1
|
Márquez-Rodas I, Álvarez A, Arance A, Valduvieco I, Berciano-Guerrero MÁ, Delgado R, Soria A, Lopez Campos F, Sánchez P, Romero JL, Martin-Liberal J, Lucas A, Díaz-Beveridge R, Conde-Moreno AJ, Álamo de la Gala MDC, García-Castaño A, Prada PJ, González Cao M, Puertas E, Vidal J, Foro P, Aguado de la Rosa C, Corona JA, Cerezuela-Fuentes P, López P, Luna P, Aymar N, Puértolas T, Sanagustín P, Berrocal A. Encorafenib and binimetinib followed by radiotherapy for patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma and brain metastases (E-BRAIN/GEM1802 phase II study). Neuro Oncol 2024; 26:2074-2083. [PMID: 38946469 PMCID: PMC11534317 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noae116] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/18/2024] [Indexed: 07/02/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iván Márquez-Rodas
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain
| | - Ana Álvarez
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Universidad Complutense, Madrid, Spain
| | - Ana Arance
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Izaskun Valduvieco
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clínic Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Miguel-Ángel Berciano-Guerrero
- Medical Oncology Intercenter Unit, Hospitales Universitarios Regional y Virgen de la Victoria de Málaga, IBIMA-Plataforma BIONAND, Málaga, Spain
| | - Raquel Delgado
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Regional de Málaga, Málaga, Spain
| | - Ainara Soria
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain
| | - Fernándo Lopez Campos
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain
| | - Pedro Sánchez
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain
| | - Jose Luis Romero
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain
| | - Juan Martin-Liberal
- Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Catalá d’Oncologia (ICO) L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Anna Lucas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut Catalá d’Oncologia (ICO) L’Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Roberto Díaz-Beveridge
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe de Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | - Antonio-José Conde-Moreno
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe de Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| | | | - Almudena García-Castaño
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain
| | - Pedro José Prada
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla, Santander, Spain
| | - María González Cao
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitari Dexeus, Instituto Oncológico Dr. Rosell, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Enrique Puertas
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario QuirónSalud Dexeus,Barcelona, Spain
| | - Joana Vidal
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Palmira Foro
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Juan Antonio Corona
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
| | - Pablo Cerezuela-Fuentes
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Clínico Universitario (HCU) Virgen de la Arrixaca; IMIB. Ciudad de Murcia, Spain
| | - Paco López
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Clínico Universitario (HCU) Virgen de la Arrixaca; IMIB. Ciudad de Murcia, Spain
| | - Pablo Luna
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
| | - Neus Aymar
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Son Espases, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
| | - Teresa Puértolas
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, Spain
| | - Pilar Sanagustín
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Universitario Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, Spain
| | - Alfonso Berrocal
- Department of Medical Oncology, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Márquez-Rodas I, Muñoz Couselo E, Rodríguez Moreno JF, Arance Fernández AM, Berciano Guerrero MÁ, Campos Balea B, de la Cruz Merino L, Espinosa Arranz E, García Castaño A, Berrocal Jaime A. SEOM-GEM clinical guidelines for cutaneous melanoma (2023). Clin Transl Oncol 2024; 26:2841-2855. [PMID: 38748192 PMCID: PMC11467041 DOI: 10.1007/s12094-024-03497-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2024] [Accepted: 04/24/2024] [Indexed: 10/11/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Eva Muñoz Couselo
- Hospital Vall d'Hebron & Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain
| | | | | | | | | | - Luis de la Cruz Merino
- Cancer Immunotherapy, Biomedicine Institute of Seville (IBIS)/CSIC, Clinical Oncology Department, University Hospital Virgen Macarena and School of Medicine, University of Seville, Seville, Spain
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Samoylenko IV, Kolontareva YM, Kogay EV, Zhukova NV, Utyashev IA, Ivannikov ME, Menshikov KV, Zinkevich MV, Orlova KV, Vakhabova YV, Volkonsky MV, Beliaeva NA, Butkov II, Karabina EV, Moskovkina TL, Moshkova KA, Plishkina OV, Sychev VD, Cheplukhova OS, Chernova VV, Yurchenkov AN, Babina KG, Savelov NA, Demidov LV. Triple combination of vemurafenib, cobimetinib, and atezolizumab in real clinical practice in the Russian Federation: results of the A1 cohort of the ISABELLA study. Front Oncol 2024; 14:1395378. [PMID: 39469641 PMCID: PMC11514068 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1395378] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2024] [Accepted: 08/26/2024] [Indexed: 10/30/2024] Open
Abstract
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).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Igor V. Samoylenko
- Skin tumors department, NN Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow, Russia
- The Russian Melanoma Professional Association (Melanoma.PRO), Moscow, Russia
| | | | - Ekaterina V. Kogay
- Skin tumors department, NN Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow, Russia
- The Russian Melanoma Professional Association (Melanoma.PRO), Moscow, Russia
| | - Natalia V. Zhukova
- St. Petersburg City Clinical Oncology Dispensary, St. Petersburg, Russia
| | | | | | - Konstantin V. Menshikov
- Ufa Republican Clinical Oncological Dispensary of the Ministry of Health Republic of Bashkortostan, Ufa, Russia
| | - Maxim V. Zinkevich
- Leningrad Regional Clinical Oncological Dispensary, St. Petersburg, Russia
| | - Kristina V. Orlova
- Skin tumors department, NN Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow, Russia
- The Russian Melanoma Professional Association (Melanoma.PRO), Moscow, Russia
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Kseniya A. Moshkova
- Nizhny Novgorod Regional Clinical Oncological Dispensary, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Ksenia G. Babina
- Volgograd Regional Clinical Oncological Dispensary, Volgograd, Russia
| | | | - Lev V. Demidov
- Skin tumors department, NN Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Moscow, Russia
- The Russian Melanoma Professional Association (Melanoma.PRO), Moscow, Russia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Boutros C, Herrscher H, Robert C. Progress in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor for Melanoma Therapy. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2024; 38:997-1010. [PMID: 39048408 DOI: 10.1016/j.hoc.2024.05.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/27/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Celine Boutros
- Department of Medicine, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, 114 Rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805 Villejuif, France
| | - Hugo Herrscher
- Oncology Unit, Clinique Sainte-Anne, Groupe Hospitalier Saint Vincent, rue Philippe Thys, 67000 Strasbourg, France
| | - Caroline Robert
- Department of Medicine, Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, 114 Rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805 Villejuif, France; Faculty of Medicine, University Paris-Saclay, 63 Rue Gabriel Péri, 94270 Kremlin-Bicêtre, France; INSERM Unit U981, 114 Rue Edouard Vaillant, 94805 Villejuif, France.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Prinzi A, van Velsen EFS, Belfiore A, Frasca F, Malandrino P. Brain Metastases in Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: Clinical Presentation, Diagnosis, and Management. Thyroid 2024; 34:1194-1204. [PMID: 39163020 DOI: 10.1089/thy.2024.0240] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/21/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antonio Prinzi
- Endocrinology Unit, Dept. of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Catania, Garibaldi-Nesima Medical Center, Catania, Italy
| | - Evert F S van Velsen
- Department of Internal Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Academic Center for Thyroid Diseases, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus MC Bone Center, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Antonino Belfiore
- Endocrinology Unit, Dept. of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Catania, Garibaldi-Nesima Medical Center, Catania, Italy
| | - Francesco Frasca
- Endocrinology Unit, Dept. of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Catania, Garibaldi-Nesima Medical Center, Catania, Italy
| | - Pasqualino Malandrino
- Endocrinology Unit, Dept. of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Catania, Garibaldi-Nesima Medical Center, Catania, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Hasanov M, Acikgoz Y, Davies MA. Melanoma Brain Metastasis: Biology and Therapeutic Advances. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 2024; 38:1027-1043. [PMID: 38845301 DOI: 10.1016/j.hoc.2024.05.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/03/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Merve Hasanov
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Suite 1335, Lincoln Tower, 1800 Cannon Drive, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA.
| | - Yusuf Acikgoz
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, 13th floor, Lincoln Tower, 1800 Cannon Drive, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA
| | - Michael A Davies
- Division of Cancer Medicine, Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Boulevard, Unit 0430, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kennedy LB, Salama AKS. Multiple Options: How to Choose Therapy in Frontline Metastatic Melanoma. Curr Oncol Rep 2024; 26:915-923. [PMID: 38837107 DOI: 10.1007/s11912-024-01547-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/10/2024] [Indexed: 06/06/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucy Boyce Kennedy
- Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA
| | - April K S Salama
- Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Dugan MM, Perez MC, Karapetyan L, Zager JS. Combination Atezolizumab, Cobimetinib, and Vemurafenib as a Treatment Option in BRAF V600 Mutation-Positive Melanoma: Patient Selection and Perspectives. Cancer Manag Res 2024; 16:933-939. [PMID: 39099762 PMCID: PMC11296355 DOI: 10.2147/cmar.s325514] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2024] [Accepted: 07/24/2024] [Indexed: 08/06/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle M Dugan
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Matthew C Perez
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Lilit Karapetyan
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA
- Department of Oncologic Sciences, University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Jonathan S Zager
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA
- Department of Oncologic Sciences, University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, FL, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pellerino A, Davidson TM, Bellur SS, Ahluwalia MS, Tawbi H, Rudà R, Soffietti R. Prevention of Brain Metastases: A New Frontier. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16:2134. [PMID: 38893253 PMCID: PMC11171378 DOI: 10.3390/cancers16112134] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2024] [Revised: 05/29/2024] [Accepted: 06/01/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessia Pellerino
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Neuroscience ‘Rita Levi Montalcini’, University and City of Health and Science Hospital, 10126 Turin, Italy;
| | - Tara Marie Davidson
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (T.M.D.); (H.T.)
| | - Shreyas S. Bellur
- Department of Medical Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, FL 33176, USA; (S.S.B.); (M.S.A.)
| | - Manmeet S. Ahluwalia
- Department of Medical Oncology, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, FL 33176, USA; (S.S.B.); (M.S.A.)
| | - Hussein Tawbi
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA; (T.M.D.); (H.T.)
| | - Roberta Rudà
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Neuroscience ‘Rita Levi Montalcini’, University and City of Health and Science Hospital, 10126 Turin, Italy;
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
de Sauvage MA, Torrini C, Nieblas-Bedolla E, Summers EJ, Sullivan E, Zhang BS, Batchelor E, Marion B, Yamazawa E, Markson SC, Wakimoto H, Nayyar N, Brastianos PK. The ERK inhibitor LY3214996 augments anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in preclinical mouse models of BRAFV600E melanoma brain metastasis. Neuro Oncol 2024; 26:889-901. [PMID: 38134951 PMCID: PMC11066918 DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noad248] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2023] [Indexed: 12/24/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Magali A de Sauvage
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Consuelo Torrini
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Cancer Program, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Edwin Nieblas-Bedolla
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Elizabeth J Summers
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Emily Sullivan
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Britney S Zhang
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Emily Batchelor
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Braxton Marion
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Erika Yamazawa
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Samuel C Markson
- Department of Immunology, Blavatnik Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Cancer Program, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Hiroaki Wakimoto
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Naema Nayyar
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Cancer Program, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Priscilla K Brastianos
- Center for Cancer Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Cancer Program, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Division of Neuro-Oncology, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital. Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Albrecht LJ, Dimitriou F, Grover P, Hassel JC, Erdmann M, Forschner A, Johnson DB, Váraljai R, Lodde G, Placke JM, Krefting F, Zaremba A, Ugurel S, Roesch A, Schulz C, Berking C, Pöttgen C, Menzies AM, Long GV, Dummer R, Livingstone E, Schadendorf D, Zimmer L. Anti-PD-(L)1 plus BRAF/MEK inhibitors (triplet therapy) after failure of immune checkpoint inhibition and targeted therapy in patients with advanced melanoma. Eur J Cancer 2024; 202:113976. [PMID: 38484692 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2024.113976] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2023] [Revised: 02/16/2024] [Accepted: 02/21/2024] [Indexed: 04/21/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lea Jessica Albrecht
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany
| | - Florentia Dimitriou
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Piyush Grover
- Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Jessica C Hassel
- Department of Dermatology and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Michael Erdmann
- Department of Dermatology, Uniklinikum Erlangen and the Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-European Metropolitan Area of Nuremberg (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Andrea Forschner
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Douglas B Johnson
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, VUMC, and Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Renáta Váraljai
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany
| | - Georg Lodde
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany
| | - Jan Malte Placke
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany
| | - Frederik Krefting
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany
| | - Anne Zaremba
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany
| | - Selma Ugurel
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany
| | - Alexander Roesch
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany
| | - Carsten Schulz
- Department of Dermatology and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Carola Berking
- Department of Dermatology, Uniklinikum Erlangen and the Comprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen-European Metropolitan Area of Nuremberg (CCC ER-EMN), Erlangen, Germany
| | - Christoph Pöttgen
- Department of Radiotherapy, West German Cancer Centre, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Alexander M Menzies
- Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Department of Medical Oncology, Royal North Shore and Mater Hospitals, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Georgina V Long
- Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Department of Medical Oncology, Royal North Shore and Mater Hospitals, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Reinhard Dummer
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Elisabeth Livingstone
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany
| | - Dirk Schadendorf
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT)-West, Campus Essen, & Research Alliance Ruhr, Research Center One Health, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany
| | - Lisa Zimmer
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Essen, West German Cancer Center, University Duisburg-Essen and the German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Knox A, Wang T, Shackleton M, Ameratunga M. Symptomatic brain metastases in melanoma. Exp Dermatol 2024; 33:e15075. [PMID: 38610093 DOI: 10.1111/exd.15075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/11/2024] [Revised: 03/22/2024] [Accepted: 03/27/2024] [Indexed: 04/14/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Knox
- Department of Medical Oncology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Tim Wang
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia
| | - Mark Shackleton
- Department of Medical Oncology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Australia
- School of Translational Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Malaka Ameratunga
- Department of Medical Oncology, Alfred Health, Melbourne, Australia
- School of Translational Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Amouzegar A, Tawbi HA. Local and Systemic Management Options for Melanoma Brain Metastases. Cancer J 2024; 30:102-107. [PMID: 38527263 DOI: 10.1097/ppo.0000000000000711] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/27/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Afsaneh Amouzegar
- From the Division of Cancer Medicine, Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Cappelli C, Gatta E, Ippolito S. Levothyroxine personalized treatment: is it still a dream? Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2024; 14:1334292. [PMID: 38260167 PMCID: PMC10801080 DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1334292] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2023] [Accepted: 12/18/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carlo Cappelli
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, SSD Endocrinologia, University of Brescia, ASST Spedali Civili of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Elisa Gatta
- Department of Clinical and Experimental Sciences, SSD Endocrinologia, University of Brescia, ASST Spedali Civili of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Salvatore Ippolito
- Consulcesi Homnya, Head of Omnichannel Strategy & Project Management, Rome, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Sherman WJ, Romiti E, Michaelides L, Moniz-Garcia D, Chaichana KL, Quiñones-Hinojosa A, Porter AB. Systemic Therapy for Melanoma Brain and Leptomeningeal Metastases. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2023; 24:1962-1977. [PMID: 38158477 DOI: 10.1007/s11864-023-01155-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/22/2023] [Indexed: 01/03/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wendy J Sherman
- Department of Neurology, Division of Neuro-Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 4500 San Pablo Rd S, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA.
| | - Edoardo Romiti
- Vita e Salute San Raffaele University in Milan, Via Olgettina, 58, 20132, Milan, MI, Italy
| | - Loizos Michaelides
- Department of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, 4500 San Pablo Rd S, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA
| | - Diogo Moniz-Garcia
- Department of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, 4500 San Pablo Rd S, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA
| | - Kaisorn L Chaichana
- Department of Neurosurgery, Mayo Clinic, 4500 San Pablo Rd S, Jacksonville, FL, 32224, USA
| | | | - Alyx B Porter
- Department of Neurology, Division of Neuro-Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ, 85054, USA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Pavlick AC, Ariyan CE, Buchbinder EI, Davar D, Gibney GT, Hamid O, Hieken TJ, Izar B, Johnson DB, Kulkarni RP, Luke JJ, Mitchell TC, Mooradian MJ, Rubin KM, Salama AK, Shirai K, Taube JM, Tawbi HA, Tolley JK, Valdueza C, Weiss SA, Wong MK, Sullivan RJ. Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, version 3.0. J Immunother Cancer 2023; 11:e006947. [PMID: 37852736 PMCID: PMC10603365 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2023-006947] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/16/2023] [Indexed: 10/20/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Charlotte E Ariyan
- Department of Surgery Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | | | - Diwakar Davar
- Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburg Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Geoffrey T Gibney
- Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | - Omid Hamid
- The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, A Cedars-Sinai Affiliate, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Tina J Hieken
- Department of Surgery and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Benjamin Izar
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Douglas B Johnson
- Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Rajan P Kulkarni
- Departments of Dermatology, Oncological Sciences, Biomedical Engineering, and Center for Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research, Knight Cancer Institute, OHSU, Portland, Oregon, USA
- Operative Care Division, VA Portland Health Care System (VAPORHCS), Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Jason J Luke
- Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Tara C Mitchell
- Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Meghan J Mooradian
- Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Krista M Rubin
- Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - April Ks Salama
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University, Durham, Carolina, USA
| | - Keisuke Shirai
- Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA
| | - Janis M Taube
- Department of Dermatology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Hussein A Tawbi
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - J Keith Tolley
- Patient Advocate, Melanoma Research Alliance, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Caressa Valdueza
- Cutaneous Oncology Program, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA
| | - Sarah A Weiss
- Department of Medical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA
| | - Michael K Wong
- Patient Advocate, Melanoma Research Alliance, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Ryan J Sullivan
- Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Retraction and republication-Atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib in patients with melanoma with CNS metastases (TRICOTEL): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24:832. [PMID: 37459870 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00327-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/06/2023]
|
18
|
Dummer R, Tawbi H. Retraction and republication-TRICOTEL: defining symptomatic brain metastases in clinical trials. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24:e327. [PMID: 37459871 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00292-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2023] [Revised: 06/09/2023] [Accepted: 06/14/2023] [Indexed: 08/06/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Reinhard Dummer
- Department of Dermatology, Skin Cancer Center, University Hospital Zurich, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland.
| | - Hussein Tawbi
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|