KEYNOTE-022 part 3: a randomized, double-blind, phase 2 study of pembrolizumab, dabrafenib, and trametinib in BRAF-mutant melanoma

Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab, dabrafenib and trametinib in BRAFV600-mutant resectable melanoma: the randomized phase 2 NeoTrio trial

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and BRAF-targeted therapy each improve survival in melanoma. Immune changes early during targeted therapy suggest the mechanisms of each drug class could work synergistically. In the non-comparative, randomized, phase 2 NeoTrio trial, we investigated whether targeted therapy could boost the proportion of patients achieving long-term recurrence-free survival with neoadjuvant immunotherapy in resectable stage III BRAFV600-mutant melanoma. Sixty patients (42% females) were randomized to pembrolizumab alone (n = 20), sequential therapy (dabrafenib plus trametinib followed by pembrolizumab; n = 20) or concurrent (triple) therapy (n = 20), followed by surgery and adjuvant therapy. The primary outcome was pathological response; secondary outcomes included radiographic response, recurrence-free survival, overall survival, surgical outcomes, peripheral blood and tumor analyses and safety. The pathological response rate was 55% (11/20; including six pathological complete responses (pCRs)) with pembrolizumab, 50% (10/20; three pCRs) with sequential therapy and 80% (16/20; ten pCRs) with concurrent therapy, which met the primary outcome in each arm. Treatment-related adverse events affected 75-100% of patients during neoadjuvant treatment, with seven early discontinuations (all in the concurrent arm). At 2 years, event-free survival was 60% with pembrolizumab, 80% with sequential therapy and 71% with concurrent therapy. Recurrences after major pathological response were more common in the targeted therapy arms, suggesting a reduction in response 'quality' when targeted therapy is added to neoadjuvant immunotherapy. Risking the curative potential of immunotherapy in melanoma cannot be justified. Pending longer follow-up, we suggest that immunotherapy and targeted therapy should not be combined in the neoadjuvant setting for melanoma. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT02858921 .

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.

Efficiency and tolerance of second-line triple BRAF inhibitor/MEK inhibitor/anti-PD1 combined therapy in BRAF mutated melanoma patients with central nervous system metastases occurring during first-line combined targeted therapy: a real-life survey

Although current systemic therapies significantly improved the outcome of advanced melanoma, the prognosis of patient with central nervous system (CNS) metastases remains poor especially when clinically symptomatic. We aimed to investigate the efficiency of CNS targets and tolerance of second-line combined anti-PD1/dual-targeted anti-BRAF/anti-MEK therapy implemented in patients with CNS progression after initially efficient first-line combined targeted therapy in patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma in a real-life setting. A monocentric retrospective analysis including all such patients treated from January 2017 to January 2022 was conducted in our tertiary referral center. The response of CNS lesions to second-line triple therapy was assessed through monthly clinical and at least quarterly morphological (according to RECIST criteria) evaluation. Tolerance data were also collected. Seventeen patients were included with a mean follow-up of 2.59 (±2.43) months. Only 1 patient displayed a significant clinical and morphological response. No statistically significant difference was observed between patients receiving or not additional local therapy (mainly radiotherapy) as to response achievement. Immunotherapy was permanently discontinued in 1 patient owing to grade 4 toxicity. Mean PFS and OS after CNS progression were 2.59 and 4.12 months, respectively. In this real-life survey, the subsequent addition of anti-PD1 to combined targeted therapy in melanoma patients with upfront CNS metastases did not result in significant response of CNS targets in most BRAF mutated melanoma patients with secondary CNS progression after initially successful first-line combined targeted therapy.

A phase 1 trial of the MEK inhibitor selumetinib in combination with pembrolizumab for advanced or metastatic solid tumors

MEK inhibitors have immunomodulatory activity and potential for synergistic activity when combined with PD-1 inhibitors. We evaluated selumetinib (inhibitor of MEK1/2) plus pembrolizumab (anti‒PD-1 antibody) in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors. In this phase 1b study, adults with previously treated advanced/metastatic solid tumors received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks plus selumetinib on days 1‒14 per 3-week cycle (2 weeks on/1 week off); selumetinib dosing began at 50 mg orally twice daily with escalation in 25 mg increments for ≤ 35 cycles. Primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), adverse events (AEs), and treatment discontinuations due to AEs. Thirty-two patients were enrolled. Dose escalation was completed up to selumetinib 125 mg twice daily. The target DLT rate of 30% was not reached at any dose level. In the selumetinib 100 mg group, 2/11 patients (18.2%) experienced DLTs (n = 1 grade 3 diarrhea, n = 1 grade 3 fatigue). In the selumetinib 125 mg group, 3/14 (21.4%) experienced DLTs (n = 1 grade 2 retinal detachment, n = 1 grade 3 retinopathy, n = 1 grade 3 stomatitis). Dose-related changes in pharmacokinetic exposures were observed for selumetinib and N-desmethyl selumetinib up to 100 mg (saturation at 125 mg). Two patients achieved partial responses (1 each with selumetinib 75 mg and 125 mg) for an objective response rate of 6%. The study was stopped early because of insufficient efficacy. Although the target DLT rate was not reached at any dose level and no new safety signals were identified, selumetinib plus pembrolizumab had limited antitumor activity in this population. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03833427.

Curing Stage IV Melanoma: Where Have We Been and Where Are We?

Little more than 10 years ago, metastatic melanoma was considered to have one of the poorest cancer outcomes, associated with a median overall survival of 6-8 months. Cytotoxic chemotherapy offered modest response rates of 20%-30%, but no clear survival benefit. Patients were routinely enrolled in clinical trials as their first-line therapy in the search for effective novel therapeutics. Remarkable developments in molecular biology, cancer genomics, immunology, and drug discovery have dominated the early part of the 21st century, and nowhere have the benefits been better realized than in the transformation of outcomes for patients with metastatic melanoma: since 2011, 14 new agents have been approved that significantly increase survival, with long-term remissions and, possibly now, potential for cure. Even so, there is still much work to be done, given that most treated patients still die of their disease. Although most survival gains have so far been realized for cutaneous melanoma, improving treatment options for those 10% of patients with rarer, noncutaneous melanomas is a high priority. Key novel therapeutic approaches aimed at improving outcomes with potential for curing patients with melanoma are considered.

Immunotherapy combination approaches: mechanisms, biomarkers and clinical observations

The approval of the first immune checkpoint inhibitors provided a paradigm shift for the treatment of malignancies across a broad range of indications. Whereas initially, single-agent immune checkpoint inhibition was used, increasing numbers of patients are now treated with combination immune checkpoint blockade, where non-redundant mechanisms of action of the individual agents generally lead to higher response rates. Furthermore, immune checkpoint therapy has been combined with various other therapeutic modalities, including chemotherapy, radiotherapy and other immunotherapeutics such as vaccines, adoptive cellular therapies, cytokines and others, in an effort to maximize clinical efficacy. Currently, a large number of clinical trials test combination therapies with an immune checkpoint inhibitor as a backbone. However, proceeding without inclusion of broad, if initially exploratory, biomarker investigations may ultimately slow progress, as so far, few combinations have yielded clinical successes based on clinical data alone. Here, we present the rationale for combination therapies and discuss clinical data from clinical trials across the immuno-oncology spectrum. Moreover, we discuss the evolution of biomarker approaches and highlight the potential new directions that comprehensive biomarker studies can yield.

Novel RAF-directed approaches to overcome current clinical limits and block the RAS/RAF node

Mutations in the RAS-RAF-MEK-ERK pathway are frequent alterations in cancer and RASopathies, and while RAS oncogene activation alone affects 19% of all patients and accounts for approximately 3.4 million new cases every year, less frequent alterations in the cascade's downstream effectors are also involved in cancer etiology. RAS proteins initiate the signaling cascade by promoting the dimerization of RAF kinases, which can act as oncoproteins as well: BRAFV600E is the most common oncogenic driver, mutated in the 8% of all malignancies. Research in this field led to the development of drugs that target the BRAFV600-like mutations (Class I), which are now utilized in clinics, but cause paradoxical activation of the pathway and resistance development. Furthermore, they are ineffective against non-BRAFV600E malignancies that dimerize and could be either RTK/RAS independent or dependent (Class II and III, respectively), which are still lacking an effective treatment. This review discusses the recent advances in anti-RAF therapies, including paradox breakers, dimer-inhibitors, immunotherapies, and other novel approaches, critically evaluating their efficacy in overcoming the therapeutic limitations, and their putative role in blocking the RAS pathway.

Melanoma Management: Exploring Staging, Prognosis, and Treatment Innovations

Melanoma, a malignant neoplasm originating from melanocytes, stands as one of the most prevalent cancers globally, ranking fifth in terms of estimated new cases in recent years. Its aggressive nature and propensity for metastasis pose significant challenges in oncology. Recent advancements have led to a notable shift towards targeted therapies, driven by a deeper understanding of cutaneous tumor pathogenesis. Immunotherapy and tyrosine kinase inhibitors have emerged as promising strategies, demonstrating the potential to improve clinical outcomes across all disease stages, including neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and metastatic settings. Notably, there has been a groundbreaking development in the treatment of brain metastasis, historically associated with poor prognosis in oncology but showcasing impressive results in melanoma patients. This review article provides a comprehensive synthesis of the most recent knowledge on staging and prognostic factors while highlighting emerging therapeutic modalities, with a particular focus on neoadjuvant and adjuvant strategies, notably immunotherapy and targeted therapies, including the ongoing trials.

New therapies for unresectable or metastatic cutaneous eyelid and orbital melanoma

PURPOSE

Newer treatment options offer the promise of improved outcomes for metastatic and unresectable melanoma. This investigation was performed to review these modalities for cutaneous eyelid and orbital disease.

METHODS

A search for articles that were related to this subject was performed in the PubMed database, and the bibliographies of these manuscripts were reviewed to ensure capture of the appropriate literature. Data was abstracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

Historically, patients who suffer from melanoma of the ocular adnexa have fared poorly. Approaches that employ BRAF and mitogen-associated protein kinase inhibitors, immunotherapy, and novel cellular therapies improve outcomes and survival rates, although the side effect profiles of these agents are problematic. Most of the existing strategies have not explored ocular adnexal disease specifically, and treatment plans are generally adapted from the general cutaneous oncology literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Thanks to advances in our comprehension of the cellular biology of the disease, the management of unresectable and metastatic melanoma has evolved considerably over the past several years. Newer modalities will likely continue to improve survival and reduce adverse events.

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.

The fusion of light and immunity: Advancements in photoimmunotherapy for melanoma

Metastatic melanoma is an aggressive skin cancer with high mortality and recurrence rates. Despite the clinical success of recent immunotherapy approaches, prevailing resistance rates necessitate the continued development of novel therapeutic options. Photoimmunotherapy (PIT) is emerging as a promising immunotherapy strategy that uses photodynamic therapy (PDT) to unleash systemic immune responses against tumor sites while maintaining the superior tumor-specificity and minimally invasive nature of traditional PDT. In this review, we discuss recent advances in PIT and strategies for the management of melanoma using PIT. PIT can strongly induce immunogenic cell death, inviting the concomitant application of immune checkpoint blockade or adoptive cell therapies. PIT can also be leveraged to selectively remove the suppressive immune populations associated with immunotherapy resistance. The modular nature of PIT therapy design combined with the potential for patient-specific antigen selection or drug co-delivery makes PIT an alluring option for future personalized melanoma care.

BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic NSCLC: disease overview and treatment landscape

In this review, we cover the current understanding of BRAF mutations and associated clinical characteristics in patients with metastatic NSCLC, approved and emerging treatment options, BRAF sequencing approaches, and unmet needs. The BRAFV600E mutation confers constitutive activity of the MAPK pathway, leading to enhanced growth, proliferation, and survival of tumor cells. Testing for BRAF mutations enables patients to be treated with therapies that directly target BRAFV600E and the MAPK pathway, but BRAF testing lags behind other oncogene testing in metastatic NSCLC. Additional therapies targeting BRAFV600E mutations provide options for patients with metastatic NSCLC. Emerging therapies and combinations under investigation could potentially overcome issues of resistance and target non-V600E mutations. Therefore, because targeted therapies with enhanced efficacy are on the horizon, being able to identify BRAF mutations in metastatic NSCLC may become even more important.

The treatment of advanced melanoma: Current approaches and new challenges

In recent years, advances in melanoma treatment have renewed patient hope. This comprehensive review emphasizes the evolving treatment landscape, particularly highlighting first-line strategies and the interplay between immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted therapies. Ipilimumab plus nivolumab has achieved the best median overall survival, exceeding 70 months. However, the introduction of new ICIs, like relatlimab, has added complexity to first-line therapy decisions. Our aim is to guide clinicians in making personalized treatment decisions. Various features, including brain metastases, PD-L1 expression, BRAF mutation, performance status, and prior adjuvant therapy, significantly impact the direction of advanced melanoma treatment. We also provide the latest insights into the treatment of rare melanoma subtypes, such as uveal melanoma, where tebentafusp has shown promising improvements in overall survival for metastatic uveal melanoma patients. This review provides invaluable insights for clinicians, enabling informed treatment choices and deepening our understanding of the multifaceted challenges associated with advanced melanoma management.

Precision Oncology in Melanoma and Skin Cancer Surgery

There has been perhaps no greater advance in the prognosis of solid tumors in the last decade than for patients with metastatic melanoma. This is due to significant improvements in treatment based on two key components of melanoma tumor biology (1) the identification of driver mutations with therapeutic potential and (2) the mechanistic understanding of a tumor-specific immune response. With breakthrough findings in such a relatively short period of time, the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma has become intensely personalized.

BRAF and MEK inhibitor combinations induce potent molecular and immunological effects in NRAS-mutant melanoma cells: Insights into mode of action and resistance mechanisms

About 25% of melanoma harbor activating NRAS mutations, which are associated with aggressive disease therefore requiring a rapid antitumor intervention. However, no efficient targeted therapy options are currently available for patients with NRAS-mutant melanoma. MEK inhibitors (MEKi) appear to display a moderate antitumor activity and also immunological effects in NRAS-mutant melanoma, providing an ideal backbone for combination treatments. In our study, the MEKi binimetinib, cobimetinib and trametinib combined with the BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) encorafenib, vemurafenib and dabrafenib were investigated for their ability to inhibit proliferation, induce apoptosis and alter the expression of immune modulatory molecules in sensitive NRAS-mutant melanoma cells using two- and three-dimensional cell culture models as well as RNA sequencing analyses. Furthermore, NRAS-mutant melanoma cells resistant to the three BRAFi/MEKi combinations were established to characterize the mechanisms contributing to their resistance. All BRAFi induced a stress response in the sensitive NRAS-mutant melanoma cells thereby significantly enhancing the antiproliferative and proapoptotic activity of the MEKi analyzed. Furthermore, BRAFi/MEKi combinations upregulated immune relevant molecules, such as ICOS-L, components of antigen-presenting machinery and the "don't eat me signal" molecule CD47 in the melanoma cells. The BRAFi/MEKi-resistant, NRAS-mutant melanoma cells counteracted the molecular and immunological effects of BRAFi/MEKi by upregulating downstream mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway molecules, inhibiting apoptosis and promoting immune escape mechanisms. Together, our study reveals potent molecular and immunological effects of BRAFi/MEKi in sensitive NRAS-mutant melanoma cells that may be exploited in new combinational treatment strategies for patients with NRAS-mutant melanoma.

Molecular Frontiers in Melanoma: Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Therapeutic Advances

Melanoma, a highly aggressive skin cancer, is characterized by rapid progression and high mortality. Recent advances in molecular pathogenesis have shed light on genetic and epigenetic changes that drive melanoma development. This review provides an overview of these developments, focusing on molecular mechanisms in melanoma genesis. It highlights how mutations, particularly in the BRAF, NRAS, c-KIT, and GNAQ/GNA11 genes, affect critical signaling pathways. The evolution of diagnostic techniques, such as genomics, transcriptomics, liquid biopsies, and molecular biomarkers for early detection and prognosis, is also discussed. The therapeutic landscape has transformed with targeted therapies and immunotherapies, improving patient outcomes. This paper examines the efficacy, challenges, and prospects of these treatments, including recent clinical trials and emerging strategies. The potential of novel treatment strategies, including neoantigen vaccines, adoptive cell transfer, microbiome interactions, and nanoparticle-based combination therapy, is explored. These advances emphasize the challenges of therapy resistance and the importance of personalized medicine. This review underlines the necessity for evidence-based therapy selection in managing the increasing global incidence of melanoma.

The outcome in patients with BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma treated with anti-programmed death receptor-1 monotherapy or targeted therapy in the real-world setting

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy and targeted therapy are currently two alternative backbones in the therapy of BRAF-mutated malignant melanoma. However, predictive biomarkers that would help with treatment selection are lacking.

METHODS

This retrospective study investigated outcomes of anti-programmed death receptor-1 monotherapy and targeted therapy in the first-line setting in patients with metastatic BRAF-mutated melanoma, focusing on clinical and laboratory parameters associated with treatment outcome.

RESULTS

Data from 174 patients were analysed. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 17.0 months (95% CI; 8-39) and 12.5 months (95% CI; 9-14.2) for immunotherapy and targeted therapy, respectively. The 3-year PFS rate was 39% for immunotherapy and 25% for targeted therapy. The objective response rate was 72% and 51% for targeted therapy and immunotherapy. The median overall (OS) survival for immunotherapy has not been reached and was 23.6 months (95% CI; 16.1-38.2) for targeted therapy, with a 3-year survival rate of 63% and 40%, respectively. In a univariate analysis, age < 70 years, a higher number of metastatic sites, elevated serum LDH and a neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio above the cut-off value were associated with inferior PFS regardless of the therapy received, but only serum LDH level and the presence of lung metastases remained significant predictors of PFS in a multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Present real-world data document the high effectiveness of immunotherapy and targeted therapy. Although targeted therapy had higher response rates, immunotherapy improved PFS and OS. While the prognostic value of LDH was confirmed, the potential use of blood cell count-derived parameters to predict outcomes needs further investigation.

Checkpoint Inhibition in Addition to Dabrafenib/Trametinib for BRAFV600E-Mutated Anaplastic Thyroid Carcinoma

Background: The dabrafenib plus trametinib combination (DT) has revolutionized the treatment of BRAFV600E-mutated anaplastic thyroid carcinoma (BRAFm-ATC). However, patients eventually develop resistance and progress. Single-agent anti-PD-1 inhibitor spartalizumab has shown a median overall survival (mOS) of 5.9 months. Combination of immunotherapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi) seems to improve outcomes compared with BRAF/MEKi alone, although no direct comparison is available. BRAF-targeted therapy before surgery (neoadjuvant approach) has also shown improvement in survival. We studied the efficacy and safety of DT plus pembrolizumab (DTP) compared with current standard-of-care DT alone as an initial treatment, as well as in the neoadjuvant setting. Methods: Retrospective single-center study of patients with BRAFm-ATC treated with first-line BRAF-directed therapy between January 2014 and March 2023. Three groups were evaluated: DT, DTP (pembrolizumab added upfront or at progression), and neoadjuvant (DT before surgery, and pembrolizumab added before or after surgery). The primary endpoint was mOS between DT and DTP. Secondary endpoints included median progression-free survival (mPFS) and response rate with DT versus DTP as initial treatments, and the exploratory endpoint was mOS in the neoadjuvant group. Results: Seventy-one patients were included in the primary analysis: n = 23 in DT and n = 48 in DTP. Baseline demographics were similar between groups, including the presence of metastatic disease at start of treatment (p = 0.427) and prior treatments with surgery (p = 0.864) and radiation (p = 0.678). mOS was significantly longer with DTP (17.0 months [confidence interval CI, 11.9-22.1]) compared with DT alone (9.0 months [CI, 4.5-13.5]), p = 0.037. mPFS was also significantly improved with DTP as the initial treatment (11.0 months [CI, 7.0-15.0]) compared with DT alone (4.0 months [CI, 0.7-7.3]), p = 0.049. Twenty-three patients were in the exploratory neoadjuvant group, where mOS was the longest (63.0 months [CI, 15.5-110.5]). No grade 5 adverse events (AEs) occurred in all three cohorts, and 32.4% had immune-related AEs, most frequently hepatitis and colitis. Conclusions: Our results show that in BRAFm-ATC, addition of pembrolizumab to dabrafenib/trametinib may significantly prolong survival. Surgical resection of the primary tumor after initial BRAF-targeted therapy in selected patients may provide further survival benefit. However, conclusions are limited by the retrospective nature of the study. Additional prospective data are needed to confirm this observation.

Efficacy and safety of 'Second Adjuvant' therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors after local therapy for recurrent melanoma following adjuvant PD-1 based immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

Anti-PD-1 antibodies and BRAK/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi) reduce the risk of recurrence for patients with resected stage III melanoma. BRAFV600-mutated (BRAFmut) melanoma patients who recur with isolated disease following adjuvant therapy may be suitable for 'second adjuvant' treatment after local therapy. We sought to examine the efficacy and safety of 'second adjuvant' BRAF/MEKi.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with BRAFmut melanoma treated with adjuvant PD-1 based immunotherapy who recurred, underwent definitive local therapy and were then treated with adjuvant BRAF/MEKi were identified retrospectively from 13 centres (second adjuvant group). Demographics, disease and treatment characteristics and outcome data were examined. Outcomes were compared to BRAFmut patients who did not receive 'second adjuvant' therapy (no second adjuvant group).

RESULTS

73 patients were included; 61 who received 'second adjuvant' therapy and 12 who did not. Most initially recurred on PD-1 therapy (66%). There were no differences in characteristics between groups. 92% of second adjuvant group received dabrafenib and trametinib and median duration of therapy was 11.8 months (0.4, 34.5). 72% required dose adjustments, 23% had grade 3 + toxicity and 38% permanently discontinued drug due to toxicity. After median 26.1 months (1.9, 56.3) follow-up, recurrence-free survival (RFS) was improved in second adjuvant group versus no second adjuvant group (median 30.8 vs 4 months, HR 0.35; p = 0.014), largely driven by a delay in early recurrence, with no difference in overall survival (p = 0.59).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study examining outcomes of 'second adjuvant' targeted therapy for melanoma, after failure of adjuvant PD-1 based immunotherapy. Data suggest a short-term improvement in RFS, but at the cost of toxicity. Alternative strategies and more data on sequencing adjuvant therapies are required to improve outcomes.

Targeted therapy or immunotherapy in BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma: a Spanish center's decade of experience

Background

Targeted therapies and immunotherapy are currently considered the mainstay first-line treatment for advanced BRAF-mutated melanoma. However, the impact of treatment (targeted therapy and immunotherapy) and the prognostic factors are still not clear.

Material and methods

Medical records of 140 patients diagnosed with advanced melanoma between 2011 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed to extract demographic, BRAF status, treatment, performance status, and survival data. ORR, PFS, and OS were compared between patients diagnosed with advanced melanoma and treated with first-line IT or BRAF/MEKi. The prognostic factors were assessed using Cox regression models.

Results

In all patients and those treated with immunotherapy, we did not find any effect of BRAF status on ORR, PFS, or OS. In patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma, ORR was 43.8% vs. 70% (P=0.04), PFS was 19.2 vs. 11.5 months (p=0.22), and OS was 33.4 vs. 16.4 months for the immunotherapy and targeted therapy groups, respectively (P=0.04). ECOG, presence of brain metastases, and high LDH level from initiation of first-line treatment were all associated with differences in PFS and OS.

Conclusion

Patients with advanced BRAF-mutated melanoma treated with first-line immunotherapy had a significantly longer PFS and OS than those treated with first-line BRAF/MEKi; however, first-line BRAF/MEKi treatment had a significantly higher ORR than first-line immunotherapy.

Neoadjuvant cobimetinib and atezolizumab with or without vemurafenib for high-risk operable Stage III melanoma: the Phase II NeoACTIVATE trial

Both targeted therapies and immunotherapies provide benefit in resected Stage III melanoma. We hypothesized that the combination of targeted and immunotherapy given prior to therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND) would be tolerable and drive robust pathologic responses. In NeoACTIVATE (NCT03554083), a Phase II trial, patients with clinically evident resectable Stage III melanoma received either 12 weeks of neoadjuvant vemurafenib, cobimetinib, and atezolizumab (BRAF-mutated, Cohort A, n = 15), or cobimetinib and atezolizumab (BRAF-wild-type, Cohort B, n = 15) followed by TLND and 24 weeks of adjuvant atezolizumab. Here, we report outcomes from the neoadjuvant portion of the trial. Based on intent to treat analysis, pathologic response (≤50% viable tumor) and major pathologic response (complete or near-complete, ≤10% viable tumor) were observed in 86.7% and 66.7% of BRAF-mutated and 53.3% and 33.3% of BRAF-wild-type patients, respectively (primary outcome); these exceeded pre-specified benchmarks of 50% and 30% for major pathologic response. Grade 3 and higher toxicities, primarily dermatologic, occurred in 63% during neoadjuvant treatment (secondary outcome). No surgical delays nor progression to regional unresectability occurred (secondary outcome). Peripheral blood CD8 + TCM cell expansion associated with favorable pathologic responses (exploratory outcome).

Metabolic Profiling to Assess Response to Targeted and Immune Therapy in Melanoma

There is currently no consensus to determine which advanced melanoma patients will benefit from targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or a combination of both, highlighting the critical need to identify early-response biomarkers to advanced melanoma therapy. The goal of this review is to provide scientific rationale to highlight the potential role of metabolic imaging to assess response to targeted and/or immune therapy in melanoma cancer. For that purpose, a brief overview of current melanoma treatments is provided. Then, current knowledge with respect to melanoma metabolism is described with an emphasis on major crosstalks between melanoma cell metabolism and signaling pathways involved in BRAF-targeted therapy as well as in immune checkpoint inhibition therapies. Finally, preclinical and clinical studies using metabolic imaging and/or profiling to assess response to melanoma treatment are summarized with a particular focus on PET (Positron Emission Tomography) imaging and 13C-MRS (Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy) methods.

The Effect of Sex on the Therapeutic Efficiency of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Sex is an important factor influencing the immune system, and the distribution of tumors, including their types and subtypes, is characterized by sexual dichotomy. The aim of this study was to investigate whether there is an association between sex and the treatment effect of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI).

METHODS

Four bibliographic databases were searched. Studies of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of ICI were identified and used, and the primary endpoint was the difference in efficacy of ICI between males and females, presented as overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). The study calculated the pooled HRs and 95% CIs for OS, PFS and RFS for males and females using a random effects model or a fixed effects model, and thereby assessed the effect of sex on the efficacy of ICI treatment. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022370939).

RESULTS

A total of 103 articles, including a total of 63,755 patients with cancer, were retrieved from the bibliographic database, of which approximately 70% were males. In studies with OS as the outcome, the combined hazard ratio (HR) was 0.77 (95% CI 0.74-0.79) for male patients treated with ICI and 0.81 (95% CI 0.78-0.85) for female patients compared to controls, respectively. The difference in efficacy between males and females was significant.

CONCLUSIONS

ICI therapy, under suitable conditions for its use, has a positive impact on survival in various types of tumors, and male patients benefit more than females. It may be necessary to develop different tumor immunotherapy strategies for patients of different sexes.

Molecular Targeting of the BRAF Proto-Oncogene/Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase (MAPK) Pathway across Cancers

The mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway is essential for cellular proliferation, growth, and survival. Constitutive activation of this pathway by BRAF mutations can cause downstream activation of kinases, leading to uncontrolled cellular growth and carcinogenesis. Therefore, inhibition of BRAF and the downstream substrate MEK has been shown to be effective in controlling tumor growth and proliferation. Over the last decade, several BRAF and MEK inhibitors have been investigated, ranging from primarily melanoma to various cancer types with BRAF alterations. This subsequently led to several Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals for BRAF/MEK inhibitors for melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, anaplastic thyroid cancer, colorectal cancer, histiocytosis neoplasms, and finally, tumor-agnostic indications. Here, this comprehensive review will cover the developments of BRAF and MEK inhibitors from melanomas to tumor-agnostic indications, novel drugs, challenges, future directions, and the importance of those drugs in personalized medicine.

Targeted therapeutic strategies for melanoma

ABSTRACT

Melanoma accounts for a small proportion of skin cancers diagnosed each year, but it has a high degree of malignancy and rapid progression, resulting in a short survival period for patients. The incidence of melanoma continues to rise, and now melanoma accounts for 1.7% of cancer diagnoses worldwide and is the fifth most common cancer in the United States. With the development of high-throughput sequencing technologies, the understanding of the pathophysiology of melanoma had also been improved. The most common activating mutations in melanoma cells are BRAF , NRAS , and KIT mutations, which disrupt cell signaling pathways related to tumor proliferation. The progress has led to the emergence of molecularly targeted drugs, which extends the survival of patients with advanced melanoma. A large number of clinical trials have been conducted to confirm that targeted therapy for patients with advanced melanoma can improve progression-free survival and overall survival, and for stage III patients after radical tumor resection targeted therapy can reduce the recurrence of melanoma. Patients who were originally stage III or IV inoperable have the opportunity to achieve tumor radical resection after targeted therapy. This article reviewed the clinical trial data and summarized the clinical benefits and limitations of these therapies.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

FINDINGS

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

INTERPRETATION

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

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche.

The impact of ECOG performance status on efficacy of immunotherapy and immune-based combinations in cancer patients: the MOUSEION-06 study

ECOG performance status (PS) is a pivotal prognostic factor in a wide number of solid tumors. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the role of ECOG PS in terms of survival in patients with ECOG PS 0 or ECOG PS 1 treated with immunotherapy alone or combined with other anticancer treatments. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses, all phase II and III randomized clinical trials that compared immunotherapy or immune-based combinations in patients with solid tumors were retrieved. The outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). We also performed subgroup analyses focused on type of therapy (ICI monotherapy or combinations), primary tumor type, setting (first line of treatment, subsequent lines). Overall, 60 studies were included in the analysis for a total of 35.020 patients. The pooled results showed that immunotherapy, either alone or in combination, reduces the risk of death or progression in both ECOG PS 0 and 1 populations. The survival benefit was consistent in all subgroups. Immune checkpoint inhibitors monotherapy or immune-based combinations are associated with improved survival irrespective of ECOG PS 0 or 1. Clinical trials should include more frail patients to assess the value of immunotherapy in these patients.

Systemic Therapy for Melanoma: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To provide guidance to clinicians regarding the use of systemic therapy for melanoma.

METHODS

American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel and conducted an updated systematic review of the literature.

RESULTS

The updated review identified 21 additional randomized trials.

UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS

Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab was newly recommended for patients with resectable stage IIIB to IV cutaneous melanoma. For patients with resected cutaneous melanoma, adjuvant nivolumab or pembrolizumab was newly recommended for stage IIB-C disease and adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab was added as a potential option for stage IV disease. For patients with unresectable or metastatic cutaneous melanoma, nivolumab plus relatlimab was added as a potential option regardless of BRAF mutation status and nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab was preferred over BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy. Talimogene laherparepvec is no longer recommended as an option for patients with BRAF wild-type disease who have progressed on anti-PD-1 therapy. Ipilimumab- and ipilimumab-containing regimens are no longer recommended for patients with BRAF-mutated disease after progression on other therapies.This full update incorporates the new recommendations for uveal melanoma published in the 2022 Rapid Recommendation Update.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/melanoma-guidelines.

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.

Actionable Genetic Screens Unveil Targeting of AURKA, MEK, and Fatty Acid Metabolism as an Alternative Therapeutic Approach for Advanced Melanoma

Despite the remarkable improvements achieved in the management of metastatic melanoma, there are still unmet clinical needs. A considerable fraction of patients does not respond to immune and/or targeted therapies owing to primary and acquired resistance, high-grade immune-related adverse events, and a lack of alternative treatment options. To design effective combination therapies, we set up a functional ex vivo preclinical assay on the basis of a drop-out genetic screen in metastatic melanoma patient-derived xenografts. We showed that this approach can be used to isolate actionable vulnerabilities predictive of drug efficacy. In particular, we highlighted that the dual targeting of AURKA and MAPK/extracellular signal-regulated kinase kinase employing the combination of alisertib and trametinib is highly effective in a cohort of metastatic melanoma patient-derived xenografts, both ex vivo and in vivo. Alisertib and trametinib combination therapy outperforms standard-of-care therapy in both BRAF-mutant patient-derived xenografts and targeted therapy-resistant models. Furthermore, alisertib and trametinib treatment modulates several critical cancer pathways, including an early metabolic reprogramming that leads to the transcriptional upregulation of the fatty acid oxidation pathway. This acquired trait unveiled an additional point of intervention for pharmacological targeting, and indeed, the triple combination of alisertib and trametinib with the fatty acid oxidation inhibitor etomoxir proved to be further beneficial, inducing tumor regression and remarkably prolonging the overall survival of the mice.

Advances in targeted therapy and immunotherapy for melanoma (Review)

Melanoma is the most aggressive and deadly type of skin cancer and is known for its poor prognosis as soon as metastasis occurs. Since 2011, new and effective therapies for metastatic melanoma have emerged, with US Food and Drug Administration approval of multiple targeted agents, such as V-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1/mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase inhibitors and multiple immunotherapy agents, such as cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4 and anti-programmed cell death protein 1/ligand 1 blockade. Based on insight into the respective advantages of the above two strategies, the present article provided a review of clinical trials of the application of targeted therapy and immunotherapy, as well as novel approaches of their combinations for the treatment of metastatic melanoma in recent years, with a focus on upcoming initiatives to improve the efficacy of these treatment approaches for metastatic melanoma.

Immunotherapy in Melanoma: Recent Advancements and Future Directions

Immune checkpoint inhibition has fundamentally altered the treatment paradigm of resectable and unresectable melanoma, resulting in dramatic improvements in patient outcomes. With these advances, the five-year overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed unresectable disease has eclipsed 50%. Ongoing research is focused on improving outcomes further, with a considerable emphasis on preventing de novo and acquired resistance and personalizing therapeutic options. Here, we review the ongoing advancements in the treatment of malignant melanoma, focusing on novel combination strategies that aim to build upon the successes of the last decade.

The role of triple therapy and therapy sequence in treatment of BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma. Response to overall survival with first-line atezolizumab in combination with vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma (IMspire150): second interim analysis of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 study

Novel therapies have achieved unprecedented benefit in survival of advanced melanoma patients. While immunotherapy (ICI) can be administered independent of mutational status, BRAF and MEK kinase inhibitors represent another effective treatment option for patients with BRAF mutant melanoma. Given the benefits these therapies demonstrate, the natural instinct was to combine. Three studies have investigated the benefit of combination of ICI using anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 antibody and targeted therapy (TT) with BRAF and MEK inhibitors over TT and placebo. Among these studies, statistically significantly superior duration of response was observed, however overall and progression-free survival were only numerically superior, if at all. One triple combination was approved for BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma; however, the expected synergistic effect of triple therapy could not be universally confirmed and the observed benefits with triple seem to depend on statistical considerations rather than a biological reason. As patients with BRAF mutant melanoma have both ICI and TT as their first-line treatment options, the question whether the sequence matters was addressed. Two prospective trials compared first-line ICI, followed by TT at progression, or vice-versa, with additional "sandwich" approach (8 weeks of TT followed by ICI until progression, then TT again) in the Secombit study. The benefit of first-line ICI was demonstrated in both studies with Secombit study showing the "sandwich" approach to have similar effect. Current data advices for immunotherapy based regiments in patients with BRAF mutant melanoma or, possibly, sandwich approach. Whether triple therapy is superior to ICI monotherapy still needs to be addressed considering not only efficacy, but also safety.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced cutaneous melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of efficacy and review of characteristics

OBJECTIVES

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are one of the most promising approaches toward advanced melanoma. Here, we aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the efficacy of all studied ICIs.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search to identify the relevant publications (PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42023470649). Then we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of different ICIs for metastatic melanoma. We used Cochrane's tool to assess the quality of studies. The outcome measures were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

Twenty reports of RCTs entered our systematic review, 18 of which were included in our data analysis. ICIs showed improved survival compared with control group (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.43-0.71; P<0.001). Using a meta-regression, we found a significant relation between patients' mean age and their OS (P<0.001, R 2  = 100.00%). Also, our analysis revealed greater HR for CTLA-4 inhibitors than PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors (HR = 0.71, 95%CI: 0.63-0.79, P<0.001 vs. HR = 0.63, 95%CI: 0.46-0.79, P<0.001). The effect sizes of different types of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that ICI-based immunotherapy is associated with enhanced OS, PFS, and RFS (P < 0.001) and will assist clinicians in choosing the optimal approach toward treating metastatic melanoma.

IMPemBra: a phase 2 study comparing pembrolizumab with intermittent/short-term dual MAPK pathway inhibition plus pembrolizumab in patients with melanoma harboring the BRAFV600 mutation

BACKGROUND

Continuous combination of MAPK pathway inhibition (MAPKi) and anti-programmed death-(ligand) 1 (PD-(L)1) showed high response rates, but only limited improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) at the cost of a high frequency of treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) in patients with BRAF^V600-mutated melanoma. Short-term MAPKi induces T-cell infiltration in patients and is synergistic with anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) in a preclinical melanoma mouse model. The aim of this phase 2b trial was to identify an optimal regimen of short-term MAPKi with dabrafenib plus trametinib in combination with pembrolizumab.

METHODS

Patients with treatment-naïve BRAF^V600E/K-mutant advanced melanoma started pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. In week 6, patients were randomized to continue pembrolizumab only (cohort 1), or to receive, in addition, intermittent dabrafenib 150 mg two times per day plus trametinib 2 mg one time per day for two cycles of 1 week (cohort 2), two cycles of 2 weeks (cohort 3), or continuously for 6 weeks (cohort 4). All cohorts continued pembrolizumab for up to 2 years. Primary endpoints were safety and treatment-adherence. Secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) at week 6, 12, 18 and PFS.

RESULTS

Between June 2016 and August 2018, 33 patients with advanced melanoma have been included and 32 were randomized. Grade 3-4 TRAE were observed in 12%, 12%, 50%, and 63% of patients in cohort 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. All planned targeted therapy was given in 88%, 63%, and 38% of patients in cohort 2, 3, and 4. ORR at week 6, 12, and 18 were 38%, 63%, and 63% in cohort 1; 25%, 63%, and 75% in cohort 2; 25%, 50%, and 75% in cohort 3; and 0%, 63%, and 50% in cohort 4. After a median follow-up of 43.5 months, median PFS was 10.6 months for pembrolizumab monotherapy and not reached for patients treated with pembrolizumab and intermittent dabrafenib and trametinib (p=0.17). The 2-year and 3-year landmark PFS were both 25% for cohort 1, both 63% for cohort 2, 50% and 38% for cohort 3 and 75% and 60% for cohort 4.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of pembrolizumab plus intermittent dabrafenib and trametinib seems more feasible and tolerable than continuous triple therapy. The efficacy is promising and appears to be favorable over pembrolizumab monotherapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02625337.

Activity and safety of first-line treatments for advanced melanoma: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for advanced melanoma have increased with the US Food and Drug Administration approval of the anti-LAG3 plus anti-PD-1 relatlimab/nivolumab combination. To date, ipilimumab/nivolumab is the benchmark of overall survival, despite a high toxicity profile. Furthermore, in BRAF-mutant patients, BRAF/MEK inhibitors and the atezolizumab/vemurafenib/cobimetinib triplet are also available treatments, making the first-line therapy selection more complex. To address this issue, we conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of the available first-line treatment options in advanced melanoma.

METHODS

Randomised clinical trials of previously untreated, advanced melanoma were included if at least one intervention arm contained a BRAF/MEK or an immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI). The aim was to indirectly compare the ICIs combinations ipilimumab/nivolumab and relatlimab/nivolumab, and these combinations with all the other first-line treatment options for advanced melanoma (irrespective of BRAF status) in terms of activity and safety. The coprimary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (≥ G3 TRAEs) rate, defined according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

RESULTS

A total of 9070 metastatic melanoma patients treated in 18 randomised clinical trials were included in the network meta-analysis. No difference in PFS and ORR was observed between ipilimumab/nivolumab and relatlimab/nivolumab (HR = 0.99 [95% CI 0.75-1.31] and RR = 0.99 [95% CI 0.78-1.27], respectively). The PD-(L)1/BRAF/MEK inhibitors triplet combinations were superior to ipilimumab/nivolumab in terms of both PFS (HR = 0.56 [95% CI 0.37-0.84]) and ORR (RR = 3.07 [95% CI 1.61-5.85]). Ipilimumab/nivolumab showed the highest risk of developing ≥ G3 TRAEs. Relatlimab/nivolumab trended to a lower risk of ≥ G3 TRAEs (RR = 0.71 [95% CI 0.30-1.67]) versus ipilimumab/nivolumab.

CONCLUSION

Relatlimab/nivolumab showed similar PFS and ORR compared to ipilimumab/nivolumab, with a trend for a better safety profile.

Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma Metastatic to the Larynx and Trachea: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

Malignant melanoma rarely develops in mucous membranes. Statistical data show that approximately 0.6-9.3% of patients with cutaneous malignant melanoma will develop metastases in the upper aerodigestive tract mucosa, and within these metastatic sites, the least common are the laryngeal and tracheobronchial ones. This exceedingly rare clinical entity has no clear treatment recommendations; radical surgery does not seem to benefit the patient in term of life expectancy. We present the case of a 56-year-old male patient diagnosed with laryngeal and tracheobronchial melanoma metastases. Prior to admission to our clinic the patient had a personal history of malignant melanoma of the nuchal region operated on 7 years ago, malignant melanoma of the gallbladder and metastatic left axillary polyadenopathy for which he underwent surgical treatment 3 months prior. Histopathological and immunohistochemical reports established the diagnosis of laryngeal metastasis of malignant melanoma. Genetic molecular analysis was positive for B-Raf (BRAF) gene and hence Vemurafenib was administered, with a favorable outcome at the one-year follow-up. Nevertheless, there are currently no clear universally accepted guidelines for the treatment of laryngeal melanoma, mainly due to the rarity of this clinical entity. We conducted a review of similar cases reported in the literature. Interestingly, reviewing the cases reported in the literature, it appears that laryngeal metastases of a primary cutaneous melanoma are more common in men, with an average time to metastasis of 4.3 years.

Neoadjuvant Checkpoint Immunotherapy and Melanoma: The Time Is Now

The role of neoadjuvant therapy is undergoing an historic shift in oncology. The emergence of potent immunostimulatory anticancer agents has transformed neoadjuvant therapy from a useful tool in minimizing surgical morbidity to a life-saving treatment with curative promise, led by research in the field of melanoma. Health practitioners have witnessed remarkable improvements in melanoma survival outcomes over the past decade, beginning with checkpoint immunotherapies and BRAF-targeted therapies in the advanced setting that were successfully adopted into the postsurgical adjuvant setting for high-risk resectable disease. Despite substantial reductions in postsurgical recurrence, high-risk resectable melanoma has remained a life-altering and potentially fatal disease. In recent years, data from preclinical models and early-phase clinical trials have pointed to the potential for greater clinical efficacy when checkpoint inhibitors are administered in the neoadjuvant rather than adjuvant setting. Early feasibility studies showed impressive pathologic response rates to neoadjuvant immunotherapy, which were associated with recurrence-free survival rates of over 90%. Recently, the randomized phase II SWOG S1801 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03698019) reported a 42% reduction in 2-year event-free survival risk with neoadjuvant versus adjuvant pembrolizumab in resectable stage IIIB-D/IV melanoma (72% v 49%; hazard ratio, 0.58; P = .004), establishing neoadjuvant single-agent immunotherapy as a new standard of care. A randomized phase III trial of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in resectable stage IIIB-D melanoma, NADINA (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04949113), is ongoing, as are feasibility studies in high-risk stage II disease. With a swathe of clinical, quality-of-life, and economic benefits, neoadjuvant immunotherapy has the potential to redefine the contemporary management of resectable tumors.

Sequencing Targeted and Immune Therapy in BRAF-Mutant Melanoma: Lessons Learned

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The treatment strategy for BRAF-mutated melanoma remains unsatisfactory, although the advent of immune checkpoint inhibition has improved the prognosis of advanced melanoma. This article reports current evidence on the efficacy and safety of sequential immunotherapy with targeted therapy in patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma. It discusses criteria for the use of available options in clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Targeted therapy provides rapid disease control in a relatively high proportion of patients, although the development of secondary resistance limits the duration of responses; in contrast, immunotherapy may induce slow but more durable responses in a subset of patients. Therefore, the identification of a combination strategy for the use of these therapies seems a promising perspective. Currently, inconsistent data have been obtained, but most studies indicate that the administration of BRAFi/MEKi prior to immune checkpoint inhibitors appears to reduce the efficacy of immunotherapy. On the contrary, several clinical and real-life studies suggest that frontline immunotherapy with subsequent targeted therapy may be associated with better tumor control than immunotherapy alone. Larger clinical studies are ongoing to confirm the efficacy and safety of this sequencing strategy for treating BRAF-mutated melanoma with immunotherapy followed by targeted therapy.

Common toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy in the treatment of melanoma: A systematic scoping review

INTRODUCTION

This systematic scoping review compares the toxicities experienced by patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) or targeted therapy (TT) for stage III (resected and unresectable) and stage IV melanoma.

METHODS

OVID Medline, Embase, and PsycInfo were searched to identify Phase III trials reporting toxicities of FDA-approved ICIs and TT for advanced melanoma. AEs that were reported by ≥ 10% of patients in the evaluated trials were included.

RESULTS

Toxicity profiles of 11208 patients from 24 studies were reviewed. The rate of AEs was lower with ICIs compared to TT. However, ICIs were associated with higher rates of long-term or permanent AEs compared to TT, where toxicities generally were shortterm and reversible with treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

The toxicity profiles of ICIs and TT vary substantially. Whilst the rate of AEs was lower with ICIs than during TT, it was also associated with higher rates of potentially chronic AEs.

Safety and rapid response of dabrafenib and trametinib therapy during hyperbilirubinemia in metastatic melanoma

This case report describes the occurrence of hyperbilirubinemia as a complication of metastatic melanoma. A 72-year-old male patient was diagnosed with BRAF V600E-mutated melanoma with metastases in the liver, lymph nodes, lungs, pancreas, and stomach. Due to a lack of clinical data and specific guidelines for the treatment of mutated metastatic melanoma patients with hyperbilirubinemia, a conference of specialists debated between initiating treatment or providing supportive care. Ultimately, the patient was started on the combination therapy of dabrafenib and trametinib. This treatment resulted in a significant therapeutic response via normalization of bilirubin levels and an impressive radiological response of metastases just one month post-treatment initiation.

Dabrafenib-Trametinib and Radiotherapy for Oligoprogressive BRAF Mutant Advanced Melanoma

The clinical management of metastatic melanoma has been changed by BRAF (BRAFi) and MEK inhibitors (MEKi), which represent a standard treatment for BRAF-mutant melanoma. In oligoprogressive melanoma patients with BRAF mutations, target therapy can be combined with loco-regional radiotherapy (RT). However, the association of BRAF/MEK inhibitors and RT needs to be carefully monitored for potential increased toxicity. Despite the availability of some reports regarding the tolerability of RT + target therapy, data on simultaneous RT and BRAFi/MEKi are limited and mostly focused on the BRAFi vemurafenib. Here, we report a series of metastatic melanoma patients who received fractioned RT regimens for oligoprogressive disease in combination with the BRAFi dabrafenib and the MEKi trametinib, which have continued beyond progression. None of the cases developed relevant adverse events while receiving RT or interrupted dabrafenib and trametinib administration. These cases suggest that a long period of dabrafenib/trametinib interruption during radiotherapy for oligoprogressive disease can be avoided. Prospective trials are warranted to assess the efficacy and safety of the contemporary administration of BRAF/MEK inhibitors and radiotherapy for oligoprogressive disease.

Hypertransaminasemia in cancer patients receiving immunotherapy and immune-based combinations: the MOUSEION-05 study

BACKGROUND

The antitumor efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has increasingly emerged during the last few years. However, there is a need to identify the safety profile of these agents more comprehensively, including liver toxicity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Herein, we performed a meta-analysis to assess the risk of all-grade and grade 3-4 hypertransaminasemia in cancer patients receiving ICIs-as monotherapy or in combination with other anticancer agents. All the relevant trials were retrieved through EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and PubMed/Medline databases; eligible studies were selected according to PRISMA statement. The pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were extracted.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies were included. The pooled RRs for all-grade AST and ALT increase were 1.45 (95% CI 1.26-1.67) (Supplementary Fig. 3) and 1.51 (95% CI 1.29-1.77) in patients receiving ICIs monotherapy and immune-based combinations compared to control treatment, respectively. The pooled RRs for grade 3-4 AST and ALT increase were 2.16 (95% CI 1.77-2.64) and 2.3 (95% CI 1.91-2.77).

CONCLUSIONS

According to our results, ICIs monotherapy and immune-based combinations were associated with higher risk of all-grade and grade 3-4 hypertransaminasemia. Monitoring liver function should be recommended in cancer patients treated with ICIs monotherapy or immune-based combination, and in case of underlying liver disease, a careful risk-benefit assessment appears as a mandatory need.

Complete remissions following immunotherapy or immuno-oncology combinations in cancer patients: the MOUSEION-03 meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Immunotherapy has determined unprecedented long-term responses in several hematological and solid tumors. In the MOUSEION-03 study, we conducted a meta-analysis to determine the possibility of achieving complete remissions (CR) with immunotherapy or immuno-oncology combinations in cancer patients.

METHODS

The primary endpoint was to assess the incidence of CR in cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) alone or in combination with other agents versus control treatments. The pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for CR rate were extracted.

RESULTS

A total of 12,130 potentially relevant trials were identified; 5 phase II and 80 phase III randomized studies (37 monotherapies and 48 combinations) and 49,425 cancer patients were included. The most frequent types of malignancies were non-small cell lung cancer (n = 14,249; 29%), urothelial cancer (n = 6536; 13%), renal cell carcinoma (n = 5743; 12%), and melanoma (n = 2904; 6%). In patients treated with immunotherapy (as monotherapy or in combination with other anticancer agents), the pooled OR was 1.67 (1.52-1.84). The highest OR was registered by immune-based combinations with two ICIs (3.56, 95% CI 1.28-9.90).

CONCLUSIONS

To the best of the authors' knowledge, no comprehensive meta-analysis on the use of ICIs and ICI-based combinations in solid tumors to systematically investigate the probability to achieve CR has been published so far. Although CR is not a common event in several cancer patients receiving immunotherapy, the MOUSEION-03 suggests that the use of ICIs may significantly increase the chance of achieving CR in comparison with control treatments.

Shaping the Future of Immunotherapy Targets and Biomarkers in Melanoma and Non-Melanoma Cutaneous Cancers

Recent advances in treating cutaneous melanoma have resulted in impressive patient survival gains. Refinement of disease staging and accurate patient risk classification have significantly improved our prognostic knowledge and ability to accurately stratify treatment. Undoubtedly, the most important step towards optimizing patient outcomes has been the advent of cancer immunotherapy, in the form of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI). Immunotherapy has established its cardinal role in the management of both early and late-stage melanoma. Through leveraging outcomes in melanoma, immunotherapy has also extended its benefit to other types of skin cancers. In this review, we endeavor to summarize the current role of immunotherapy in melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancers, highlight the most pertinent immunotherapy-related molecular biomarkers, and lastly, shed light on future research directions.

Research landscape and trends of melanoma immunotherapy: A bibliometric analysis

Background

Immunotherapy for lung cancer has been a hot research area for years. This bibliometric analysis was intended to present research trends on melanoma immunotherapy.

Method

On April 1, 2022, the authors identified 2,109 papers on melanoma immunotherapy using the Web of Science and extracted their general information and the total number of citations. The authors then conducted a bibliometric analysis to present the research landscape, clarify the research trends, and determine the most cited papers (top-papers) as well as major journals on melanoma immunotherapy. Subsequently, recent research hotspots were identified by analyzing the latest articles in major journals.

Results

The total and median number of citations of these 2,109 papers on melanoma immunotherapy was 137,686 and 11, respectively. "Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma" by Hodi et al. was the most cited paper (9,824 citations). Among the journals, the top-paper number (16), average citations per paper (2,510.7), and top-papers rate (100%) of New England Journal of Medicine were the highest. Corresponding authors represented the USA took part in most articles (784). Since 2016, the hottest research area has changed from CTLA-4 to PD-1.

Conclusions

This bibliometric analysis comprehensively and quantitatively presents the research trends and hotspots based on 2,109 relevant publications, and further suggests future research directions. The researchers can benefit in selecting journals and in finding potential collaborators. This study can help researchers gain a comprehensive impression of the research landscape, historical development, and current hotspots in melanoma immunotherapy and can provide inspiration for future research.

BRAF/MEK inhibition in NSCLC: mechanisms of resistance and how to overcome it

Targeted therapy for oncogenic genetic alterations has changed the treatment paradigm of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Mutations in the BRAF gene are detected in approximately 4% of patients and result in hyper-activation of the MAPK pathway, leading to uncontrolled cellular proliferation. Inhibition of BRAF and its downstream effector MEK constitutes a therapeutic strategy for a subset of patients with NSCLC and is associated with clinical benefit. Unfortunately, the majority of patients will develop disease progression within 1 year. Preclinical and clinical evidence suggests that resistance mechanisms involve the restoration of MAPK signaling which becomes inhibition-independent due to upstream or downstream alterations, and the activation of bypass pathways, such as the PI3/AKT/mTOR pathway. Future research should be directed to deciphering the mechanisms of cancer cells' oncogenic dependence, understanding the tissue-specific mechanisms of BRAF-mutant tumors, and optimizing treatment strategies after progression on BRAF and MEK inhibition.

Overall survival with first-line atezolizumab in combination with vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma (IMspire150): second interim analysis of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Primary analysis of the phase 3 IMspire150 study showed improved investigator-assessed progression-free survival with first-line atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) versus placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group) in patients with BRAF^V600 mutation-positive melanoma. With a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4-23·8) at the primary analysis, overall survival data were immature. Here, we report the results from the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis.

METHODS

The multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 IMspire150 study was done at 108 academic and community hospitals in 20 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated unresectable stage IIIc or stage IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously on day 1 and 15) or placebo plus vemurafenib (960 mg or 720 mg twice daily orally) and cobimetinib (60 mg once daily orally; 21 days on and 7 days off) in 28-day cycles. Atezolizumab and placebo were added to treatment regimens from cycle two onwards. Randomisation was done centrally (Durham, NC, USA) based on a permuted block randomisation scheme (block size of 4) using an interactive web-based response system and was stratified by geographical region and baseline lactate dehydrogenase concentration. Overall survival was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug according to actual treatment received. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, which was previously reported. Here, we report the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis, which was planned after about 270 overall survival events had occurred. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer enrolling patients, and it is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 514 patients (median age 54 years [IQR 43-63]; 299 [58%] men and 215 [42%] women) were enrolled in the trial and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (256 [50%] patients) or the control group (258 [50%] patients). At the data cutoff (Sept 8, 2021), 273 patients had died (126 in the atezolizumab group and 147 in the control group). Median follow-up was 29·1 months (IQR 10·1-45·4) for the atezolizumab group versus 22·8 months (10·6-44·1) for the control group. Median overall survival was 39·0 months (95% CI 29·9-not estimable) in the atezolizumab group versus 25·8 months (22·0-34·6) in the control group (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·66-1·06]; p=0·14). The most common adverse events of any grade in the atezolizumab group were blood creatine phosphokinase increased (123 [53%] of 231 patients), diarrhoea (116 [50%]), and pyrexia (115 [50%]). The most common adverse events of any grade in the control group were diarrhoea (157 [56%] of 280 patients), blood creatine phosphokinase increased (135 [48%]), and rash (119 [43%]). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were increased lipase (54 [23%] of 231 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 62 [22%] of 280 patients in the control group), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (51 [22%] vs 50 [18%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase (32 [14%] vs 26 [9%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 112 (48%) patients in the atezolizumab group and 117 (42%) patients in the control group. Grade 5 adverse events were reported in eight (3%) patients in the atezolizumab group versus six (2%) patients in the control group. Two grade 5 adverse events (hepatitis fulminant and hepatic failure) in the atezolizumab group were considered to be associated with the triplet combination, and one event in the control group (pulmonary haemorrhage) was considered to be associated with cobimetinib.

INTERPRETATION

Additional follow-up of the IMspire150 trial showed that overall survival was not significantly improved with atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib compared with placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib in patients with BRAF^V600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. Results of the final analysis are awaited to establish whether a significant improvement in overall survival can be achieved with long-term treatment with this triplet combination versus vemurafenib plus cobimetinib.

FUNDING

F Hoffmann-La Roche.