Real-world efficacy and safety data of nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy in Japanese patients with advanced melanoma

Combined programmed cell death protein 1 and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 blockade in an international cohort of patients with acral lentiginous melanoma

BACKGROUND

Combination immune checkpoint blockade targeting programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) leads to high response rates and improved survival in patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma (CM). Less is known about the efficacy of this combination in acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of combination immune checkpoint blockade targeting PD-1 and CTLA-4 in a diverse, real-world population of patients with ALM.

METHODS

This multi-institutional retrospective study analysed patients with histologically confirmed ALM treated with a combination of PD-1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors between 2010 and 2022. The primary objective of the study was the objective response rate (ORR) as per the RECIST criteria. The secondary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

In total, 109 patients with advanced ALM treated with combined PD-1 and CTLA-4 blockade in any line of treatment were included. The majority of patients had stage IV disease (n = 81; 74.3%). The ORR for the entire cohort was 18.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 11.6-26.9], with 9 (8.3%) complete and 11 (10.1%) partial responses. A further 22 patients (20.2%) had stable disease, and the disease control rate was 38.5%. Median PFS was 4.2 months (95% CI 3.25-5.62), while median OS was 17 months (95% CI 12.4-23.1). Ninety-five patients (87.2%) had a treatment-related adverse event, with 40.4% (n = 44/109) experiencing at least one grade 3 or 4 toxicity. Elevated lactate dehydrogenase (P = 0.04), ≥ 2 lines of prior treatment (P = 0.03) and Asian ethnicity (P = 0.04) were associated with worse OS, while Hispanic/Latino ethnicity was associated with better OS (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Combination PD-1 and CTLA-4 blockade is less effective for ALM than for CM, despite similar toxicity. In particular, Asian patients appear to derive less benefit from this regimen. Novel treatment approaches are needed for this rare melanoma subtype.

Long-term follow-up results from KEYNOTE-041: Phase 1b study of pembrolizumab in Japanese patients with advanced melanoma

Pembrolizumab demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and promising antitumor activity in Japanese patients with advanced melanoma in the phase 1b KEYNOTE-041 (Study of Pembrolizumab [MK-3475] in Participants With Advanced Melanoma) trial. To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in Japanese patients with advanced melanoma in KEYNOTE-041. The current analysis reports results of additional follow-up of approximately 12 months since the initial analysis. Eligible patients had locally advanced (unresectable stage III) or metastatic (stage IV) melanoma not amenable to local therapy and had received two or fewer prior systemic therapies. Pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg was given every 3 weeks for up to 2 years or until confirmed progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end points included safety, tolerability, and overall response rate (ORR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 by independent central review. The data cutoff for this analysis was August 30, 2017. Forty-two patients were followed up for a median of 22.3 months (range, 2.63-30.82 months). The ORR was 24.3% (nine of 37 evaluable patients [95% confidence interval (CI), 11.8%-41.2%]). Two patients with partial response at the time of the initial analysis achieved complete response. The median overall survival (OS) was 25.1 months (95% CI, 13.1-not reached] and the 30-month OS rate was 46.3% (95% CI, 29.8%-61.3%). The median duration of response was not reached. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 78.6% of patients; the incidence of grade 3 to 5 TRAEs was 23.8%. No additional treatment-related deaths occurred since the initial analysis. Pembrolizumab provided durable antitumor activity and an acceptable safety profile in Japanese patients with advanced melanoma.

The OX40-TRAF6 axis promotes CTLA-4 degradation to augment antitumor CD8+ T-cell immunity

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB), including anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), benefits only a limited number of patients with cancer. Understanding the in-depth regulatory mechanism of CTLA-4 protein stability and its functional significance may help identify ICB resistance mechanisms and assist in the development of novel immunotherapeutic modalities to improve ICB efficacy. Here, we identified that TNF receptor-associated factor 6 (TRAF6) mediates Lys63-linked ubiquitination and subsequent lysosomal degradation of CTLA-4. Moreover, by using TRAF6-deficient mice and retroviral overexpression experiments, we demonstrated that TRAF6 promotes CTLA-4 degradation in a T-cell-intrinsic manner, which is dependent on the RING domain of TRAF6. This intrinsic regulatory mechanism contributes to CD8+ T-cell-mediated antitumor immunity in vivo. Additionally, by using an OX40 agonist, we demonstrated that the OX40-TRAF6 axis is responsible for CTLA-4 degradation, thereby controlling antitumor immunity in both tumor-bearing mice and patients with cancer. Overall, our findings demonstrate that the OX40-TRAF6 axis promotes CTLA-4 degradation and is a potential therapeutic target for the improvement of T-cell-based immunotherapies.

Efficacy of Nivolumab and Ipilimumab Combined Therapy as a First-Line Therapy for Patients with Advanced Melanoma and the Urgent Need for an Effective Second-Line Therapy for Patients with Wild-Type BRAF in Japan: A Single Center Retrospective Study

Therapeutic advantages of immune checkpoint inhibitors, anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1), and anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) in melanoma have been reported recently. In this study, we conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of the combined use of nivolumab and ipilimumab as a first-line therapy for Japanese patients with advanced melanoma. Moreover, we examined the effects of second-line treatment. Seven patients were enrolled in this study. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 7 months (95%CI, 1.868-12.132) and 12 months (95%CI, 0.000- 27.397), respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) and the disease control rate (DCR) were 42.9 % and 85.7 %. Three patients chose pembrolizumab monotherapy as second-line therapy after the combination therapy due to their BRAF wild-type status, which resulted in progressive disease. ORR and DCR were 0% and 33.3%, respectively, with pembrolizumab. Grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 71.4% of the patients treated with the combined-therapy. All irAEs were treated with corticosteroid or hormone replacement therapy. Although this single center retrospective study had some limitations, it demonstrated good efficacy for the combined use of nivolumab and ipilimumab as a first-line therapy for Japanese patients with advanced melanoma. Moreover, poor efficacy was observed for the second-line therapy after the combined therapy. These findings suggest that a novel second-line therapy is required for patients with advanced melanoma in Japan, particularly for patients with wildtype BRAF.

Postmarketing surveillance of nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination therapy in Japanese patients with unresectable malignant melanoma

Although malignant melanoma is relatively rare in Japan, it is often diagnosed at a later stage than in Western countries. Nivolumab and ipilimumab are immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting programmed death 1 and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4, respectively. Owing to their complementary anticancer effects, nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy (N + I) has been studied and approved for treating malignant melanoma in various countries including Japan. Real-world postmarketing surveillance was implemented to record treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) in patients treated with N + I following its approval in Japan. Patients were eligible for registration if they had unresectable malignant melanoma and started N + I between September 2018 and August 2019. The observation period was 13 weeks from starting N + I. Only safety information was collected and evaluated. The final case report form lock was March 2021. Overall, 173 patients (median age, 66.0 years; performance status 0-1, 88.4%; skin: 53.2%; mucosal: 32.4%) were eligible for the analyses. Overall, 34.1% of patients completed 4 doses of N + I. N + I was discontinued by 63.0% (due to adverse events in 67.9% and disease progression/death in 22.9%). Any grade and grade ≥3 TRAEs were reported in 73.41% and 52.02%, respectively. TRAEs in ≥10 patients were hepatic function abnormal (any grade/grade ≥3: 23.12%/13.29%), pyrexia (10.40%/0.58%), diarrhea (9.25%/2.89%), rash (8.67%/0.58%), hypophysitis (5.78%/5.20%), interstitial lung disease (5.78%/2.89%), and liver disorder (5.78%/4.62%). TRAEs were classified as recovered (36.99% of patients), recovering (44.51%), unrecovered (13.29%), recovered with sequelae (2.31%), and death (1.73%). Overall, 24 of 34 patients (70.59%) with gastrointestinal-related and 53 of 65 (81.54%) liver-related TRAEs received treatment, such as a steroid with/without an immunosuppressant; most patients recovered within 1 to 2 months. In conclusion, this postmarketing surveillance of N + I in patients with unresectable malignant melanoma revealed no new safety concerns compared with results of prior studies. Immune-related TRAEs were generally manageable by appropriate treatment including a steroid.

Nail Apparatus Melanoma: Current Management and Future Perspectives

Nail apparatus melanoma (NAM) is a rare type of cutaneous melanoma that belongs to the acral melanoma subtype. NAM is managed principally in accordance with the general treatment for cutaneous melanoma, but there is scarce evidence in support of this in the literature. Acral melanoma is genetically different from non-acral cutaneous melanoma, while recently accumulated data suggest that NAM also has a different genetic background from acral melanoma. In this review, we focus on recent advances in the management of NAM. Localized NAM should be surgically removed; amputation of the digit and digit-preserving surgery have been reported. Sentinel lymph node biopsy can be considered for invasive NAM for the purpose of accurate staging. However, it is yet to be clarified whether patients with metastatic sentinel lymph nodes can be safely spared completion lymph node dissection. Similar to cutaneous melanoma, immune checkpoint inhibitors and BRAF/MEK inhibitors are used as the first-line treatment for metastatic NAM, but data on the efficacy of these therapies remain scarce. The therapeutic effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors could be lower for NAM than for cutaneous melanoma. This review highlights the urgent need to accumulate data to better define the optimal management of this rare melanoma.

Immune checkpoint inhibitor-based therapy for advanced acral and mucosal melanoma

Acral melanoma (AM) and mucosal melanomas (MM) are rare clinical subtypes of melanoma. AM and MM are etiologically, biologically, and molecularly distinct from cutaneous melanoma (CM). Despite the recent development of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of advanced CMs, the true therapeutic efficacy of ICIs for these rare subtypes remains unclear. Since these subtypes are rare, especially in the Caucasian population, their biological features and corresponding novel therapies are underexplored than those of CM. Even in the larger phase III clinical trials for ICIs, the sample size of patients with AM and MM is limited. Consequently, establishment of standard of care for advanced AM and MM has been challenging. This review covers current update and overview on clinical efficacy of ICIs and ICI-based therapy for advanced AM and MM, based mainly on the reported clinical trials, prospective observational studies, and retrospective studies, to provide a better understanding of the current landscape of this field. In addition, we discuss the future direction of treatment for those rare clinical subtypes, focusing on issues relevant to dermatology and medical oncology.

Updated analysis of nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy in Japanese patients with advanced melanoma

The efficacy and safety of nivolumab and ipilimumab (N + I) combination therapy for Japanese patients with advanced unresectable melanoma was re-evaluated in clinical practice. One hundred Japanese patients with advanced melanoma were included. The overall response rate was 24%; complete response (CR), 6%; partial response, 18%. The response rates were 33.3% in the systemic therapy-naïve and 15.4% in the prior-treatment groups, and 16.1% for patients who were treated with first-line anti-programmed death 1 antibody monotherapy followed by second-line N + I therapy after progression of the disease. The response rate for cutaneous melanoma was 32.7%, and 47.8% in the naïve group. Response rates for non-acral, acral, and mucosal melanoma were 34.9%, 25%, and 16.7%, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) for all patients was 3.25 months (6.5 and 2.5 months in the naïve and prior-treatment groups, respectively). Median overall survival (OS) was 14.5 months (25.25 and 7.5 months in the naïve and prior-treatment groups, respectively). There were no significant differences in PFS or OS for patients with non-acral, acral, or mucosal melanoma. The 3-year PFS and OS were both 100% in patients who achieved CR with combination therapy. Adverse events occurred in 89% and were grade three or higher in 56% of cases. Although direct comparisons cannot be made due to different patient backgrounds, N + I combination therapy in Japanese patients in clinical practice tended to be inferior when compared to global study and non-Asian patients in clinical practice. The highest response rate was in the cutaneous melanoma therapy-naïve group. The best tumor response was associated with survival outcome, and the PFS and OS were good in cases where CR was obtained. The proportion of grade three and four adverse events was as high as that in the global study.

Resistance to anti-PD1 therapies in patients with advanced melanoma: systematic literature review and application of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer Immunotherapy Resistance Taskforce anti-PD1 resistance definitions

Nearly half of advanced melanoma patients do not achieve a clinical response with anti-programmed cell death 1 protein (PD1) therapy (i.e. primary resistance) or initially achieve a clinical response but eventually progress during or following further treatment (i.e. secondary resistance). A consensus definition for tumor resistance to anti-PD1 monotherapy was published by Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer Immunotherapy Resistance Taskforce (SITC) in 2020. A systematic literature review (SLR) of clinical trials and observational studies was conducted to characterize the proportions of advanced melanoma patients who have progressed on anti-PD1 therapies. The SLR included 55 unique studies and the SITC definition of primary resistance was applied to 37 studies that specified disease progression by best overall response. Median and range of patients with primary resistance in studies that specified first-line and second-line or higher anti-PD1 monotherapy was 35.50% (21.19-39.13%; n = 4 studies) and 41.54% (30.00-56.41%, n = 3 studies); median and range of patients with primary resistance in studies that specified first-line and second-line or higher combination therapy was 30.23% (15.79-33.33%; n = 6 studies), and 70.00% (61.10-73.33%; n = 3 studies). Primary resistance to anti-PD1 monotherapies and when in combination with ipilimumab are higher in patients receiving second-line or higher therapies, in patients with acral, mucosal, and uveal melanoma, and in patients with active brain metastases. The percentage of patients with primary resistance was generally consistent across clinical trials, with variability in resistance noted for observational studies. Limitations include applying the SITC definitions to combination therapies, where consensus definitions are not yet available. Future studies should highly consider utilizing the SITC definitions to harmonize how resistance is classified and facilitate meaningful context for clinical activity.

Efficacy comparison between anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy and anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 combination therapy as first-line immunotherapy for advanced acral melanoma: A retrospective, multicenter study of 254 Japanese patients

BACKGROUND

Although anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy (PD-1) is commonly used to treat advanced acral melanoma (AM), its efficacy is limited. Further, data on the efficacy of PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 antibody (PD-1+CTLA-4) for the treatment of AM are limited. Therefore, we compared the efficacy of PD-1+CTLA-4 and PD-1 in the treatment of Japanese patients with advanced AM.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated patients with advanced AM who were treated with PD-1 or PD-1+CTLA-4 as first-line immunotherapy in 24 Japanese institutions between 2014 and 2020. Treatment efficacy focussing on the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) was compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

In total, 254 patients (palm and sole melanoma [PSM], n = 180; nail apparatus melanoma [NAM], n = 74) were included. Among the patients with PSM, the ORR (19% vs. 31%; P = 0.44), PFS (5.9 vs. 3.2 months; P = 0.74), and OS (23.1 vs. not reached; P = 0.55) did not differ significantly between the PD-1 and PD-1+CTLA-4 groups. Among the patients with NAM, the ORR (61% vs. 10%; P < 0.001) was significantly higher and PFS was longer (6.4 vs. 3.8 months; P = 0.10) in the PD-1+CTLA-4 group than in the PD-1 group. Cox multivariate analysis demonstrated that PD-1+CTLA-4 is an independent predictor of a favourable PFS in patients with NAM (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of PD-1+CTLA-4 is not superior to that of PD-1 for the treatment of advanced PSM. However, PD-1+CTLA-4 may be more efficacious than PD-1 for the treatment of advanced NAM.

The pharmacotherapeutic management of nail unit and acral melanomas

INTRODUCTION

Acral and nail unit melanomas are rare subtypes of melanoma, which have poor prognoses. Current guidelines for optimal treatment are lacking. Recent clinical trials have evaluated new pharmacotherapeutic agents for melanoma treatment, with dramatically improved survival rates; however, studies on acral and nail unit melanomas are limited in comparison to trials on cutaneous melanoma.

AREAS COVERED

This is a comprehensive review of the literature regarding the available treatment options for acral and nail unit melanomas, with consideration of safety and tolerability.

EXPERT OPINION

Programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitors are more efficacious than cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 blockers in acral and nail unit melanomas, although both are well-tolerated. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors have good clinical activity, however, data on safety is relatively limited. There is minimal data on high dose interferon α-2b and cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors, and efficacy and safety must be evaluated in future trials before they can be recommended for use in this patient population. Prospective clinical trials on acral and nail unit melanomas are lacking, and must be performed in large patient populations, with international collaboration likely necessary in order to enroll adequate participants.

Multi-target combinatory strategy to overcome tumor immune escape

Immune therapy has become the fourth approach after surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy in cancer treatment. Many immune checkpoints were identified in the last decade since ipilimumab, which is the first immune checkpoint inhibitor to cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4, had been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic melanoma in 2011. The use of several antibody drugs that target PD1/PD-L1 for various cancer treatments has been approved by the FDA. However, fewer people are benefitting from immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment in solid cancers. Approximately 80% of patients do not respond appropriately because of primary or acquired therapeutic resistance. Along with the characterization of more immune checkpoints, the combinatory treatment of multiimmune checkpoint inhibitors becomes a new option when monotherapy could not receive a good response. In this work, the author focuses on the combination therapy of multiple immune checkpoints (does not include targeted therapy of oncogenes or chemotherapy), introduces the current progression of multiple immune checkpoints and their related inhibitors, and discusses the advantages of combination therapy, as well as the risk of immune-related adverse events.

Anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy versus anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 combination therapy as first-line immunotherapy in unresectable or metastatic mucosal melanoma: a retrospective, multicenter study of 329 Japanese cases (JMAC study)

Background

Anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) antibody monotherapy (PD1) has led to favorable responses in advanced non-acral cutaneous melanoma among Caucasian populations; however, recent studies suggest that this therapy has limited efficacy in mucosal melanoma (MCM). Thus, advanced MCM patients are candidates for PD1 plus anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) combination therapy (PD1 + CTLA4). Data on the efficacy of immunotherapy in MCM, however, are limited. We aimed to compare the efficacies of PD1 and PD1 + CTLA4 in Japanese advanced MCM patients.

Patients and methods

We retrospectively assessed advanced MCM patients treated with PD1 or PD1 + CTLA4 at 24 Japanese institutions. Patient baseline characteristics, clinical responses (RECIST), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan–Meier analysis, and toxicity was assessed to estimate the efficacy and safety of PD1 and PD1 + CTLA4.

Results

Altogether, 329 patients with advanced MCM were included in this study. PD1 and PD1 + CTLA4 were used in 263 and 66 patients, respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar between both treatment groups, except for age (median age 71 versus 65 years; P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between the PD1 and PD1 + CTLA4 groups with respect to objective response rate (26% versus 29%; P = 0.26) or PFS and OS (median PFS 5.9 months versus 6.8 months; P = 0.55, median OS 20.4 months versus 20.1 months; P = 0.55). Cox multivariate survival analysis revealed that PD1 + CTLA4 did not prolong PFS and OS (PFS: hazard ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.58-1.19, P = 0.30; OS: HR 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.57-1.38, P = 0.59). The rate of ≥grade 3 immune-related adverse events was higher in the PD1 + CTLA4 group than in the PD1 group (53% versus 17%; P < 0.001).

Conclusions

First-line PD1 + CTLA4 demonstrated comparable clinical efficacy to PD1 in Japanese MCM patients, but with a higher rate of immune-related adverse events.

•

Anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 antibody therapy (PD1 + CTLA4) is an option for patients with advanced mucosal melanoma (MCM).

•

Data on the efficacy of PD1 + CTLA4 compared with PD-1 monotherapy (PD1) for MCM, however, are limited.

•

We retrospectively analyzed data from 329 Japanese patients with advanced MCM treated with PD1 or PD1 + CTLA4.

•

No significant differences in objective response rate, progression-free survival, or overall survival were observed.

•

Immune-related adverse events resulting in treatment cessation were higher in the PD1 + CTLA4 group.

Real-world efficacy and safety of axitinib in combination with anti-programmed cell death-1 antibody for advanced mucosal melanoma

PURPOSE

The combination of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) inhibitor and programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) blockade provides promising therapeutic opportunities for advanced mucosal melanoma in early phase trials. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination regimen for advanced mucosal melanoma in the real world.

METHODS

Patients with advanced mucosal melanoma received an anti-PD-1 antibody plus the VEGFR inhibitor axitinib until confirmed disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. In addition, those with liver metastasis were allowed to take hepatic transcatheter arterial chemoembolisation (TACE). The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), time to treatment failure (TTF), duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS) and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).

RESULTS

Eighty-one and sixty-six patients received axitinib plus immunotherapy as first-line and salvage therapy, respectively. Overall, ORR was 24.5% (95% CI, 17.3-31.6), DCR was 72.7% (95% CI, 65.3-80.1). Median TTF, DOR and OS were 5.2 months (95% CI, 3.7-6.6), 9.2 months (95% CI, 7.2-11.2) and 11.1 months (95% CI, 7.2-15.0). ORR was 30.0% (95% CI, 19.7-40.3) and 17.5% (95% CI, 7.8-27.1) as first-line and salvage therapy, respectively. No statistical difference among the primary sites was noted for ORR. The ORR of patients with liver metastasis with or without hepatic TACE was 26.1% (95% CI, 6.7-45.5) and 15.0% (95% CI, 2.1-32.1), respectively (P = 0.467). Elevated LDH and poor ECOG status are negative predictive factors.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest analysis of anti-PD-1 plus VEGFR inhibitor therapy for mucosal melanoma to date. Immunotherapy plus anti-angiogenesis is applicable for advanced mucosal melanoma, especially as front-line. Hepatic TACE might act synergistically with systemic immunotherapy and anti-angiogenesis.