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

Efficacy of encorafenib plus binimetinib in patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma brain metastases: Results from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry

AIM

Data on the effectiveness of encorafenib/binimetinib in melanoma patients with brain metastases (BMs) are limited.

METHODS

All patients with BRAF V600-mutated melanoma and BMs treated with encorafenib/binimetinib between 2019 and 2022 in the Netherlands were included from the nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Patients previously treated with other BRAF/MEK inhibitors were excluded. We analyzed objective response rates (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Multivariable Cox regression identified factors associated with survival. Subgroup analyses included asymptomatic versus symptomatic BMs and line of treatment (first-line versus later-line).

RESULTS

In total, 190 patients were included. Symptomatic BMs were present in 63 % of patients. Encorafenib/binimetinib was the first-line treatment in 64 % of all patients, while 36 % had prior immunotherapy. Overall, the ORR was 69.4 %, median PFS was 5.5 months (95 %CI 4.9-6.2), and median OS 11.9 months (95 %CI 10.0-15.7). Age ≥ 70, ECOG PS ≥ 2, symptomatic BMs, and elevated LDH were significantly associated with worse survival. Patients with prior immunotherapy had a median PFS of 6.9 months (95 %CI 4.3-9.6) and OS of 17.9 months (95 %CI 13.7-31.2), while this was 4.9 months (95 %CI 4.3-5.5) and 10.1 months (95 %CI 8.1-13.0) in treatment-naïve patients. Median PFS and OS in patients with asymptomatic versus symptomatic BMs were 6.1 months (95 %CI 4.9-9.8) and 20.5 (95 %CI 14.0-NA) versus 5.3 months (95 %CI 4.9-6.3) and 10.7 (95 %CI 8.9-13.7), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Encorafenib/binimetinib has clinical activity in real-world melanoma patients with BMs. Their prognosis is determined by the presence of symptomatic BMs, age, ECOG PS, and LDH levels.

Early switch from run-in with targeted to immunotherapy in advanced BRAFV600-positive melanoma: final results of the randomised phase II ImmunoCobiVem trial

BACKGROUND

Optimal sequencing of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted therapies (TTs) in BRAFV600-positive advanced melanoma should achieve rapid tumour control and durable progression-free survival (PFS), translating into prolonged overall survival (OS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The 1 : 1 randomised phase II ImmunoCobiVem trial compared-after a 3-month run-in phase with vemurafenib (VEM, 960 mg twice daily) and cobimetinib (COB, 60 mg daily days 21-28, q4w)-continuous VEM + COB until disease progression (PD1) and second-line atezolizumab (ATEZO, 1200 mg, q3w) in arm A versus early switch to ATEZO after run-in, followed by crossover to VEM + COB at PD1, in arm B. PFS from the start of run-in until PD1 was the primary endpoint (PFS1); secondary efficacy endpoints were OS, overall PFS (PFS2) and PFS3 (time from PD1 to PD after crossover, i.e. PD2) and best overall response rates (BORRs).

RESULTS

The final analysis (median follow-up 57.0 months, interquartile range 22.7-63.0 months) confirmed longer PFS1 for continuous TT [arm A (69 patients) versus arm B (early switch, 66 patients); hazard ratio (HR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.91, P = 0.006], but early switch to ICIs resulted in better long-term OS [4- and 5-year landmark OS 42% (95% CI 29% to 55%) and 40% (95% CI 27% to 53%) for arm A, and 53% (95% CI 38% to 65%) and 45% (95% CI 31% to 58%) for arm B; descriptive HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.71-1.91]. Absolute BORRs were 81% and 89%, respectively, with 15 (22%) and 19 (29%) patients achieving a complete response at least once along each sequence. At crossover, TT retreatment (arm B) resulted in higher PFS3 than second-line ICI (arm A).

CONCLUSIONS

Early switch to ICIs after TT run-in (arm B) led to an improved, although not statistically significant, 4- and 5-year landmark OS compared with arm A. No subgroups were identified for which a TT run-in provided clinical benefit. The number of patients developing brain metastasis and the time to brain metastasis were not improved by an early TT to ICI switch.

The role of upfront radiation therapy for brain metastases in the era of CNS-active systemic therapies: a narrative review of clinical trial design and lessons learned

PURPOSE

Systemic therapies are increasingly being considered as primary treatments for brain metastases (BM), deferring the upfront use of local treatment modalities. However, evidence to support this paradigm shift is difficult to interpret given the volume of data published and the intricacies of the outcomes reported. The objective of this narrative review is to evaluate the current evidence guiding treatment selection for BM patients by assembling and analyzing a detailed dataset of clinical trials, completed and published during the last two decades.

METHODS

Obstacles in interpreting the results of prospective systemic therapy clinical trials are detailed, including non-standardized study cohorts, inconsistent use of response assessment criteria, insufficient endpoint definition for central nervous system (CNS) efficacy, and under-reporting of previous radiotherapy. The paucity of prospective data to guide radiation therapy options is also addressed, and caveats of the available published evidence are detailed.

RESULTS

Proposed treatment and follow-up recommendations for patient with newly diagnosed BM are provided based on currently available evidence.

CONCLUSION

Prospective trials evaluating contemporary treatment paradigms and defining the respective roles of systemic and local therapies are eagerly awaited.

Bridging the gap: unlocking the potential of emerging drug therapies for brain metastasis

Brain metastasis remains an unmet clinical need in advanced cancers with an increasing incidence and poor prognosis. The limited response to various treatments is mainly derived from the presence of the substantive barrier, blood-brain barrier (BBB) and brain-tumour barrier (BTB), which hinders the access of potentially effective therapeutics to the metastatic tumour of the brain. Recently, the understanding of the structural and molecular features of the BBB/BTB has led to the development of efficient strategies to enhance BBB/BTB permeability and deliver drugs across the BBB/BTB to elicit the anti-tumour response against brain metastasis. Meanwhile, novel agents capable of penetrating the BBB have rapidly developed and been evaluated in preclinical studies and clinical trials, with both targeted therapies and immunotherapies demonstrating impressive intracranial activity against brain metastasis. In this review, we summarize the recent advances in the biological properties of the BBB/BTB and the emerging strategies for BBB/BTB permeabilization and drug delivery across the BBB/BTB. We also discuss the emerging targeted therapies and immunotherapies against brain metastasis tested in clinical trials. Additionally, we provide our viewpoints on accelerating clinical translation of novel drugs into clinic for patients of brain metastasis. Although still challenging, we expect this review to benefit the future development of novel therapeutics, specifically from a clinical perspective.

Survival improvements in patients with melanoma brain metastases and leptomeningeal disease in the modern era: Insights from a nationwide study (2015-2022)

INTRODUCTION

Advances in modern therapies have improved outcomes for patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBM), though prognosis remains poor. The optimal treatment strategy for patients who do not meet clinical trial inclusion criteria is unclear.

METHODS

This study included all patients with MBM diagnosed in Denmark between 2015 and 2022, identified through the Danish Metastatic Melanoma Database (DAMMED) and local surgical and radiotherapy records. Data were collected from electronic patient records.

RESULTS

A total of 838 patients were included, with a median overall survival (OS) of 9.0 months. Of these, 112 (19.4 %) survived beyond 3 years post-diagnosis. Patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) as first line treatment, specifically ipilimumab + nivolumab, demonstrated an intracranial overall response rate (icORR) of 46 % and a 2-year OS of 49 %. Those treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi) had an icORR of 56 % but a 2-year OS of 20 %. Patients with leptomeningeal disease (LMD, n = 67) had a median OS of 8.4 months. Systemic therapy was associated with a superior OS for patients with LMD, though no survival benefit was seen with ICI compared to BRAF/MEKi. Among the 230 patients who underwent surgery, 30 received postoperative stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS); however, there was no difference in OS or intracranial progression-free survival between the groups.

CONCLUSION

A considerable proportion of patients with brain metastases diagnosed after 2015 survived more than 3 years. Patients with LMD appeared to obtain limited benefit of ICI with only few patients alive > 3 years post-diagnosis.

Challenges and perspectives in the management of BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma: Systemic treatment sequencing and brain metastases

The global incidence of metastatic melanoma with BRAF mutations, characterized by aggressive behavior and poor prognosis, is rising. Recent treatment advances, including immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and targeted therapies (TT) such as BRAF and MEK inhibitors, have significantly enhanced patient outcomes. Although guidelines recommend sequencing strategies, real-world implementation can be influenced by clinical scenarios. This article highlights the importance of tailored treatment strategies, emphasizing that the decision to initiate immunotherapy (IT) or TT hinges on multiple factors, including tumor burden, LDH levels, presence of brain metastases, and patient symptomatic status. Managing brain metastases also poses a challenge, as these patients are typically excluded from pivotal clinical trials. While insights from phase II studies provide some guidance, there is a critical need for more quality data to inform comprehensive recommendations. Furthermore, although triple therapy combining IT and TT was initially thought to be promising, it has failed to clearly demonstrate benefit over current treatments. For all these reasons, there is an imperative need for further research on biomarkers and predictive factors, as well as real-world studies, that will help tailor treatment strategies across diverse patient subsets, thereby refining therapeutic approaches for BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma.

Progress in immunotherapy for brain metastatic melanoma

Melanoma is highly aggressive, with brain metastasis being a significant contributor to poor outcomes. Immunotherapy has emerged as a crucial treatment modality for melanoma, particularly for addressing brain metastases. This review explores recent developments in immunotherapy for patients with melanoma brain metastasis, with such treatments encompassing immune checkpoint inhibitors and various immunotherapy combination approaches, such as dual immunotherapy, immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy, immunotherapy combined with targeted drugs, and immunotherapy combined with radiotherapy. This article also discusses existing treatment obstacles and potential future avenues for research and clinical practice.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for melanoma. Part 2: Treatment - Update 2024

A unique collaboration of multi-disciplinary experts from the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), and the European Organization of 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 one to two-centimeter safety margins. For a correct stage classification and treatment decision, a sentinel lymph node biopsy shall be offered 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 should be primarily made by an interdisciplinary oncology team ("Tumor Board"). Adjuvant therapies can be proposed in completely resected stage IIB-IV. In stage II only PD-1 inhibitors are approved. In stage III anti-PD-1 therapy or dabrafenib plus trametinib for patients with BRAFV600 mutated melanoma can be discussed. In resected stage IV, nivolumab can be offered, as well as ipilimumab and nivolumab, in selected, high-risk patients. In patients with clinically detected macroscopic, resectable disease, neoadjuvant therapy with ipilimumab plus nivolumab followed complete surgical resection and adjuvant therapy according to pathological response and BRAF status can be offered. Neoadjuvant therapy with pembrolizumab followed by complete surgical resection and adjuvant pembrolizumab is also recommended. For patients with disease recurrence after (neo) adjuvant therapy, further treatment should consider the type of (neo) adjuvant therapy received as well as the time of recurrence, i.e., on or off therapy. In patients with irresectable stage III/IV disease systemic treatment is always indicated. For first line treatment PD-1 antibodies alone or in combination with CTLA-4 or LAG-3 antibodies shall be considered. In stage IV melanoma with a BRAFV600 mutation, first-line therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors can be offered as an alternative to immunotherapy, in selected cases. In patients with primary resistance to immunotherapy and harboring a BRAFV600 mutation, this therapy shall be offered as second line. Other second line therapies include therapy with tumor infiltrating lymphocytes and combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors not used in first line. This guideline is valid until the end of 2026.

Current and emerging treatment options for BRAFV600-mutant melanoma

INTRODUCTION

BRAF mutations are the most common driver mutation in cutaneous melanoma, present in 40% of cases. Rationally designed BRAF targeted therapy (TT) has been developed in response to this, and alongside immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), forms the backbone of systemic therapy options for BRAF-mutant melanoma. Various therapeutic approaches have been studied in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant and advanced settings, and there is a wealth of information to guide clinicians managing these patients. Despite this, certain challenges remain.

AREAS COVERED

We reviewed the available literature regarding BRAF mutation types and resistance mechanisms, neoadjuvant and adjuvant approaches for patients with early-stage disease, management of advanced disease, including patients with brain metastases, as well as identified areas of further research.

EXPERT OPINION

Although there is a significant amount of literature to guide the management of BRAF-mutant melanoma, several questions remain. Thus far, the management of stage III BRAF-mutant patients following neoadjuvant ICI, treatment de-escalation in long-term TT responders in the advanced setting and the management of symptomatic brain metastases remain areas of debate. Further work on predictive and prognostic biomarkers for patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma patients will assist in clinical decision-making.

Current trends in sensitizing immune checkpoint inhibitors for cancer treatment

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have dramatically transformed the treatment landscape for various malignancies, achieving notable clinical outcomes across a wide range of indications. Despite these advances, resistance to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) remains a critical clinical challenge, characterized by variable response rates and non-durable benefits. However, growing research into the complex intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics of tumors has advanced our understanding of the mechanisms behind ICI resistance, potentially improving treatment outcomes. Additionally, robust predictive biomarkers are crucial for optimizing patient selection and maximizing the efficacy of ICBs. Recent studies have emphasized that multiple rational combination strategies can overcome immune checkpoint resistance and enhance susceptibility to ICIs. These findings not only deepen our understanding of tumor biology but also reveal the unique mechanisms of action of sensitizing agents, extending clinical benefits in cancer immunotherapy. In this review, we will explore the underlying biology of ICIs, discuss the significance of the tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) and clinical predictive biomarkers, analyze the current mechanisms of resistance, and outline alternative combination strategies to enhance the effectiveness of ICIs, including personalized strategies for sensitizing tumors to ICIs.

Regorafenib Combined with BRAF/MEK Inhibitors for the Treatment of Refractory Melanoma Brain Metastases

BACKGROUND

There are no active treatment options for patients with progressive melanoma brain metastases (MBM) failing immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) and BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi). Regorafenib (REGO), an oral multi-kinase inhibitor (incl. RAF-dimer inhibition), can overcome adaptive resistance to BRAF/MEKi in preclinical models.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective case series of patients with refractory MBM treated with REGO plus BRAF/MEKi (compassionate use).

RESULTS

A total of 22 patients were identified (18 BRAF-mutant, 4 NRASQ61-mutant; 19 with progressive MBM; 11 on corticosteroids). Thirteen BRAFV600-mutant patients were progressing on BRAF/MEKi at the time of REGO association. BRAF-mutant patients received REGO (40-80 mg once daily) combined with BRAF/MEKi, NRAS-mutant patients were treated with REGO + MEKi (+low-dose BRAFi to mitigate skin-toxicity). Grade 3 TRAE included arterial hypertension (n = 4) and maculopapular rash (n = 3). There were no G4/5 TRAE. In BRAF-mutant patients, overall and intracranial objective response rates (overall ORR and IC-ORR) were 11 and 29%, and overall and intracranial disease control rates (overall DCR and IC-DCR) were 44 and 59%, respectively. In NRAS-mutant patients overall ORR and IC-ORR were 0 and 25% and overall DCR and IC-DCR were 25 and 50%, respectively. The median PFS and OS were, respectively, 7.1 and 16.4 weeks in BRAF-mutant and 8.6 and 10.1 weeks in NRAS-mutant patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In heavily pretreated patients with refractory MBM, REGO combined with BRAF/MEKi demonstrated promising anti-tumor activity with an acceptable safety profile. In BRAFV600-mutant melanoma patients, responses cannot solely be attributed to BRAF/MEKi rechallenge. Further investigation in a prospective trial is ongoing to increase understanding of the efficacy.

BMScope: A scoping review to chart the evolving clinical study landscape in brain and leptomeningeal metastasis

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have challenged the notion that patients with brain metastasis (BM) or leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) should be excluded from systemic therapy clinical trials. This scoping study summarizes the BM/LM clinical studies published between 2010 and 2023.

METHODS

MEDLINE, CINAHL, CAB Abstracts, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, HINARI, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and EMBASE electronic databases were searched on June 21, 2021. An updated search was performed on February 21, 2023. Eligible studies investigated a therapeutic intervention in solid tumor patients with BM and/or LM and reported a patient outcome. Extracted study-level data, including study type, publication date, geographical location, number of BM/LM patients in the study, primary tumor type, and type of therapeutic intervention, were collected.

RESULTS

4921 unique studies were eligible for analysis. The key finding is that BM/LM clinical research is expanding globally, both in observational studies and clinical trials. Despite the shift over time toward a higher proportion of systemic therapy trials, the majority still do not include patients with symptomatic disease and lack reporting of BM/LM-specific endpoints. Globally, there has been a trend to more international collaboration in BM/LM clinical studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis of the BM/LM literature charts the evolving landscape of studies involving this previously excluded population. Given the increasing clinical research activity, particularly involving late-stage systemic therapy trials, it is imperative that due consideration is given to the intracranial activity of new investigational agents. Wider adoption of standardized reporting of intracranial-specific endpoints will facilitate the evaluation of relative intracranial efficacy.

Emerging Therapies for Brain Metastases in NSCLC, Breast Cancer, and Melanoma: A Critical Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Advancements in precision medicine have shifted the treatment paradigm of brain metastases (BM) from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), breast cancer, and melanoma, especially through targeted therapies focused on specific molecular drivers. These novel agents have improved outcomes by overcoming challenges posed by the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and resistance mechanisms, enabling more effective treatment of BM.

RECENT FINDINGS

In NSCLC, therapies such as osimertinib have improved efficacy in treating EGFR-mutant BM, with emerging combinations such as amivantamab and lazertinib offering promising alternatives for patients resistant to frontline therapies. In HER2-positive breast cancer, significant advancements with tucatinib and trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) have transformed the treatment landscape, achieving improved survival and intracranial control in patients with BM. Similarly, in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), novel therapies such as sacituzumab govitecan (SG) and datopotamab deruxtecan (Dato-DXd) offer new hope for managing BM. For melanoma, the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors such as nivolumab and ipilimumab has proven effective in enhancing survival for patients with BM, both in BRAF-mutant and wild-type cases. Developing targeted therapies penetrating the BBB has revolutionized BM treatment by targeting key drivers like EGFR, ALK, HER2, and BRAF. Despite improved survival, challenges persist, particularly for patients with resistant genetic alterations. Future research should optimise combination therapies, overcome resistance, and refine treatment sequencing. Continued emphasis on personalized, biomarker-driven approaches offers the potential to further improve outcomes, even for complex cases.

Braf-Mutant Melanomas: Biology and Therapy

The incidence of melanoma, the most lethal form of skin cancer, has increased mainly due to ultraviolet exposure. The molecular characterization of melanomas has shown a high mutational burden led to the identification of some recurrent genetic alterations. BRAF gene is mutated in 40-50% of melanomas and its role in melanoma development is paramount. BRAF mutations confer constitutive activation of MAPK signalling. The large majority (about 90%) of BRAF mutations occur at amino acid 600; the majority are BRAFV600E mutations and less frequently BRAFv600K, V600D and V600M. The introduction of drugs that directly target BRAF-mutant protein (BRAF inhibitors) and of agents that stimulate immune response through targeting of immune check inhibitor consistently improved the survival of melanoma BRAFV600-mutant patients with unresectable/metastatic disease. In parallel, studies in melanoma stage II-III patients with resectable disease have shown that adjuvant therapy with ICIs and/or targeted therapy improves PFS and RFS, but not OS compared to placebo; however, neoadjuvant therapy plus adjuvant therapy improved therapeutic response compared to adjuvant therapy alone.

Encorafenib and binimetinib followed by radiotherapy for patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma and brain metastases (E-BRAIN/GEM1802 phase II study)

BACKGROUND

Encorafenib plus binimetinib (EB) is a standard-of-care treatment for advanced BRAFV600-mutant melanoma. We assessed the efficacy and safety of encorafenib plus binimetinib in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma and brain metastasis (BM) and explored if radiotherapy improves the duration of response.

METHODS

E-BRAIN/GEM1802 was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm, phase II trial that enrolled patients with melanoma BRAFV600-mutant and BM. Patients received encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg BID, and those who achieved a partial response or stable disease at first tumor assessment were offered radiotherapy. Treatment continued until progression. Primary endpoint was intracranial response rate (icRR) after 2 months of EB, establishing a futility threshold of 60%.

RESULTS

The study included 25 patients with no BM symptoms and 23 patients with BM symptoms regardless of using corticosteroids. Among them, 31 patients (64.6%) received sequential radiotherapy. After 2 months, icRR was 70.8% (95% CI: 55.9-83.1); 10.4% complete response. Median intracranial progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were 8.5 (95% CI: 6.4-11.8) and 15.9 (95% CI: 10.7-21.4) months, respectively (8.3 months for icPFS and 13.9 months OS for patients receiving RDT). Most common grades 3-4 treatment-related adverse event was alanine aminotransferase (ALT) increased (10.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Encorafenib plus binimetinib showed promising clinical benefit in terms of icRR, and tolerable safety profile with low frequency of high-grade TRAEs, in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma and BM, including those with symptoms and need for steroids. Sequential radiotherapy is feasible but it does not seem to prolong response.

SEOM-GEM clinical guidelines for cutaneous melanoma (2023)

Cutaneous melanoma incidence is rising. Early diagnosis and treatment administration are key for increasing the chances of survival. For patients with locoregional advanced melanoma that can be treated with complete resection, adjuvant-and more recently neoadjuvant-with targeted therapy-BRAF and MEK inhibitors-and immunotherapy-anti-PD-1-based therapies-offer opportunities to reduce the risk of relapse and distant metastases. For patients with advanced disease not amenable to radical treatment, these treatments offer an unprecedented increase in overall survival. A group of medical oncologists from the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) and Spanish Multidisciplinary Melanoma Group (GEM) has designed these guidelines, based on a thorough review of the best evidence available. The following guidelines try to cover all the aspects from the diagnosis-clinical, pathological, and molecular-staging, risk stratification, adjuvant therapy, advanced disease therapy, and survivor follow-up, including special situations, such as brain metastases, refractory disease, and treatment sequencing. We aim help clinicians in the decision-making process.

Triple combination of vemurafenib, cobimetinib, and atezolizumab in real clinical practice in the Russian Federation: results of the A1 cohort of the ISABELLA study

Background

Among several treatment options for BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma, a combination of BRAF inhibitor, MEK inhibitor, and anti-PDL1 antibody seems to be a new emergent approach recently registered in the Russian Federation. It is still not clear which patient population benefits more from this simultaneous use of three drugs instead of its sequencing.

Aim

This study aimed to evaluate patients' characteristics treated in real practice in 14 Russian regions by triple combination and to analyze their outcomes depending on biomarkers (PD-L1 expression).

Methods

This was a part (cohort A1) of a prospective non-interventional study of clinical outcomes and biomarkers in patients with skin melanoma. Patients were included in cohort A1 if combination treatment with vemurafenib (vem) + cobimetinib (cobi) + atezolizumab (atezo) was initiated no earlier than 12 weeks (84 days) prior to written informed consent to participate in this study. The index event was the initiation of therapy with all three drugs vem + cobi + atezo (i.e., triple combination). The primary efficacy endpoint of the study was the 24-month overall survival (OS), defined as the time from the index date to the date of death from any cause. If the patient did not experience an event, the OS will be censored at the date of the last contact. Objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR), and progression-free survival (PFS) in the Intention to treat (ITT) population, in biomarker positive population, and in population with brain metastases were also evaluated. Quality of life questionnaires were pre-planned by protocol if it was a part of routine practice. Adverse events were also collected.

Results

Between March 2021 and May 2023, 59 patients were enrolled in 19 centers from 14 regions of Russia. Thirty-one of 59 (52.4%) patients had central nervous system metastases, and 18 of 31 (58.4%) were symptomatic. Forty of 59 patients (68%) received the triple combination as the first-line treatment. The median follow-up period was 16.83 [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.8-19.8] months. The mean duration of therapy with this regimen was 9.95 months (95% CI 7.48-13.8). ORR was 55.1%; progression as the best outcome was seen in 16.3%. The median DoR was 12.95 months (95% CI 11.0-14.8 months), with a median of 20.3 months (95% CI 9.1-31.5 months) when triple therapy was administered in the first-line treatment. In patients with brain metastases (N = 31), ORR was 45.1%; the median DoR was 12.95 (95% CI 11.0-14.8 months). The median PFS in the entire population was 13.6 months (95% CI 8.6-18.6); the 24-month PFS was 22%. The estimated median OS in the entire population was 15.8 months (95% CI NA); 24-month OS was 45% (95% CI 0.32-0.64). In multivariate Cox regression model, biomarkers of interest [lactate dehydrogenase, Programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1)] did not have statistically significant impact on PFS, OS, or DoR probably due to high data missing rate. No unexpected adverse events were reported. Grades 3-4 AEs were seen in 23 of 59 patients (38%) with most common were skin and liver toxicity.

Conclusion

Triple combination of atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib had proven its efficacy and tolerability in real settings. No impact of potential predictive biomarkers was seen (NCT05402059).

Progress in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor for Melanoma Therapy

Melanoma has seen the most remarkable therapeutic improvements among all cancers in the past decade, primarily due to the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Initially developed in the patients with advanced disease, ICI are now used in adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings. More recently, the development of LAG-3 blocking antibody and the combination of ICI with a personalized RNA-based vaccine have continued to lead the immunotherapeutic field. Despite these advances, primary and secondary resistances remain problematic and there is a high need for predictive biomarkers to optimize benefit/risk ratio of ICI use.

Brain Metastases in Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: Clinical Presentation, Diagnosis, and Management

Background: Brain metastases (BM) are the most common intracranial neoplasms in adults and are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. The brain is an unusual site for distant metastases of thyroid cancer; indeed, the most common sites are lungs and bones. In this narrative review, we discuss about the clinical characteristics, diagnosis, and treatment options for patients with BM from differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). Summary: BM can be discovered before initial therapy due to symptoms, but in most patients, BM is diagnosed during follow-up because of imaging performed before starting tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) or due to the onset of neurological symptoms. Older male patients with follicular thyroid cancer (FTC), poorly differentiated thyroid cancer (PDTC), and distant metastases may have an increased risk of developing BM. The gold standard for detection of BM is magnetic resonance imaging with contrast agent administration, which is superior to contrast-enhanced computed tomography. The treatment strategies for patients with BM from DTC remain controversial. Patients with poor performance status are candidates for palliative and supportive care. Neurosurgery is usually reserved for cases where symptoms persist despite medical treatment, especially in patients with favorable prognostic factors and larger lesions. It should also be considered for patients with a single BM in a surgically accessible location, particularly if the primary disease is controlled without other systemic metastases. Additionally, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) may be the preferred option for treating small lesions, especially those in inaccessible areas of the brain or when surgery is not advisable. Whole brain radiotherapy is less frequently used in treating these patients due to its potential side effects and the debated effectiveness. Therefore, it is typically reserved for cases involving multiple BM that are too large for SRS. TKIs are effective in patients with progressive radioiodine-refractory thyroid cancer and multiple metastases. Conclusions: Although routine screening for BM is not recommended, older male patients with FTC or PDTC and distant metastases may be at higher risk and should be carefully evaluated for BM. According to current data, patients who are suitable for neurosurgery seem to have the highest survival benefit, while SRS may be appropriate for selected patient.

Melanoma Brain Metastasis: Biology and Therapeutic Advances

Metastasis to the brain is a frequent complication of advanced melanoma. Historically, patients with melanoma brain metastasis (MBM) have had dismal outcomes, but outcomes have improved with the development of more effective treatments, including stereotactic radiosurgery and effective immune and targeted therapies. Despite these advances, MBM remains a leading cause of death from this disease, and many therapies show decreased efficacy against these tumors compared with extracranial metastases. This differential efficacy may be because of recently revealed unique molecular and immune features of MBMs-which may also provide rational new therapeutic strategies.

Multiple Options: How to Choose Therapy in Frontline Metastatic Melanoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Given the rapid development of multiple targeted and immune therapies for patients with advanced melanoma, it can be challenging to select a therapy based on currently available data. This review aims to provide an overview of frontline options for metastatic melanoma, with practical guidance for selecting a treatment regimen.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recently reported data from randomized trials suggests that the majority of patients with unresectable melanoma should receive a PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor as part of their first line therapy, irrespective of BRAF mutation status. Additional data also suggests that combination immunotherapies result in improved outcomes compared to single agent, albeit at the cost of increased toxicity, though to date no biomarker exists to help guide treatment selection. As the number therapeutic options continue to grow for patients with advanced melanoma, there is likely to be a continued focus on combination strategies. Defining the optimal treatment approach in order to maximize efficacy while minimizing toxicity remains an area of active investigation.

Combination Atezolizumab, Cobimetinib, and Vemurafenib as a Treatment Option in BRAF V600 Mutation-Positive Melanoma: Patient Selection and Perspectives

The treatment landscape for advanced and metastatic melanoma has drastically changed in recent years, with the advent of novel therapeutic options such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies offering remarkable efficacy and significantly improved patient outcomes compared to traditional approaches. Approximately 50% of melanomas harbor activating BRAF mutations, with over 90% resulting in BRAF V600E. Tumors treated with BRAF inhibitor monotherapy have a high rate of developing resistance within six months. Combination therapy with MEK inhibitors helped to mitigate this treatment resistance and led to improved outcomes. Due to the up-regulation of PD-1/PD-L1 receptors in tumors treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy, further studies included a third combination agent, anti-PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors. This triple combination therapy may have superior efficacy and a manageable safety profile when compared with single or double agent therapy regimens.

Prevention of Brain Metastases: A New Frontier

This review discusses the topic of prevention of brain metastases from the most frequent solid tumor types, i.e., lung cancer, breast cancer and melanoma. Within each tumor type, the risk of brain metastasis is related to disease status and molecular subtype (i.e., EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer, HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancer, BRAF and NRAF-mutant melanoma). Prophylactic cranial irradiation is the standard of care in patients in small cell lung cancer responsive to chemotherapy but at the price of late neurocognitive decline. More recently, several molecular agents with the capability to target molecular alterations driving tumor growth have proven as effective in the prevention of secondary relapse into the brain in clinical trials. This is the case for EGFR-mutant or ALK-rearranged non-small cell lung cancer inhibitors, tucatinib and trastuzumab-deruxtecan for HER2-positive breast cancer and BRAF inhibitors for melanoma. The need for screening with an MRI in asymptomatic patients at risk of brain metastases is emphasized.

The ERK inhibitor LY3214996 augments anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in preclinical mouse models of BRAFV600E melanoma brain metastasis

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have revolutionized cancer treatment; however, only a subset of patients with brain metastasis (BM) respond to ICI. Activating mutations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathway are frequent in BM. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether therapeutic inhibition of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) can improve the efficacy of ICI for BM.

METHODS

We used immunotypical mouse models of BM bearing dual extracranial/intracranial tumors to evaluate the efficacy of single-agent and dual-agent treatment with selective ERK inhibitor LY3214996 (LY321) and anti-programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1) antibody. We verified target inhibition and drug delivery, then investigated treatment effects on T-cell response and tumor-immune microenvironment using high-parameter flow cytometry, multiplex immunoassays, and T-cell receptor profiling.

RESULTS

We found that dual treatment with LY321 and anti-PD-1 significantly improved overall survival in 2 BRAFV600E-mutant murine melanoma models but not in KRAS-mutant murine lung adenocarcinoma. We demonstrate that although LY321 has limited blood-brain barrier (BBB) permeability, combined LY321 and anti-PD-1 therapy increases tumor-infiltrating CD8+ effector T cells, broadens the T-cell receptor repertoire in the extracranial tumor, enriches T-cell clones shared by the periphery and brain, and reduces immunosuppressive cytokines and cell populations in tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the limited BBB permeability of LY321, combined LY321 and anti-PD-1 treatment can improve intracranial disease control by amplifying extracranial immune responses, highlighting the role of extracranial tumors in driving intracranial response to treatment. Combined ERK and PD-1 inhibition is a promising therapeutic approach, worthy of further investigation for patients with melanoma BM.

Anti-PD-(L)1 plus BRAF/MEK inhibitors (triplet therapy) after failure of immune checkpoint inhibition and targeted therapy in patients with advanced melanoma

BACKGROUND

Effective treatment options are limited for patients with advanced melanoma who have progressed on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and targeted therapies (TT). Preclinical models support the combination of ICI with TT; however, clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of triplet combinations in first-line setting showed limited advantage compared to TT only.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, multicenter study, that included patients with advanced melanoma who were treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors in combination with an anti-PD-(L)1 antibody (triplet therapy) after failure of at least one anti-PD-(L)1-based therapy and one TT in seven major melanoma centers between February 2016 and July 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 48 patients were included, of which 32 patients, 66.7% had brain metastases, 37 patients (77.1%) had three or more metastatic organs and 21 patients (43.8%) had three or more treatment lines. The median follow-up time was 31.4 months (IQR, 22.27-40.45 months). The treatment with triplet therapy resulted in an ORR of 35.4% (n = 17) and a DCR of 47.9% (n = 23). The median DOR was 5.9 months (range, 3.39-14.27 months). Patients treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors as the last treatment line showed a slightly lower ORR (29.6%) compared to patients who received ICI or chemotherapy last (ORR: 42.9%). Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 25% of patients (n = 12), with seven patients (14.6%) requiring discontinuation of treatment with both or either drug.

CONCLUSIONS

Triplet therapy has shown activity in heavily pretreated patients with advanced melanoma and may represent a potential treatment regimen after failure of ICI and TT.

Symptomatic brain metastases in melanoma

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

Local and Systemic Management Options for Melanoma Brain Metastases

ABSTRACT

Development of brain metastasis is one of the most serious complications of advanced melanoma, carrying a significant burden of morbidity and mortality. Although advances in local treatment modalities such as stereotactic radiosurgery and breakthrough systemic therapies including immunotherapy and targeted therapies have improved the outcomes of patients with metastatic melanoma, management of patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) remains challenging. Notably, patients with MBMs have historically been excluded from clinical trials, limiting insights into their specific treatment responses. Encouragingly, a growing body of evidence shows the potential of systemic therapies to yield durable intracranial responses in these patients, highlighting the need for inclusion of patients with MBMs in future clinical trials. This is pivotal for expediting the advancement of novel therapies tailored to this distinct patient population. In this review, we will highlight the evolving landscape of MBM management, focusing on local and systemic treatment strategies.

Levothyroxine personalized treatment: is it still a dream?

Levothyroxine is a milestone in the treatment of all causes of hypothyroidism. From 19th century till today, Levothyroxine experienced a great advancement, from hypodermic injections of an extract of the thyroid gland of a sheep to novel formulations, known to circumvent malabsorption issue. However, the rate of patients on suboptimal therapy is still high. Current Guidelines are clear, daily Levothyroxine dosage should be calculated based on body weight. However, we are still far away from the possibility to administer the right dosage to the right patient, for several reasons. We retrace the history of treatment with levothyroxine, pointing out strengths and weaknesses of different formulations, with particular attention to what keeps us away from tailored therapy. In the age of digitalization, the pharmaceutical industry has been giving rising importance to Digital therapeutics, that are known to be effective in reaching target therapies. By combining current knowledge of hypothyroidism therapy with cutting-edge technology, we also hypothesized what could be the future strategies to be developed in this field.

Systemic Therapy for Melanoma Brain and Leptomeningeal Metastases

OPINION STATEMENT

Melanoma has a high propensity to metastasize to the brain which portends a poorer prognosis. With advanced radiation techniques and targeted therapies, outcomes however are improving. Melanoma brain metastases are best managed in a multi-disciplinary approach, including medical oncologists, neuro-oncologists, radiation oncologists, and neurosurgeons. The sequence of therapies is dependent on the number and size of brain metastases, status of systemic disease control, prior therapies, performance status, and neurological symptoms. The goal of treatment is to minimize neurologic morbidity and prolong both progression free and overall survival while maximizing quality of life. Surgery should be considered for solitary metastases, or large and/or symptomatic metastases with edema. Stereotactic radiosurgery offers a benefit over whole-brain radiation attributed to the relative radioresistance of melanoma and reduction in neurotoxicity. Thus far, data supports a more durable response with systemic therapy using combination immunotherapy of ipilimumab and nivolumab, though targeting the presence of BRAF mutations can also be utilized. BRAF inhibitor therapy is often used after immunotherapy failure, unless a more rapid initial response is needed and then can be done prior to initiating immunotherapy. Further trials are needed, particularly for leptomeningeal metastases which currently require the multi-disciplinary approach to determine best treatment plan.

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, version 3.0

Since the first approval for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma more than a decade ago, immunotherapy has completely transformed the treatment landscape of this chemotherapy-resistant disease. Combination regimens including ICIs directed against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) with anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) agents or, more recently, anti-lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) agents, have gained regulatory approvals for the treatment of metastatic cutaneous melanoma, with long-term follow-up data suggesting the possibility of cure for some patients with advanced disease. In the resectable setting, adjuvant ICIs prolong recurrence-free survival, and neoadjuvant strategies are an active area of investigation. Other immunotherapy strategies, such as oncolytic virotherapy for injectable cutaneous melanoma and bispecific T-cell engager therapy for HLA-A*02:01 genotype-positive uveal melanoma, are also available to patients. Despite the remarkable efficacy of these regimens for many patients with cutaneous melanoma, traditional immunotherapy biomarkers (ie, programmed death-ligand 1 expression, tumor mutational burden, T-cell infiltrate and/or microsatellite stability) have failed to reliably predict response. Furthermore, ICIs are associated with unique toxicity profiles, particularly for the highly active combination of anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 agents. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to develop this clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, including rare subtypes of the disease (eg, uveal, mucosal), with the goal of improving patient care by providing guidance to the oncology community. Drawing from published data and clinical experience, the Expert Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for healthcare professionals using immunotherapy to treat melanoma, with topics including therapy selection in the advanced and perioperative settings, intratumoral immunotherapy, when to use immunotherapy for patients with BRAFV600-mutated disease, management of patients with brain metastases, evaluation of treatment response, special patient populations, patient education, quality of life, and survivorship, among others.