markedly improved the prognosis for patients with advanced melanoma. This article aims to highlight the current era of integrated multidisciplinary care of patients with advanced melanoma by outlining current approved therapies, including immunotherapy, targeted therapy, radiation therapy, and other strategies used in both the adjuvant and the neoadjuvant setting as well as the evolving role of surgical intervention in the changing landscape of advanced melanoma.

The adjuvant treatment revolution for high-risk melanoma patients

The past 5 years have witnessed the results of many practice-changing studies that have dramatically improved the landscape of adjuvant therapy in patients with resected, high-risk melanoma. After a 20-year era of adjuvant interferon, the anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 immune-checkpoint inhibitors, and MAPK-directed targeted therapy brought a revolution into the adjuvant treatment of melanoma. These results came along with the practice-changing results of two large multicenter studies showing no benefit in terms of overall survival for completion lymph node dissection after positive sentinel node biopsy. In this review, we summarized the current state of the art of the adjuvant treatment of high-risk melanoma, with a view on future perspectives.

Adjuvant Therapy for Melanoma

OPINION STATEMENT

In recent years, the number of patients with malignant melanoma has continued to increase globally; surgery remains the first treatment option for patients with resectable melanoma. Adjuvant therapy for patients with stage III and IV melanoma following surgical resection has gradually been approved. After complete resection, these patients can probably derive significant benefit from adjuvant therapy. New treatments that improve the long-term survival of patients with unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma are currently under evaluation in adjuvant therapy to increase relapse-free survival and overall survival. We here review several relevant clinical trials of radiotherapy, systemic immune therapies, molecular-targeted therapies, and neoadjuvant therapies in order to shed light on most suitable adjuvant therapy. The findings of this review include the following: The use of interferon-α2b will be restricted for patients with ulcerated primary melanoma in countries with no access to new drugs in adjuvant therapy. Ipilimumab should not be considered as the first-line therapy due to its lower efficacy and severe toxicity. The use of anti-programmed death-1 antibody would be a relevant adjuvant therapy for patients without BRAF mutation. If the BRAF mutation status is positive, the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib is a plausible option. The establishment of appropriate therapeutic planning and clinical endpoints in adjuvant therapy should affect the standard of care. The choice of optimal adjuvant therapy for individual patients is an important issue.

Update on adjuvant melanoma therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review the results from relevant clinical trials and discuss current strategies in the melanoma adjuvant setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

The favorable therapeutic efficacy and the significant less toxicity of nivolumab compared with ipilimumab, fully substitutes today's approval of ipilimumab, regardless mutation status, whereas in BRAF-mutated patients, dabrafenib and trametinib seem to confirm their high efficacy also in adjuvant setting. The use of interferon is restricted to patients with ulcerated melanoma and countries with no access to the new drugs.

SUMMARY

Systemic adjuvant treatment after complete disease resection in high-risk melanoma patients aims to increase relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). According to the eighth edition of melanoma classification of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC), the prognosis in stage III patients is heterogeneous and depends not only on N (nodal) but also on T (tumor thickness) category criteria. Recent data from randomized, phase-3 clinical trials analyzing the use of adjuvant anti-programmed death-1 and targeted therapies ultimately affect the standard of care and change the landscape of the adjuvant treatment.

Cutaneous Melanoma, Version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Cutaneous melanoma have been significantly revised over the past few years in response to emerging data on immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies and BRAF-targeted therapy. This article summarizes the data and rationale supporting extensive changes to the recommendations for systemic therapy as adjuvant treatment of resected disease and as treatment of unresectable or distant metastatic disease.

An update on the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer consensus statement on tumor immunotherapy for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma: version 2.0

BACKGROUND

Cancer immunotherapy has been firmly established as a standard of care for patients with advanced and metastatic melanoma. Therapeutic outcomes in clinical trials have resulted in the approval of 11 new drugs and/or combination regimens for patients with melanoma. However, prospective data to support evidence-based clinical decisions with respect to the optimal schedule and sequencing of immunotherapy and targeted agents, how best to manage emerging toxicities and when to stop treatment are not yet available.

METHODS

To address this knowledge gap, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) Melanoma Task Force developed a process for consensus recommendations for physicians treating patients with melanoma integrating evidence-based data, where available, with best expert consensus opinion. The initial consensus statement was published in 2013, and version 2.0 of this report is an update based on a recent meeting of the Task Force and extensive subsequent discussions on new agents, contemporary peer-reviewed literature and emerging clinical data. The Academy of Medicine (formerly Institute of Medicine) clinical practice guidelines were used as a basis for consensus development with an updated literature search for important studies published between 1992 and 2017 and supplemented, as appropriate, by recommendations from Task Force participants.

RESULTS

The Task Force considered patients with stage II-IV melanoma and here provide consensus recommendations for how they would incorporate the many immunotherapy options into clinical pathways for patients with cutaneous melanoma.

CONCLUSION

These clinical guidleines provide physicians and healthcare providers with consensus recommendations for managing melanoma patients electing treatment with tumor immunotherapy.

Targeting gp100 and TRP-2 with a DNA vaccine: Incorporating T cell epitopes with a human IgG1 antibody induces potent T cell responses that are associated with favourable clinical outcome in a phase I/II trial

A DNA vaccine, SCIB1, incorporating two CD8 and two CD4 epitopes from TRP-2/gp100 was evaluated in patients with metastatic melanoma. Each patient received SCIB1 via intramuscular injection with electroporation. The trial was designed to find the safest dose of SCIB1 which induced immune/clinical responses in patients with or without tumour. Fifteen patients with tumor received SCIB1 doses of 0.4-8 mg whilst 20 fully-resected patients received 2-8 mg doses. Twelve patients elected to continue immunization every 3 months for up to 39 months. SCIB1 induced dose-dependent T cell responses in 88% of patients with no serious adverse effects or dose limiting toxicities. The intensity of the T cell responses was significantly higher in patients receiving 4 mg doses without tumor when compared to those with tumor (p < 0.01). In contrast, patients with tumor showed a significantly higher response to the 8 mg dose than the 4 mg dose (p < 0.03) but there was no significant difference in the patients without tumor. One of 15 patients with measurable disease showed an objective tumor response and 7/15 showed stable disease. 5/20 fully-resected patients have experienced disease recurrence but all remained alive at the cut-off date with a median observation time of 37 months. A positive clinical outcome was associated with MHC-I and MHC-II expression on tumors prior to therapy (p = 0.027). We conclude that SCIB1 is well tolerated and stimulates potent T cell responses in melanoma patients. It deserves further evaluation as a single agent adjuvant therapy or in combination with checkpoint inhibitors in advanced disease.

Anorectal mucosal melanoma

Anorectal melanoma is an uncommon and aggressive mucosal melanocytic malignancy. Due to its rarity, the pre-operative diagnosis remains difficult. The first symptoms are non-specific such as anal bleeding, anal mass or pain. Although anorectal melanoma carries a poor prognosis; optimal therapeutics strategies are unclear. Surgical resection remains the mainstay of treatment. The optimal surgical procedure for primary tumours is controversial and can vary from wide local excision or endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) to an abdomino-perineal resection. A high degree of uncertainly exists regarding the benefit of radiation therapy or chemotherapy. The treatment of advanced melanoma is evolving rapidly with better understanding of the disease biology and immunology. Considerable effort has been devoted to the identification of molecular determinants of response to target therapies and immunotherapy.

Relapse-Free Survival as a Surrogate for Overall Survival in the Evaluation of Stage II-III Melanoma Adjuvant Therapy

Background

We assessed whether relapse-free survival (RFS; time until recurrence/death) is a valid surrogate for overall survival (OS) among resected stage II-III melanoma patients through a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Methods

Individual patient data (IPD) on RFS and OS were collected from 5826 patients enrolled in 11 randomized adjuvant trials comparing interferon (IFN) to observation. In addition, IPD from two studies comparing IFN and vaccination in 989 patients were included. A two-level modeling approach was used for assessing Spearman's patient-level correlation (rho) of RFS and OS and the trial-level coefficient of determination (R²) of the treatment effects on RFS and on OS. The results were validated externally in 13 adjuvant studies without available IPD. We then tested the results on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 18071 double-blind trial comparing ipilimumab 10 mg/kg with placebo, which showed a statistically significant impact of the checkpoint inhibitor on RFS and OS. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results

With a median follow-up of seven years, 12 of 13 trials showed a consistency between the IFN vs No IFN differences regarding RFS (hazard ratio [HR]RFS = 0.88) and OS (HROS = 0.91), but the small trial, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 2696, was an outlier (HRRFS = 0.72 vs HROS = 1.11). Therefore, even if rho was high, R² was low and could not reliably be estimated. Based on the 12 trials, rho remained high (0.89), and the hazard ratios for RFS and OS were strongly correlated (R² = 0.91). The surrogate threshold effect for RFS was estimated to be 0.77. For the EORTC 18071 trial, the hazard ratio for RFS was 0.75, predicting an effect of ipilimumab on OS. This was subsequently confirmed (HROS = 0.72, 95.1% confidence interval = 0.58 to 0.88, P = .001).

Conclusions

In high-risk stage II-III melanoma, RFS appeared to be a valid surrogate end point for OS for adjuvant randomized studies assessing interferon or a checkpoint inhibitor. In future similar adjuvant studies, a hazard ratio for RFS of 0.77 or less would predict a treatment impact on OS.

Stimulating Innate Immunity to Enhance Radiation Therapy-Induced Tumor Control

Novel ligands that target Toll-like receptors and other innate recognition pathways represent a potent strategy for modulating innate immunity to generate antitumor immunity. Although many of the current clinically successful immunotherapies target adaptive T-cell responses, both preclinical and clinical studies suggest that adjuvants have the potential to enhance the scope and efficacy of cancer immunotherapy. Radiation may be a particularly good partner to combine with innate immune therapies, because it is a highly efficient means to kill cancer cells but may fail to send the appropriate inflammatory signals needed to act as an efficient endogenous vaccine. This may explain why although radiation therapy is a highly used cancer treatment, true abscopal effects-regression of disease outside the field without additional systemic therapy-are extremely rare. This review focuses on efforts to combine innate immune stimuli as adjuvants with radiation, creating a distinct and complementary approach from T cell-targeted therapies to enhance antitumor immunity.

The 2017 complete overhaul of adjuvant therapies for high-risk melanoma and its consequences for staging and management of melanoma patients

The spectacular outcomes of the phase III trials regarding nivolumab versus ipilimumab in fully resected stage IIIB/C-IV and of the combination of dabrafenib (D) plus trametinib (T) in BRAF-mutant stage III patients demonstrate that effective treatments in advanced melanoma are also highly effective in the adjuvant setting. In 2016, an overall survival benefit with adjuvant high-dose ipilimumab was demonstrated, and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 1325 comparing pembrolizumab versus placebo will complete the picture in the early 2018. Toxicity profiles are in line with the experience in advanced melanoma, i.e. favourable for the anti-PD1 agents and for D + T and problematic for ipilimumab. The 2017 outcomes are practice changing and put an end to the use of interferon (IFN) and ipilimumab. In countries with only access to IFN, its use can be restricted to patients with ulcerated melanoma, based on the individual patient data meta-analysis recently published. Because of the results of the Melanoma Sentinel Lymph node Trial-2 (MSLT-2) trial, completion lymph node dissection (CLND) will decrease sharply, leading to a lack of optimal prognostic information. Prognosis in sentinel node-positive stage IIIA/B patients is extremely heterogeneous with 5-year survival rates varying from 90% to 40% and depends mostly on the number of positive nodes identified by CLND. This information is crucial for clinical decision-making. How to guarantee optimal staging information needs to be discussed urgently. Further improvements of adjuvant therapies will have to address all these questions as well as the exploration of neoadjuvant use of active drugs and combination approaches. Important paradigm shifts in the management of high-risk melanoma patients are upon us.

Dose-escalation study evaluating pegylated interferon alpha-2a in patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma

BACKGROUND

This open-label, multicenter, dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of subcutaneous pegylated (40 kD) interferon α-2a (PEG-IFN α-2a) in patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PEG-IFN α-2a was administered subcutaneously at 180 (n = 4), 270 (n = 6), or 360 μg (n = 3) once weekly for 12 weeks. Efficacy was assessed by the proportion of patients with complete response (CR) or partial response (PR).

RESULTS

PEG-IFN α-2a was generally well tolerated, with a moderate number of reductions or withholding of doses because of adverse events (AEs) (25% (n = 1), 66% (n = 4), and 0% (n = 0) in the 180-, 270-, and 360-μg/week groups, respectively). The only dose-limiting toxicity was a grade 3 elevation of liver enzymes in the 270-μg dose group. The most common AEs were fatigue, acute flu-like symptoms, and hepatic toxicity. The major response rate (CR or PR) was 50% in the 180-μg group (CR, 50%; PR, 0%), 83% in the 270-μg group (CR, 67%; PR, 17%), and 66% in the 360-μg group (CR, 33%; PR, 33%).

CONCLUSION

PEG-IFN α-2a at doses up to 360 μg once weekly was well tolerated in patients with CTCL up to the highest dose group and showed good response rates. Due to their good tolerance even in high doses, they might be an option for patients not tolerating standard IFN-α preparations. However, for this purpose and to evaluate comparability between standard and PEG-IFN larger clinical trials are needed, alone and in combination with oral photochemotherapy (PUVA).

Cancer immunotherapy: Opportunities and challenges in the rapidly evolving clinical landscape

Cancer immunotherapy is now established as a powerful way to treat cancer. The recent clinical success of immune checkpoint blockade (antagonists of CTLA-4, PD-1 and PD-L1) highlights both the universal power of treating the immune system across tumour types and the unique features of cancer immunotherapy. Immune-related adverse events, atypical clinical response patterns, durable responses, and clear overall survival benefit distinguish cancer immunotherapy from cytotoxic cancer therapy. Combination immunotherapies that transform non-responders to responders are under rapid development. Current challenges facing the field include incorporating immunotherapy into adjuvant and neoadjuvant cancer therapy, refining dose, schedule and duration of treatment and developing novel surrogate endpoints that accurately capture overall survival benefit early in treatment. As the field rapidly evolves, we must prioritise the development of biomarkers to guide the use of immunotherapies in the most appropriate patients. Immunotherapy is already transforming cancer from a death sentence to a chronic disease for some patients. By making smart, evidence-based decisions in developing next generation immunotherapies, cancer should become an imminently treatable, curable and even preventable disease.

Adjuvant Therapy for Melanoma

Systemic adjuvant therapy for surgically resected cutaneous melanoma that is at high risk for disease recurrence and death targets residual micrometastatic disease which is the source of future local or distant relapse. Interferon-alfa (IFNα) has been the most extensively studied in regimens that varied by dosage, route of administration, formulation, and duration of therapy. Most regimens have demonstrated improvements in relapse-free survival (RFS), while the regimen administered at high dosage (HDI) showed improvements in overall survival (OS) in two out of three RCTs. HDI benefits as measured by the hazard ratios (HR) in E1684 (vs. observation), E1690 (vs. observation), and E1694 (vs. vaccine) trials were estimated at 0.61, 0.78, and 0.67 (RFS) and 0.67, 1.0, and 0.72 (OS) when first reported with lesser estimates on later updates. Pegylated IFNα (peg-IFN) as studied in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 18991 trial in patients with stage III melanoma significantly reduced the risk of relapse (HR 0.87) with no impact on OS. More recently (EORTC 18071), ipilimumab at the high dose of 10 mg/kg was shown to significantly improve RFS (HR 0.76) and OS (HR 0.72) of stage III melanoma patients but at a significant cost in terms of immune-related toxicities. Ongoing adjuvant studies are testing ipilimumab at 3 or 10 mg/kg versus HDI (E1609) and the anti-PD-1 antibodies nivolumab (CheckMate 238) and pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-054 and S1404).

Oncolytic virotherapy including Rigvir and standard therapies in malignant melanoma

The treatment of metastatic melanoma has evolved from an era where interferon and chemotherapy were the mainstay of treatments to an era where immunotherapy has become the frontline. Ipilimumab (IgG1 CTLA-4 inhibitor), nivolumab (IgG4 PD-1 inhibitor), pembrolizumab (IgG4 PD-1 inhibitor) and nivolumab combined with ipilimumab have become first-line therapies in patients with metastatic melanoma. In addition, the high prevalence of BRAF mutations in melanoma has led to the discovery and approval of targeted molecules, such as vemurafenib (BRAF kinase inhibitor) and trametinib (MEK inhibitor), as they yielded improved responses and survival in malignant melanoma patients. This is certainly a burgeoning time in immunotherapy drug development, and the aforementioned efforts along with the recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC), a recombinant oncolytic herpes virus, have paved the way to exploring the role of additional oncolytic viruses, such as the echovirus Rigvir, as new and innovative treatment modalities in patients with melanoma. Herein, we discuss the current standard of care treatment in melanoma with an emphasis on immunotherapy and oncolytic viruses in development.

Phase III Randomized Study of 4 Weeks of High-Dose Interferon-α-2b in Stage T2bNO, T3a-bNO, T4a-bNO, and T1-4N1a-2a (microscopic) Melanoma: A Trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cancer Research Group (E1697)

Purpose To test the efficacy of 4 weeks of intravenous (IV) induction with high-dose interferon (IFN) as part of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group regimen compared with observation (OBS) in patients with surgically resected intermediate-risk melanoma. Patients and Methods In this intergroup international trial, eligible patients had surgically resected cutaneous melanoma in the following categories: (1) T2bN0, (2) T3a-bN0, (3) T4a-bN0, and (4) T1-4N1a-2a (microscopic). Patients were randomly assigned to receive IFN α-2b at 20 MU/m²/d IV for 5 days (Monday to Friday) every week for 4 weeks (IFN) or OBS. Stratification factors were pathologic lymph node status, lymph node staging procedure, Breslow depth, ulceration of the primary lesion, and disease stage. The primary end point was relapse-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, toxicity, and quality of life. Results A total of 1,150 patients were randomly assigned. At a median follow-up of 7 years, the 5-year relapse-free survival rate was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.66 to 0.74) for OBS and 0.70, (95% CI, 0.66 to 0.74) for IFN ( P = .964). The 5-year overall survival rate was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79 to 0.86) for OBS and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.80 to 0.86) for IFN ( P = .558). Treatment-related grade 3 and higher toxicity was 4.6% versus 57.9% for OBS and IFN, respectively ( P < .001). Quality of life was worse for the treated group. Conclusion Four weeks of IV induction as part of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group high-dose IFN regimen is not better than OBS alone for patients with intermediate-risk melanoma as defined in this trial.

Surgical Management and Adjuvant Therapy for High-Risk and Metastatic Melanoma

Wide local excision is considered routine therapy after initial diagnosis of primary melanoma to reduce local recurrences, but it does not impact survival. Sentinel node staging is recommended for melanomas of intermediate thickness, but it has also not demonstrated any indisputable therapeutic effect on survival. The prognostic value of sentinel node staging has been long established and is therefore considered routine, especially in light of the eligibility criteria for adjuvant therapy (trials). Whether completion lymph node dissection after a positive sentinel node biopsy improves survival is the question of current trials. The MSLT-2 study is best powered to show a potential benefit, but it has not yet reported any data. Another study, the German DECOG study, presented at the 2015 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting did not show any benefit but is criticized for the underpowered design and insufficient follow-up. There is no consensus on the use of adjuvant interferon in melanoma. This topic has been the focus of many studies with different regimens (low-, intermediate-, or high-dose and/or short- or long-term treatment). Adjuvant interferon has been shown to improve relapse-free survival but failed to improve overall survival. More recently, adjuvant ipilimumab has also demonstrated an improved relapse-free survival. Overall survival data have not yet been reported due to insufficient follow-up. Currently, studies are ongoing to analyze the use of adjuvant anti-PD-1 and molecular targeted therapies (vemurafenib, dabrafenib, and trametinib). In the absence of unambiguously positive approved agents, clinical trial participation remains a priority. This could change in the near future.

Pediatric melanoma

Childhood melanoma is a rare pediatric malignancy, with fewer than 500 new diagnoses annually. The incidence is increasing, particularly in the adolescent population. This review highlights the epidemiology, clinical presentation, and histopathologic challenges of pediatric melanoma. Surgical resection remains the cornerstone for localized and regionally advanced disease. Adjuvant therapies, including current options and potential novel therapeutics for this unique population will be discussed.

Diagnosis and treatment of melanoma. European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline - Update 2016

Cutaneous melanoma (CM) is potentially the most dangerous form of skin tumour and causes 90% of skin cancer mortality. A unique collaboration of multi-disciplinary experts from the European Dermatology Forum, the European Association of Dermato-Oncology and the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer was formed to make recommendations on CM diagnosis and treatment, based on systematic literature reviews and the experts' experience. Diagnosis is made clinically using dermoscopy and staging is based upon the AJCC system. CMs are excised with 1-2 cm safety margins. Sentinel lymph node dissection is routinely offered as a staging procedure in patients with tumours >1 mm in thickness, although there is as yet no clear survival benefit for this approach. Interferon-α treatment may be offered to patients with stage II and III melanoma as an adjuvant therapy, as this treatment increases at least the disease-free survival and less clear the overall survival (OS) time. The treatment is however associated with significant toxicity. In distant metastasis, all options of surgical therapy have to be considered thoroughly. In the absence of surgical options, systemic treatment is indicated. For first-line treatment particularly in BRAF wild-type patients, immunotherapy with PD-1 antibodies alone or in combination with CTLA-4 antibodies should be considered. BRAF inhibitors like dabrafenib and vemurafenib in combination with the MEK inhibitors trametinib and cobimetinib for BRAF mutated patients should be offered as first or second line treatment. Therapeutic decisions in stage IV patients should be primarily made by an interdisciplinary oncology team ('Tumour Board').

Adjuvant treatment with pegylated interferon α-2a versus low-dose interferon α-2a in patients with high-risk melanoma: a randomized phase III DeCOG trial

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant treatment with interferon (IFN)-α-2a improved disease-free survival (DFS) and showed a trend for improving overall survival (OS) in melanoma. This trial was designed to examine whether PEG-IFN is superior to IFN with regard to distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), DFS and OS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this multicenter, open-label, prospective randomized phase III trial, patients with resected cutaneous melanoma stage IIA(T3a)-IIIB (AJCC 2002) were randomized to receive PEG-IFN (180 μg subcutaneously 1×/week; 24 months) or IFN α-2a (3MIU subcutaneously 3×/week; 24 months). Randomization was stratified for stage, number of metastatic nodes, age and previous IFN treatment. The primary end point was DMFS; secondary end points were OS, DFS, quality of life (QoL) and tolerability.

RESULTS

A total of 909 patients were enrolled (451 PEG-IFN versus 458 IFN). Neither 5-year DMFS [PEG-IFN 61.0% versus IFN 67.3%; hazard ratio (HR) 1.16, P = 0.21] nor 5-year OS (PEG-IFN 73.2% versus IFN 75.2%; HR 1.05, P = 0.70) nor 5-year DFS (PEG-IFN 57.3% versus IFN 60.9%; HR 1.09, P = 0.40) showed significant differences. Subgroup analyses in patients ± ulcerated primaries and of different tumor stages did not find differences in DMFS, OS or DFS between the treatment groups. One hundred and eighteen patients (26.2%) in the PEG-IFN and 61 patients (13.3%) in the IFN population did not receive the full dosage and length of treatment due to adverse events (P < 0.001). Leukopenia and elevation of liver enzymes were more common in the PEG-IFN arm (56% versus 23.5% LCP; 19.1% versus 9.4% AST; 33.0% versus 16.5% ALT). QoL was identical for nearly all domains.

CONCLUSION

PEG-IFN did not improve the outcome over IFN. A higher percentage of patients under PEG-IFN discontinued treatment due to toxicity.

CLINICAL TRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER

NCT00204529.

Adjuvant treatment for stage III melanoma in the era of targeted medicine and immunotherapy

The accelerated development in the treatment of metastatic melanoma, both in molecular targeted therapy and immunotherapy, is already starting to impact on adjuvant therapy in stage III melanoma. Following the approval of ipilimumab for adjuvant therapy in melanoma, clinical trials assessing other checkpoint modulators and MAPK pathway inhibitors as adjuvant treatments for melanoma are currently ongoing. As results from these trials mature in the next few years, a change in the landscape of adjuvant treatment for melanoma is expected, resulting in new challenges in treatment decisions such as optimizing patients selection through predictive and prognostic biomarkers, and management of treatment related adverse events, in particular immune related toxicities.

Effectiveness of electrochemotherapy after IFN-α adjuvant therapy of melanoma patients

Background

The combination of electrochemotherapy with immuno-modulatory treatments has already been explored and proven effective. However, the role of interferon alpha (IFN-α) adjuvant therapy of melanoma patients and implication on electrochemotherapy effectiveness has not been explored yet. Therefore, the aim of the study was to retrospectively evaluate the effectiveness and safety of electrochemotherapy after the previous adjuvant treatment with IFN-α in melanoma patients.

Patients and methods

The study was a retrospective single-center observational analysis of the patients with advanced melanoma, treated with electrochemotherapy after previous IFN-α adjuvant therapy. Five patients, treated between January 2008 and December 2014, were included into the study, regardless of the time point of IFN-α adjuvant therapy.

Results

Electrochemotherapy of recurrent melanoma after the IFN-α adjuvant therapy proved to be a safe and effective treatment. Patients with one or two metastases responded completely. Among patients with multiple metastases, there was a variable response rate. In one patient all 23 metastases responded completely, in second patient more than 85% of all together 80 metastases responded completely and in third patient all 5 metastases had partial response. Taking into account all metastases from all patients together there was an 85% complete response rate.

Conclusions

The study showed that electrochemotherapy of recurrent melanoma after the IFN-α adjuvant therapy is a safe and effective treatment modality, which results in a high complete response rate, not only in single metastasis, but also in multiple metastases. The high complete response rate might be due to an IFN-α immune-editing effect, however, further studies with a larger number of patients are needed to support this presumption.

Adjuvant Therapy of Melanoma

The incidence of melanoma is rapidly increasing, especially in younger female and older male patients. Recent fundamental advances in our knowledge of melanoma tumorigenesis have established roles for inhibitors of the MAPK pathway and regulatory immune checkpoints CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1. However, the majority of patients continue to present with non-metastatic disease-typically managed with surgical resection and adjuvant therapy. High-dose IFN-α2b (HDI) is the main adjuvant therapeutic mainstay in high-risk disease following definitive resection. In this chapter, we review the evidence supporting the use of adjuvant HDI in high-risk melanoma. We also discuss some of the other treatment modalities that have been evaluated including vaccines, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy.

SEOM guidelines for the management of Malignant Melanoma 2015

All melanoma patients must be confirmed histologically and resected according to Breslow. Sentinel node biopsy must be done when tumor is over 1 mm or if less with high-risk factors. Adjuvant therapy with interferon must be offered for patients with high-risk melanoma and in selected cases radiotherapy can be added. Metastatic melanoma treatment is guided by mutational BRAF status. BRAF wild type patients must receive anti-PD1 therapy and BRAF mutated patients BRAF/MEK inhibitors or anti-PD1 therapy. Up to 10 years follow up is recommended for melanoma patients with dermatologic examinations and physical exams.

Intermittent High-Dose Intravenous Interferon Alfa-2b for Adjuvant Treatment of Stage III Melanoma: Final Analysis of a Randomized Phase III Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group Trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy, safety, tolerability, and quality of life (QoL) in patients receiving intravenous, intermittent high-dose interferon alfa-2b (IFN-α-2b [iHDI]) compared with standard high-dose IFN-α-2b (HDI).

PATIENT AND METHODS

Patients with stage III resected lymph node or in-transit metastasis from cutaneous malignant melanoma were randomly assigned to receive either a standard HDI regimen or three courses of IFN-α-2b 20 MIU/m(2) administered intravenously 5 days a week for 4 weeks then repeated every 4 months. Distant metastasis-free survival was the primary end point for efficacy analysis. In addition, relapse-free survival, overall survival, safety as determined by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events criteria, and QoL were secondary end points.

RESULTS

Of 649 patients enrolled, 22 patients were excluded from the intent-to-treat analysis. The remaining 627 patients were well balanced between the arms according to sex, age, and stage. After a median follow-up of 55 months, a multivariable Cox model revealed no significant differences for distant metastasis-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.21; P = .12) or overall survival (HR, 1.01; P = .85). In contrast, the difference for relapse-free survival was significant (HR, 1.27; P = .03), favoring standard HDI. Early termination of treatment because of adverse events or QoL occurred significantly more often with HDI than with iHDI (26.0% v 14.8%; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Although the safety and QoL profiles for the intermittent regimen were favorable, no significant difference was observed for survival while the HR for relapse with iHDI was increased. Therefore, an iHDI regimen, as tested here, cannot be recommended as adjuvant treatment for high-risk melanoma.

Novel dendritic cell-based vaccination in late stage melanoma

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

Who benefits most from adjuvant interferon treatment for melanoma?

Metastatic melanoma has a poor prognosis; the median survival for patients with stage IV melanoma ranges from 8 to 18 months after diagnosis. Interferon-α provides significant improvement in disease-free survival at the cost of poor tolerability. Identifying patients who benefit the most may improve the cost:benefit ratio. In addition, no data exist for the role of adjuvant therapy in noncutaneous melanoma. Molecular profiles may help to identify patients who benefit the most from adjuvant interferon therapy. In this review, the American Joint Commission on Cancer 2009 staging criteria and emerging biomarker data to guide adjuvant treatment decisions will be discussed. Several criteria to guide selection of patients are discussed in detail. These include Breslow thickness, number of positive lymph nodes, whether or not the primary lesion has ulcerated, immunologic markers, and cytokine profiles. Substantial progress has been made in deciding which patients benefit from interferon-α adjuvant therapy. Interferon-α is the only agent currently approved for the adjuvant treatment of this deadly disease, despite its side effect profile. More effective drugs with better tolerability are needed.