Outcomes with adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy in patients with sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma without completion lymph node dissection

Neoadjuvant Therapy: Changes in the Management of Macroscopic Stage III/Resectable Stage IV Melanoma

Existing adjuvant therapies improve outcomes for resected stage III and IV melanoma patients but fail in almost half to prevent recurrence and death. Large, multi-institution, randomized studies firmly establish the superiority of neoadjuvant to adjuvant therapy alone. Checkpoint inhibition, either anti-programmed cell death protein 1 monotherapy or combination with CTLA-4/LAG-3 blockage, demonstrates more durable event-free survival compared to targeted or targeted/immunotherapy combination therapies. Novel combinations of intralesional immunotherapies and other agents aim to increase clinical efficacy and limit toxicity of therapies. Pathologic response to treatment remains as the best prognostic surrogate for clinical outcomes for patients.

Multicenter analysis of the surgical management and adjuvant therapy of patients with melanoma and a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy

INTRODUCTION

Complete lymph node dissection (CLND) was the standard practice for patients with melanoma and a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) until the results of 2 clinical trials published in 2016 and 2017 demonstrated that it did not improve melanoma-specific survival (MSS). However, it continues to be performed in some scenarios. No studies have ever been published on lymph node management after a positive SLNB in the routine clinical practice in our setting.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the evolution of the indication for CLND in patients with a positive SLNB, as well as the characteristics associated with its performance.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective observational study with patients with skin melanoma and positive sentinel lymph nodes diagnosed from 2017 through 2022 at 8 Spanish centers and 1 Italian center.

RESULTS

A total of 430 patients were included, 54% men, with 358 (75.1%) aged between 45 and 80 years. A total of 133 cases (31%) exhibited Breslow thickness > 4mm, 206 cases (49.1%) were ulcerated, and in 213 cases (55.7%), lymph node metastasis was > 1mm. Isolated lymphadenectomy or followed by adjuvant therapy was performed in 146 patients (34.1%). After multivariate logistic regression, the factors associated with the performance of CLND were the acral lentiginous melanoma histological subtype, lymph node metastasis size > 1mm, extracapsular spread, and the participant hospital. Age > 80 years was inversely associated.

CONCLUSION

While the frequency of CLND in patients with melanoma and positive SLNB has decreased, the indication for systemic adjuvant therapy in these patients has increased. However, CLND is still indicated in patients with high-risk characteristics.

[Translated article] Multicenter Analysis of the Surgical Management and Adjuvant Therapy of Patients With Melanoma and a Positive Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy

INTRODUCTION

Complete lymph node dissection (CLND) was the standard practice for patients with melanoma and a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) until the results of two clinical trials published in 2016 and 2017 demonstrated that it did not improve melanoma-specific survival (MSS). However, it continues to be performed in some scenarios. No studies have ever been published on lymph node management after a positive SLNB in the routine clinical practice in our setting.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the evolution of the indication for CLND in patients with a positive SLNB, as well as the characteristics associated with its performance.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective observational study with patients with skin melanoma and positive sentinel lymph nodes diagnosed from 2017 through 2022 at 8 Spanish centers and 1 Italian center.

RESULTS

A total of 430 patients were included, 54% men, with 323 (75.1%) aged between 45 and 80 years. A total of 133 cases (31%) exhibited Breslow thickness >4mm, 206 cases (49%) were ulcerated, and in 213 cases (55.7%), lymph node metastasis was >1mm. Isolated lymphadenectomy or followed by adjuvant therapy was performed in 146 patients (34.1%). After multivariate logistic regression, the factors associated with the performance of CLND were the acral lentiginous melanoma histological subtype, lymph node metastasis size >1mm, extracapsular spread, and the participant hospital. Age >80 years was inversely associated.

CONCLUSION

While the frequency of CLND in patients with melanoma and positive SLNB has decreased, the indication for systemic adjuvant therapy in these patients has increased. However, CLND is still indicated in patients with high-risk characteristics.

Is there still a place for lymph node dissection for stage III melanoma since the approval of adjuvant therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to explore the evolving management strategies for stage III melanoma, focusing on the comparative effectiveness of traditional surgical approaches like complete lymph node dissection (CLND) versus modern adjuvant therapies. It also examines the latest evidence on the efficacy, risks, and complications of these strategies, emphasizing the role of shared decision-making between patients and clinicians.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent clinical trials and meta-analyses, including the MSLT-II and DeCOG-SLT studies, have demonstrated that CLND may not significantly improve survival outcomes in melanoma patients with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB)-positive status. Instead, a shift towards observation combined with adjuvant therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies (for BRAF-mutant melanoma) has been observed. These approaches have been associated with similar or improved recurrence-free survival rates and reduced treatment-related complications. However, challenges remain in establishing standardized protocols for adjuvant therapy use.

SUMMARY

The management of stage III melanoma is rapidly transitioning from routine CLND towards a more individualized approach that incorporates active surveillance and adjuvant therapies based on tumor biology and patient-specific factors. Multidisciplinary discussions are essential to guide treatment decisions, and further research is required to develop clear, evidence-based protocols.

Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Stage III Melanoma Patients with Positive Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy: A Real-Life Experience

Background: Advancements in managing stage III melanoma have involved the implementation of adjuvant therapies alongside a simultaneous decrease in the utilization of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) following positive sentinel node biopsy (SLNB). Methods: This retrospective study from the University of Turin's Dermatology Clinic analyzed relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) among stage III melanoma patients (n = 157) who underwent CLND after positive SLNB versus those who did not receive such procedure. Results: Patients without CLND had a median RFS of 49 months (95% CI 42-NA), while CLND recipients showed 51 months (95% CI 31-NA) (p = 0.139). The 48-month OS for non-CLND patients was 79.8% (95% CI 58.2-91.0) versus 79.2% (95% CI 67.5-87.0) for CLND recipients (p = 0.463). Adjusted Hazard Ratios through inverse probability treatment weighting revealed the impact of CLND to be insignificant on RFS (aHR 0.90, 95% CI 0.37-2.22) and marginal on OS (aHR 0.41, 95% CI 0.13-1.21). Conversely, adjuvant therapy significantly reduced the risk of relapse (aHR 0.46, 95% CI 0.25-0.84), irrespective of CLND. Conclusions: This study corroborates the growing evidence that CLND after positive SLNB does not enhance RFS or OS, while emphasizing the crucial role of adjuvant therapy, be it immunotherapy or targeted therapy, in reducing the risk of relapse in melanoma patients with positive SLNB.

Management of Localized Melanoma in the Anti-PD-1 Era

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The management of cutaneous melanoma has rapidly progressed over the past decade following the introduction of effective systemic therapies. Given the large number of recent clinical trials which have dramatically altered the management of these patients, an updated review of the current evidence regarding the management of localized melanoma is needed.

RECENT FINDINGS

The role of effective systemic therapies in earlier stages (I-III) melanoma, both in adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings is rapidly changing the role of surgery in the management cutaneous melanoma, particularly regarding surgical safety margins for wide local excision (WLE), the role of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) and the extent of lymph node dissections. The randomized phase 2 SWOG1801 trial has demonstrated superiority of neoadjuvant-adjuvant anti-PD1 therapy in improving event-free survival by 23% at 2-years over adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy only. Furthermore, the PRADO trial has suggested a more tailored approach both the extent of surgery as well as adjuvant therapy can safely and effectively be done, depending on the response to initial neoadjuvant immunotherapy. These results await validation and it is expected that in 2024 the phase 3 Nadina trial (NCT04949113) will definitively establish neo-adjuvant combination immunotherapy as the novel standard. This will further redefine the management of localized melanoma. The use of effective systemic therapies will continue to evolve in the next decade and, together with new emerging diagnostic and surveillance techniques, will likely reduce the extent of routine surgery for stage I-III melanoma.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy is unreliable in predicting melanoma mortality for both younger and older patients

BACKGROUND

Melanoma disease patterns vary with patient age.

AIM

To evaluate sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in managing melanoma at differing patient ages.

METHODS

Online prediction tools were applied to compare SLNB positivity (SLNB+) and survival risk at patient ages 20-80. Tübingen melanoma data were used to determine variations in the hazard ratio of SLNB+ for mortality at different patient ages.

RESULTS

Regardless of tumour thickness, predicted SLNB+ rates were markedly higher than mortality rates for 20-year-old patients. For 80-year-old patients, it is the opposite.

DISCUSSION

If 1000 20-year-olds with a 0.4 mm thickness non-ulcerated melanoma underwent SLNB, 100 would likely be positive. If all 100 were to be offered adjuvant drug therapy (ADT), fewer than three more melanoma deaths in those 1000 patients would be avoided. In total, 97 patients would have received medication they may never have needed. If 1000 80-year-olds with a 3 mm thickness non-ulcerated melanoma underwent SLNB, only 40 would likely be positive. In total, 274 patients would be predicted to die of melanoma, 245 being SLNB negative and 29 SLNB+. ADT linked to SLNB+ could deny treatment to 89% of these high-risk patients.

LIMITATIONS

The authors relied on published risk data.

CONCLUSION

SLNB has poor specificity at predicting mortality in young melanoma patients and poor sensitivity in older patients. SLNB is not indicated in managing cutaneous melanoma for patients under 40 or over 60 years of age. Many such patients could be managed with wide local excision alone in their clinician's office-based practice. For all cutaneous melanoma patients at all ages, linking ADT to BAUSSS biomarker, (an algorithm of Breslow thickness, age, ulceration, subtype, sex and Site) rather than SLNB+ is likely more appropriate. BAUSSS provides a more accurate melanoma-specific mortality risk assessment for patients without burdening them with added surgery, hospitalization, costs or morbidity risk.

Modern Approach to Melanoma Adjuvant Treatment with Anti-PD1 Immune Check Point Inhibitors or BRAF/MEK Targeted Therapy: Multicenter Real-World Report

BACKGROUND

The landscape of melanoma management changed as randomized trials have launched adjuvant treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An analysis of data on 248 consecutive melanoma stage III and IV patients given adjuvant therapy in eight centers (February 2019 to January 2021) was conducted.

RESULTS

The analyzed cohort comprised 147 melanoma patients given anti-PD1 (33% nivolumab, 26% pembrolizumab), and 101 (41%) were given dabrafenib plus trametinib (DT). The 2-year overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS), and distant-metastases-free survival (DMFS) rates were 86.7%, 61.4%, and 70.2%, respectively. The disease stage affected only the RFS rate; for stage IV, it was 52.2% (95% CI: 33.4-81.5%) vs. 62.5% (95% CI: 52.3-74.8%) for IIIA-D, p = 0.0033. The type of lymph node surgery before adjuvant therapy did not influence the outcomes. Completion of lymph node dissection cessation after positive SLNB did not affect the results in terms of RFS or OS. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were associated with longer 24-month RFS, with a rate of 68.7% (55.5-84.9%) for TRAE vs. 56.6% (45.8-70%) without TRAE, p = 0.0031. For TRAE of grade ≥ 3, a significant decline in OS to 60.6% (26.9-100%; p = 0.004) was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Melanoma adjuvant therapy with anti-PD1 or DT outside clinical trials appears to be effective and comparable with the results of registration studies. Our data support a de-escalating surgery approach in melanoma treatment.

Unmeasured factors are associated with the use of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in melanoma

BACKGROUND

Completion lymph node dissection (CLND) was the standard treatment for patients with melanoma with positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) until 2017 when data from the DeCOG-SLT and MLST-2 randomized trials challenged the survival benefit of this procedure. We assessed the contribution of patient, tumor and facility factors on the use of CLND in patients with surgically resected Stage III melanoma.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database, patients who underwent surgical excision and were found to have a positive SLN from 2012 to 2017 were included. A multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression model with a random intercept for the facility was used to determine the effect of patient, tumor, and facility variables on the risk of CLND. Reference effect measures (REMs) were used to compare the contribution of contextual effects (unknown facility variables) versus measured variables on the variation in CLND use.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2017, the overall use of CLND decreased from 59.9% to 26.5% (p < 0.0001). Overall, older patients and patients with government-based insurance were less likely to undergo CLND. Tumor factors associated with a decreased rate of CLND included primary tumor location on the lower limb, decreasing depth, and mitotic rate <1. However, the contribution of contextual effects to the variation in CLND use exceeded that of the measured facility, tumor, time, and patient variables.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a decrease in CLND use during the study period. However, there is still high variability in CLND use, mainly driven by unmeasured contextual effects.