Longer Follow-Up Confirms Relapse-Free Survival Benefit With Adjuvant Dabrafenib Plus Trametinib in Patients With Resected BRAF V600-Mutant Stage III Melanoma

The EIF3H-HAX1 axis increases RAF-MEK-ERK signaling activity to promote colorectal cancer progression

Eukaryotic initiation translation factor 3 subunit h (EIF3H) plays critical roles in regulating translational initiation and predicts poor cancer prognosis, but the mechanism underlying EIF3H tumorigenesis remains to be further elucidated. Here, we report that EIF3H is overexpressed in colorectal cancer (CRC) and correlates with poor prognosis. Conditional Eif3h deletion suppresses colorectal tumorigenesis in AOM/DSS model. Mechanistically, EIF3H functions as a deubiquitinase for HAX1 and stabilizes HAX1 via antagonizing βTrCP-mediated ubiquitination, which enhances the interaction between RAF1, MEK1 and ERK1, thereby potentiating phosphorylation of ERK1/2. In addition, activation of Wnt/β-catenin signaling induces EIF3H expression. EIF3H/HAX1 axis promotes CRC tumorigenesis and metastasis in mouse orthotopic cancer model. Significantly, combined targeting Wnt and RAF1-ERK1/2 signaling synergistically inhibits tumor growth in EIF3H-high patient-derived xenografts. These results uncover the important roles of EIF3H in mediating CRC progression through regulating HAX1 and RAF1-ERK1/2 signaling. EIF3H represents a promising therapeutic target and prognostic marker in CRC.

Dabrafenib and trametinib administration in patients with BRAF V600E/R or non-V600 BRAF mutated advanced solid tumours (BELIEVE, NCCH1901): a multicentre, open-label, and single-arm phase II trial

Background

BRAF V600 mutations are common in melanoma, thyroid, and non-small-cell lung cancers. Despite dabrafenib and trametinib being standard treatments for certain cancers, their efficacy across various solid tumours remains unelucidated. The BELIEVE trial assessed the efficacy of dabrafenib and trametinib in solid tumours with BRAF V600E/R or non-V600 BRAF mutations.

Methods

Between October 1, 2019, and June 2022, at least 50 patients with measurable and seven without measurable diseases examined were enrolled in a subcohort of the BELIEVE trial (NCCH1901, jRCTs031190104). BRAF mutated solid tumour cases other than BRAF V600E mutated colorectal cancer, melanoma, and non-small cell lung cancer cases were included. Patients with solid tumours received dabrafenib (150 mg) twice daily and trametinib (2 mg) once daily until disease progression or intolerable toxicity was observed. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR), and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), 6-month PFS, and overall survival (OS). Bayesian analysis was performed using a prior distribution with a 30% expected response rate [Beta (0.6, 1.4)].

Findings

Fourty-seven patients with measurable disease, mainly with the BRAF V600E mutation (94%), and three others with non-V600E BRAF mutations (V600R, G466A, and N486_P490del) were enrolled. The primary sites included the thyroid gland, central nervous system, liver, bile ducts, colorectum, and pancreas. The confirmed ORR was 28.0%; the expected value of posterior distribution [Beta (14.6, 37.4)] was 28.1%, although the primary endpoint was achieved, not exceeding an unexpectedly high response rate of 60% obtained using Bayesian analysis. The disease control rate (DCR) was 84.0%. The median PFS was 6.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI]; 4.2-7.2 months, 87.8% at 6 months). Responses were observed across seven tumour types. Median OS was 9.7 months (95% CI, 7.5-12.2 months). Additional patients without measurable diseases had a median PFS of 4.5 months. Adverse events (AEs) were consistent with previous reports, with 45.6% of patients experiencing grade ≥3 AEs.

Interpretation

This study reported promising efficacy against BRAF V600-mutant tumours. Dabrafenib and trametinib would offer a new therapeutic option for rare cancers, such as high-grade gliomas, biliary tract cancer, and thyroid cancer.

Funding

This study was funded by the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (22ck0106622h0003) and a Health and Labour Sciences Research Grant (19EA1008).

Educational Review: Clinical Application of Immune Checkpoint Blockade for the Treatment of Melanoma

In the last decade, immunotherapy has become the cornerstone in the management of patients with melanoma, the foremost cause of skin-cancer-related death in the USA. The emergence of immune checkpoint blockade as a crucial element in current immunotherapy and combination strategies has significantly transformed the treatments of resectable and advanced (unresectable or metastatic) melanoma. This paper reviews the landmark clinical trials that formed the basis of management of melanoma in the perioperative and metastatic setting. Furthermore, we discuss the rationale for the applications of PD-1 blockade and its combination with anti-CTLA-4 and anti-LAG-3. The review also explores new experimental combinations of PD-1 blockade with other immunomodulatory agents, including targeted therapies, anti-TIGIT antibodies, TLR-9 agonists, antiangiogenic agents, and mRNA vaccines.

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies in resected melanoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background: Multiple immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted therapies have been widely used as adjuvant treatments for high-risk resected melanoma, with unclear comparative efficacy and safety. Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from database inception until 6 June 2023. We included RCTs that assess adjuvant ICIs or targeted therapies in high-risk resected melanoma. Frequentist random-effect network meta-analyses (NMA) were performed. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival (RFS). Results: Eleven trials including 10,712 patients and comparing 10 treatments (nivolumab [Nivo], ipilimumab 3 mg/kg [Ipi3], Ipi10, pembrolizumab [Pemb], vemurafenib [Vemu], bevacizumab [Beva], Nivo + Ipi1, Nivo + Ipi3, dabrafenib plus trametinib [Dab + Tram], and placebo/observation [Pla/Obs]) were included. NMA showed that all treatments showed RFS benefit over placebo/observation except Ipi3 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58-1.05). Combination therapy of Nivo + Ipi3 was the most effective treatment, which significantly improved RFS compared with other treatments. NMA also showed that all treatments were associated with an increased risk of grade 3-5 adverse events over placebo/observation except Nivo (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.87-1.80). NMA suggested that Nivo and Pemb were the two safest treatments except for placebo/observation. Although three combination therapies ranked as the top three in terms of RFS, they did not show significant overall survival benefits compared to monotherapies including Pemb, Nivo, Ipi3, and Ipi10. Conclusion: In this NMA, adjuvant Nivo and Pemb are the preferred options in patients with resected melanoma considering the benefits and harms. Combination therapy of Nivo + Ipi3 may be a promising strategy, but more evidence from phase 3 trials is needed. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=438667, PROSPERO (CRD42023438667).

Omission of Completion Lymph Node Dissection in Sentinel Node Biopsy Positive Head and Neck Cutaneous Melanoma Patients

BACKGROUND

Recent studies evaluating patients with a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB+) show no melanoma-specific survival difference between patients undergoing lymph node basin surveillance and completion lymph node dissection (CLND). This has been broadly applied, despite underrepresentation of head and neck (HN) cutaneous melanoma patients. We evaluated whether this was upheld in the HN melanoma cohort.

METHODS

Patients with HN melanoma with a SLNB+ were selected from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2012 to 2019. Overall survival (OS) of patients who underwent SLNB only versus SLNB + CLND were compared. Subgroup analyses were performed based on pathologic N (pN) and receipt of immunotherapy. Adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Analysis of 634 patients with multivariable Cox regression showed no difference in OS in SLNB only versus SLNB + CLND cohorts (hazard ratio [HR] 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-1.81; p = 0.610). Charlson-Deyo score (CDS) 1 versus 0 (HR 1.70; 95% CI 1.10-2.63; p = 0.016), pN2+ versus pN1 (HR 1.74; 95% CI 1.23-2.45; p = 0.002), and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) versus no (HR 2.07; 95% CI 1.34-3.19; p = 0.001) were associated with worse prognosis. Subgroup analysis by pN showed no OS benefit for CLND in either pN1 (HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.51-2.10; p = 0.922) or pN2+ (HR 1.31; 95% CI 0.67-2.57; p = 0.427) patients or in patients who received immunotherapy (HR 1.32; 95% CI 0.54-3.22; p = 0.549).

CONCLUSIONS

This study of SLNB + HN melanoma patients showed no OS difference in SLNB only versus SLNB + CLND. Further studies need to be performed to better define the role of CLND.

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.

Adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib for patients with resected BRAF -mutated melanoma: DESCRIBE-AD real-world retrospective observational study

BRAF and MEK inhibitor, dabrafenib plus trametinib, adjuvant therapy is effective for high-risk resected melanoma patients with BRAF - V600 mutations. However, real-world evidence is limited. We aimed to determine the feasibility of this therapy in routine clinical practice. DESCRIBE-AD, a retrospective observational study, collected real-world data from 25 hospitals in Spain. Histologically confirmed and resected BRAF -mutated melanoma patients aged ≥18 years who were previously treated with dabrafenib plus trametinib adjuvant therapy, were included. The primary objectives were treatment discontinuation rate and time to discontinuation. The secondary objectives included safety and efficacy. From October 2020 to March 2021, 65 patients were included. Dabrafenib and trametinib discontinuation rate due to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade was 9%. Other reasons for discontinuation included patients' decisions (6%), physician decisions (6%), unrelated adverse events (3%), disease progression (5%), and others (5%). The median time to treatment discontinuation was 9 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 5-11]. G3-4 TRAEs occurred in 21.5% of patients, the most common being pyrexia (3%), asthenia (3%), and diarrhoea (3%). Unscheduled hospitalisations and clinical tests occurred in 6 and 22% of patients, respectively. After 20-month median follow-up (95% CI, 18-22), 9% of patients had exitus due to disease progression, with a 12-month relapse-free survival and overall survival rates of 95.3% and 100%, respectively. Dabrafenib and trametinib adjuvant therapy proved effective for melanoma patients in a real-world setting, with a manageable toxicity profile. Toxicity frequencies were low leading to low incidence of unscheduled medical visits, tests, and treatment discontinuations.

Adjuvant Targeted Therapy in Solid Cancers: Pioneers and New Glories

Targeted therapy (TT) has revolutionized cancer treatment, successfully applied in various settings. Adjuvant TT in resected early-stage gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and breast cancer has led to practice-changing achievements. In particular, standard treatments include BRAF inhibitors for melanoma, osimertinib for NSCLC, hormone therapy or HER2 TT for breast cancer, and imatinib for GIST. Despite the undeniable benefit derived from adjuvant TT, the optimal duration of TT and the appropriate managing of the relapse remain open questions. Furthermore, neoadjuvant TT is emerging as valuable, particularly in breast cancer, and ongoing studies evaluate TT in the perioperative setting for early-stage NSCLC. In this review, we aim to collect and describe the large amount of data available in the literature about adjuvant TT across different histologies, focusing on epidemiology, major advances, and future directions.

Survival after introduction of adjuvant treatment in stage III melanoma: a nationwide registry-based study

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant treatments with PD-1 and BRAF+MEK inhibitors statistically significantly prolong recurrence-free survival in stage III cutaneous melanoma. Yet, the effect on overall survival is still unclear. Based on recurrence-free survival outcomes, these treatments have been approved and widely implemented. The treatments have considerable side effects and costs, and overall survival effect remains a highly anticipated outcome.

METHODS

Clinical and histopathological parameters were obtained from the Swedish Melanoma Registry for patients diagnosed with stage III melanoma between 2016 and 2020. The patients were divided depending on if they were diagnosed before or from July 2018, based on the timepoint when adjuvant treatment was introduced in Sweden. Patients were followed up until the end of 2021. In this cohort study, melanoma-specific and overall survival were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox-regression analyses.

RESULTS

There were 1371 patients diagnosed with stage III primary melanoma in Sweden in 2016-2020. The 2-year overall survival rates, comparing the 634 patients in the precohort and the 737 in the postcohort, were 84.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 81.4% to 87.3%) and 86.1% (95% CI = 83.4% to 89.0%), respectively, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.91 (95% CI = 0.70 to 1.19, P = .51). Further, no statistically significant overall or melanoma-specific survival differences were seen when comparing the precohort and the postcohort in different subgroups for age, sex, or tumor characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide population-based and registry-based study, no survival benefit was detected in patients diagnosed before or after the implementation of adjuvant treatment in stage III melanoma. These findings encourage a careful assessment of the current recommendations on adjuvant treatment.

Management of complications after skin surgery relevant for melanoma in the trunk and extremities during the COVID-19 pandemic: a case series report

BACKGROUND

Patients with melanoma have been found to be at greater risk of adverse outcomes including mortality after contacting COVID-19. Management of postsurgical complications presented additional challenges by potentially increasing exposure to COVID-19 through repeated inpatient admissions to hospital during the pandemic. We report four cases for which skin flaps, lymph ligation, and split-thickness skin graft (STSG) were successfully used in the treatment of complications in the trunk and extremities after wide local excision (WLE). This study details the operative experience in management of postsurgical complications for melanoma in the trunk and extremities during a 6-month period at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.

CASE PRESENTATION

We present 4 cases detailing management of complications that occurred after wide local excisions performed for melanoma during Feb. to Oct. 2020. Case 1: A 90-year-old man who experienced wound dehiscence and necrosis on the shoulder after non-radical excision for an aggressive melanoma and underwent the side-to-side closure after ellipse formed WLE with modified tangent-to-circle method. Case 2: An 80-year-old man who had undergone excision for melanoma in his left upper arm and histopathology did not show radically. Two weeks after the excision, he underwent a WLE and direct reconstruction with double rotation skin flap. Case 3: A 55-year-old man that experienced a large wound dehiscence on his back due to WLE. He underwent an advanced double skin flap operation. Case 4: A 36-year-old woman who had a lymphorrhea and graft necrosis after WLE and STSG on the right lower leg. A combination of micro lymph ligation and re-STSG was performed. One month after the operation, all wounds had healed. There was no clinical evidence of tumor recurrence after 8 months post procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe complications (e.g., large wound dehiscence, necrosis, or lymphorrhea) following wide local excision of melanoma are infrequent but must be swiftly and appropriately managed, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic to decrease the likelihood of COVID-19 infection and impaired oncology outcomes from delaying systemic cancer therapy due to the complications in primary interventions.

Adjuvant treatment and outcome of stage III melanoma patients: Results of a multicenter real-world German Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group (DeCOG) study

PURPOSE

Clinical trials demonstrated significantly improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) of melanoma patients receiving adjuvant treatment. As data from controlled trials are based on selected populations, we investigated adjuvantly treated stage III melanoma patients under real-world conditions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a prior multicenter cohort study, stage III-IV melanoma patients were analysed for their choice of adjuvant therapy. In this follow-up study, we examined RFS, overall and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) and response to the subsequent treatment of 589 stage III patients (232 BRAF-mutated) receiving adjuvant PD-1 inhibitors (PD1; n = 479) or targeted therapy (TT; n = 110).

RESULTS

The median follow-up of the total cohort was 25.7 months. The main reason for premature discontinuation of adjuvant therapy was disease progression in PD1- (28.8%, n = 138/479) and adverse events in TT-treated patients (28.2%, n = 31/110). Among BRAF-mutated patients, RFS at 24 months was 49% (95% CI 40.6-59.0%) for PD1- and 67% (95% CI 58-77%) for TT-treated patients. The risk of recurrence was higher for BRAF-mutated PD1 than TT (hazard ratio 1.99; 95% CI 1.34-2.96; hazard ratio adjusted for age, sex and tumour stage, 2.21; 95% CI 1.48-3.30). Twenty-four months MSS was 87% (95% CI 81.0-94.1) for PD1 and 92% (95% CI 86.6-97.0) for TT. Response to subsequent systemic treatment for unresectable disease was 22% for all PD1- and 16% for TT-treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

PD1-treated patients had more and earlier recurrences than TT patients. In BRAF-mutated patients, adjuvant TT might prevent early recurrences more effectively than PD1 treatment. Management of recurrence despite adjuvant treatment is challenging, with low response to current therapeutic options.

Treatment management for BRAF-mutant melanoma patients with tumor recurrence on adjuvant therapy: a multicenter study from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant therapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) or BRAF/MEK-directed targeted therapy (TT) improves recurrence-free survival (RFS) for patients with advanced, BRAFV600-mutant (BRAFmut) resected melanoma. However, 40% of these patients will develop distant metastases (DM) within 5 years, which require systemic therapy. Little data exist to guide the choice of upfront adjuvant therapy or treatment management upon DM. This study evaluated the efficacy of subsequent treatments following tumor recurrence upon upfront adjuvant therapy.

METHODS

For this multicenter cohort study, we identified 515 BRAFmut patients with resected stage III melanoma who were treated with PD-1 inhibitors (anti-PD1) or TT in the adjuvant setting. Disease characteristics, treatment regimens, details on tumor recurrence, subsequent treatment management, and survival outcomes were collected within the prospective, real-world skin cancer registry ADOReg. Primary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) following DM and best tumor response to first-line (1L) treatments.

RESULTS

Among 515 eligible patients, 273 patients received adjuvant anti-PD1 and 242 adjuvant TT. At a median follow-up of 21 months, 54.6% of anti-PD1 patients and 36.4% of TT patients recurred, while 39.6% (anti-PD1) and 29.3% (TT) developed DM. Risk of recurrence was significantly reduced in patients treated with TT compared with anti-PD1 (adjusted HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.68, p<0.001). Likewise, median RFS was significantly longer in TT-treated patients (31 vs 17 months, p<0.001). Patients who received TT as second adjuvant treatment upon locoregional recurrence had a longer RFS2 as compared with adjuvant CPI (41 vs 6 months, p=0.009). Patients who recurred at distant sites following adjuvant TT showed favorable response rates (42.9%) after switching to 1L ipilimumab+nivolumab (ipi+nivo). Patients with DM during adjuvant anti-PD1 achieved response rates of 58.7% after switching to 1L TT and 35.3% for 1L ipi+nivo. Overall, median PFS was significantly longer in patients who switched treatments for stage IV disease (median PFS 9 vs 5 months, p=0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

BRAFmut melanoma patients who developed DM upon upfront adjuvant therapy achieve favorable tumor control and prolonged PFS after switching treatment modalities in the first-line setting of stage IV disease. Patients with locoregional recurrence benefit from complete resection of recurrence followed by a second adjuvant treatment with TT.

Blood immune cells as potential biomarkers predicting relapse-free survival of stage III/IV resected melanoma patients treated with peptide-based vaccination and interferon-alpha

Introduction

Despite the recent approval of several therapies in the adjuvant setting of melanoma, tumor relapse still occurs in a significant number of completely resected stage III-IV patients. In this context, the use of cancer vaccines is still relevant and may increase the response to immune checkpoint inhibitors. We previously demonstrated safety, immunogenicity and preliminary evidence of clinical efficacy in stage III/IV resected melanoma patients subjected to a combination therapy based on peptide vaccination together with intermittent low-dose interferon-α2b, with or without dacarbazine preconditioning (https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search, identifier: 2008-008211-26). In this setting, we then focused on pre-treatment patient immune status to highlight possible factors associated with clinical outcome.

Methods

Multiparametric flow cytometry was used to identify baseline immune profiles in patients' peripheral blood mononuclear cells and correlation with the patient clinical outcome. Receiver operating characteristic curve, Kaplan-Meier survival and principal component analyses were used to evaluate the predictive power of the identified markers.

Results

We identified 12 different circulating T and NK cell subsets with significant (p ≤ 0.05) differential baseline levels in patients who later relapsed with respect to patients who remained free of disease. All 12 parameters showed a good prognostic accuracy (AUC>0.7, p ≤ 0.05) and 11 of them significantly predicted the relapse-free survival. Remarkably, 3 classifiers also predicted the overall survival. Focusing on immune cell subsets that can be analyzed through simple surface staining, three subsets were identified, namely regulatory T cells, CD56^dimCD16^- NK cells and central memory γδ T cells. Each subset showed an AUC>0.8 and principal component analysis significantly grouped relapsing and non-relapsing patients (p=0.034). These three subsets were used to calculate a combination score that was able to perfectly distinguish relapsing and non-relapsing patients (AUC=1; p=0). Noticeably, patients with a combined score ≥2 demonstrated a strong advantage in both relapse-free (p=0.002) and overall (p=0.011) survival as compared to patients with a score <2.

Discussion

Predictive markers may be used to guide patient selection for personalized therapies and/or improve follow-up strategies. This study provides preliminary evidence on the identification of peripheral blood immune biomarkers potentially capable of predicting the clinical response to combined vaccine-based adjuvant therapies in melanoma.

The Current Treatment Trends and Survival Patterns in Melanoma Patients with Positive Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLNB): A Multicenter Nationwide Study

BACKGROUND

In melanoma treatment, an approach following positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has been recently deescalated from completion lymph node dissection (CLND) to active surveillance based on phase III trials data. In this study, we aim to evaluate treatment strategies in SLNB-positive melanoma patients in real-world practice.

METHODS

Five-hundred-fifty-seven melanoma SLNB-positive patients from seven comprehensive cancer centers treated between 2017 and 2021 were included. Kaplan-Meier methods and the Cox Proportional-Hazards Model were used for analysis.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 25 months. Between 2017 and 2021, the percentage of patients undergoing CLND decreased (88-41%), while the use of adjuvant treatment increased (11-51%). The 3-year OS and RFS rates were 77.9% and 59.6%, respectively. Adjuvant therapy prolonged RFS (HR:0.69, p = 0.036)), but CLND did not (HR:1.22, p = 0.272). There were no statistically significant differences in OS for either adjuvant systemic treatment or CLND. Lower progression risk was also found, and time-dependent hazard ratios estimation in patients treated with systemic adjuvant therapy was confirmed (HR:0.20, p = 0.002 for BRAF inhibitors and HR:0.50, p = 0.015 for anti-PD-1 inhibitors).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of SLNB-positive melanoma patients is constantly evolving, and the role of surgery is currently rather limited. Whether CLND has been performed or not, in a group of SLNB-positive patients, adjuvant systemic treatment should be offered to all eligible patients.

Personalizing neoadjuvant immune-checkpoint inhibition in patients with melanoma

Neoadjuvant immune-checkpoint inhibition is a promising emerging treatment approach for patients with surgically resectable macroscopic stage III melanoma. The neoadjuvant setting provides an ideal platform for personalized therapy owing to the very homogeneous nature of the patient population and the opportunity for pathological response assessments within several weeks of starting treatment, thereby facilitating the efficient identification of novel biomarkers. A pathological response to immune-checkpoint inhibitors has been shown to be a strong surrogate marker of both recurrence-free survival and overall survival, enabling timely analyses of the efficacy of novel therapies in patients with early stage disease. Patients with a major pathological response (defined as the presence of ≤10% viable tumour cells) have a very low risk of recurrence, which offers an opportunity to adjust the extent of surgery and any subsequent adjuvant therapy and follow-up monitoring. Conversely, patients who have only a partial pathological response or who do not respond to neoadjuvant therapy still might benefit from therapy escalation and/or class switch during adjuvant therapy. In this Review, we outline the concept of a fully personalized neoadjuvant treatment approach exemplified by the current developments in neoadjuvant therapy for patients with resectable melanoma, which could provide a template for the development of similar approaches for patients with other immune-responsive cancers in the near future.

Clinical Outcomes and Prognostic Factors of Patients With Early Malignant Melanoma in One Latin American Country: Results of the Epidemiological Registry of Malignant Melanoma in Colombia Study

To describe the population with early malignant melanoma, we performed a cohort study on the basis of the Epidemiological Registry of Malignant Melanoma in Colombia-Asociacion Colombiana de Hematologia y Oncologia. From January 2011 until December 2021, 759 patients were included; the average age was 66 years, 57% were women, acral lentiginous histology was found in 27.8% of patients, and the median follow-up was 36.5 months. The prognostic factors for overall survival in our population are Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 3-4 (hazard ratio [HR], 13.8), stage III (HR, 5.07), received radiotherapy (HR, 3.38), ulceration on histology (HR, 2.68), chronic sun exposure (HR, 2.3), low income (HR, 2.04), previous local surgery (HR, 0.27), and have received adjuvant treatment (HR, 0.41).

Not Waiting to Progress; How the COVID-19 Pandemic Nudged Neoadjuvant Therapy for Stage III Locally Advanced Melanoma Patients

Background: Early-phase neoadjuvant trials have demonstrated promising results in the utility of upfront immunotherapy in locally advanced stage III melanoma and unresected nodal disease. Secondary to these results and the COVID-19 pandemic, this patient population, traditionally managed through surgical resection and adjuvant immunotherapy, received a novel treatment strategy of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). Methods: Patients with node-positive disease, who faced surgical delays secondary to COVID-19, were treated with NAT, followed by surgery. Demographic, tumour, treatment and response data were collected through a retrospective chart review. Biopsy specimens were analysed prior to the initiation of NAT, and therapy response was analysed following surgical resection. NAT tolerability was recorded. Results: Six patients were included in this case series; four were treated with nivolumab alone, one with ipilimumab and nivolumab and one with dabrafenib and trametinib. Twenty-two incidents of adverse events were reported, with the majority (90.9%) being classified as grade one or two. All patients underwent surgical resection: three out of six patients following two NAT cycles, two following three cycles and one following six cycles. Surgically resected samples were histopathologically evaluated for the presence of disease. Five out of six patients (83%) had ≤1 positive lymph node. One patient showed extracapsular extension. Four patients demonstrated complete pathological response; two had persisting viable tumour cells. Conclusions: In this case series, we outlined how in response to surgical delays secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic, NAT was successfully applied to achieve promising treatment response in patients with locally advanced stage III melanoma.

The "Great Debate" at Melanoma Bridge 2022, Naples, December 1st-3rd, 2022

The Great Debate session at the 2022 Melanoma Bridge congress (December 1-3) featured counterpoint views from leading experts on five contemporary topics of debate in the management of melanoma. The debates considered the choice of anti-lymphocyte-activation gene (LAG)-3 therapy or ipilimumab in combination with anti-programmed death (PD)-1 therapy, whether anti-PD-1 monotherapy is still acceptable as a comparator arm in clinical trials, whether adjuvant treatment of melanoma is still a useful treatment option, the role of adjuvant therapy in stage II melanoma, what role surgery will continue to have in the treatment of melanoma. As is customary in the Melanoma Bridge Great Debates, the speakers are invited by the meeting Chairs to express one side of the assigned debate and the opinions given may not fully reflect personal views. Audiences voted in favour of either side of the argument both before and after each debate.

Efficacy and toxicity of adjuvant radiotherapy in recurrent melanoma after adjuvant immunotherapy

BACKGROUND

In patients with stage III melanoma, despite surgical resection and adjuvant systemic therapy, locoregional recurrences still occur. The randomized, phase III Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG) 02.01 trial demonstrated that adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) after complete lymphadenectomy (CLND) halves the incidence of melanoma recurrence within local nodal basins without improving overall survival or quality of life. However, the study was conducted prior to the current era of adjuvant systemic therapies and when CLND was the standard approach for microscopic nodal disease. As such, there is currently no data on the role of adjuvant RT in patients with melanoma who recur during or after adjuvant immunotherapy, including those that may or may not have undergone prior CLND. In this study, we aimed to answer this question.

METHODS

Patients with resected stage III melanoma who received adjuvant anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) (±ipilimumab) immunotherapy with a subsequent locoregional (lymph node and/or in-transit metastases) recurrence were retrospectively identified. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses were conducted. Primary outcome was rate of subsequent locoregional recurrence; secondary outcomes were locoregional recurrence-free survival (lr-RFS2) and overall RFS (RFS2) to second recurrence.

RESULTS

In total, 71 patients were identified: 42 (59%) men, 30 (42%) BRAF V600E mutant, 43 (61%) stage IIIC at diagnosis. Median time to first recurrence was 7 months (1-44), 24 (34%) received adjuvant RT and 47 (66%) did not. Thirty-three patients (46%) developed a second recurrence at a median of 5 months (1-22). The rate of locoregional relapse at second recurrence was lower in those who received adjuvant RT (8%, 2/24) compared with those who did not (36%, 17/47, p=0.01). Adjuvant RT at first recurrence was associated with an improved lr-RFS2 (HR 0.16, p=0.015), with a trend towards an improved RFS2 (HR 0.54, p=0.072) and no effect on risk of distant recurrence or overall survival.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to investigate the role of adjuvant RT in patients with melanoma with locoregional disease recurrence during or after adjuvant anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy. Adjuvant RT was associated with improved lr-RFS2, but not risk of distant recurrence, demonstrating a likely benefit in locoregional disease control in the modern era. Further prospective studies are required to validate these results.

Current Controversies in Melanoma Treatment

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After reading this article and viewing the videos, the participant should be able to: 1. Discuss margins for in situ and invasive disease and describe reconstructive options for wide excision defects, including the keystone flap. 2. Describe a digit-sparing alternative for subungual melanoma. 3. Calculate personalized risk estimates for sentinel node biopsy using predictive nomograms. 4. Describe the indications for lymphadenectomy and describe a technique intended to reduce the risk of lymphedema following lymphadenectomy. 5. Offer options for in-transit melanoma management.

SUMMARY

Melanoma management continues to evolve, and plastic surgeons need to stay at the forefront of advances and controversies. Appropriate margins for in situ and invasive disease require consideration of the trials on which they are based. A workhorse reconstruction option for wide excision defects, particularly in extremities, is the keystone flap. There are alternative surgical approaches to subungual tumors besides amputation. It is now possible to personalize a risk estimate for sentinel node positivity beyond what is available for groups of patients with a given stage of disease. Sentinel node biopsy can be made more accurate and less morbid with novel adjuncts. Positive sentinel node biopsies are now rarely managed with completion lymphadenectomy. Should a patient require lymphadenectomy, immediate lymphatic reconstruction may mitigate the lymphedema risk. Finally, there are minimally invasive modalities for effective control of in-transit recurrences.

Risk Stratification of Sentinel Node Metastasis Disease Burden and Phenotype in Stage III Melanoma Patients

BACKGROUND

Currently, all patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) pT2b-pT4b melanomas and a positive sentinel node biopsy are now considered for adjuvant systemic therapy without consideration of the burden of disease in the metastatic nodes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort analysis of 1377 pT1-pT4b melanoma patients treated at an academic cancer center. Standard variables regarding patient, primary tumor, and sentinel node characteristics, in addition to sentinel node metastasis maximum tumor deposit size (MTDS) in millimeters and extracapsular spread (ECS) status, were analyzed for predicting disease-specific survival (DSS).

RESULTS

The incidence of SN+ was 17.3% (238/1377) and ECS was 10.5% (25/238). Increasing AJCC N stage was associated with worse DSS. There was no difference in DSS between the IIIB and IIIC groups. Subgroup analyses showed that the optimal MTDS cut-point was 0.7 mm for the pT1b-pT4a SN+ subgroups, but there was no cut-point for the pT4b SN+ subgroup. Patients with MTDS <0.7 mm and no ECS had similar survival outcomes as the N0 patients with the same T stage. Nodal risk categories were developed using the 0.7 mm MTDS cut-point and ECS status. The incidence of low-risk disease, according to the new nodal risk model, was 22.3% (53/238) in the stage III cohort, with 49% (26/53) in the pT2b-pT3a and pT3b-pT4a subgroups and none in the pT4b subgroup. Similar outcomes were observed for overall and distant metastasis-free survival.

CONCLUSION

We propose a more granular classification system, based on tumor burden and ECS status in the sentinel node, that identifies low-risk patients in the AJCC IIIB and IIIC subgroups who may otherwise be observed.

Tolerability of BRAF and MEK Inhibitors for Metastasized Melanoma after Intra-Class Switch: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study

Targeted therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors (BRAFi, MEKi) is one of the mainstays of melanoma treatment. When dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) is observed, an option represents the intra-class switch to a different BRAFi+MEKi combination. Currently, there is scarce evidence for this procedure. This is a multicenter, retrospective analysis from six German skin cancer centers of patients who received two different combinations of BRAFi and MEKi. In total, 94 patients were included: 38 patients (40%) were re-exposed with a different combination because of previous unacceptable toxicity, 51 (54%) were re-exposed after progression, and 5 (5%) were included for other reasons. Of the 44 patients with a DLT during their first BRAFi+MEKi combination, only five (11%) experienced the same DLT during their second combination. A new DLT was experienced by 13 patients (30%). Six patients (14%) had to discontinue the second BRAFi treatment due to its toxicity. Compound-specific adverse events were avoided in the majority of patients by switching to a different combination. Efficacy data were similar to historical cohorts of BRAFi+MEKi rechallenge, with an overall response rate of 31% for patients who had previously progressed to treatment. We conclude that switching to a different BRAFi+MEKi combination if dose-limiting toxicity occurs is a feasible and rational approach in patients with metastatic melanoma.

Multicenter Adoption and Outcomes of Nodal Observation for Patients with Melanoma and Sentinel Lymph Node Metastases

BACKGROUND

Following publication of the MSLT-II trial showing no survival benefit of completion lymphadenectomy (CLND) in patients with melanoma sentinel lymph node (SLN) metastases, it is expected that practice patterns have changed. The purpose of this study is to understand real-world practices and outcomes after publication of this landmark trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with truncal/extremity melanoma SLN metastases diagnosed between 2013 and 2019 at four academic cancer centers were included in this retrospective cohort study. Descriptive statistics, Cox proportional hazards model, and multivariable regression were used to characterize the cohort and identify predictors of CLND, harboring non-SLN (NSLN) metastases, and survival.

RESULTS

Results of 1176 patients undergoing SLN biopsy, 183 had SLN metastases. The number of patients who underwent CLND before versus after trial publication was 75.7.% versus 20.5% (HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09-0.28). Of those undergoing nodal observation (NO), 92% had a first nodal-basin ultrasound, while 63% of patients had a fourth. In exploratory multivariable analyses, age ≥ 50 years was associated with lower rate of CLND (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.36-0.92) and larger SLN deposit (> 1.0 mm) with increased rate of CLND (HR 1.87, 95% CI 1.17-3.00) in the complete cohort. Extracapsular extension was associated with increased risk of NSLN metastases (HR 12.43, 95% CI 2.48-62.31). Adjusted survival analysis demonstrated no difference in recurrence or mortality between patients treated with CLND versus NO at median 2.2-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Nodal observation was rapidly adopted into practice in patients with melanoma SLN metastases at four centers in Canada. Younger age and higher nodal burden were associated with increased use of CLND after trial publication. Ultrasound (US) surveillance decreased with time from SLNB. In our study, CLND was not associated with a decreased risk of recurrence or mortality.

TMB and BRAF mutation status are independent predictive factors in high-risk melanoma patients with adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy

BACKGROUND

High tumor mutational burden (TMB) is associated with a favorable outcome in metastatic melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, data are limited in the adjuvant setting. As BRAF mutated patients have an alternative with targeted adjuvant therapy, it is important to identify predictive factors for relapse and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients receiving adjuvant anti-PD-1 antibodies.

METHODS

We evaluated 165 melanoma patients who started adjuvant anti-PD-1 antibody therapy at our center between March 2018 and September 2019. The initial tumor stage was assessed at the beginning of therapy according to the 8th edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. Tumor and normal tissue of the high-risk stages IIIC/D/IV were sequenced using a 700 gene NGS panel.

RESULTS

The tumor stages at the beginning of adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy were as follows: N = 80 stage IIIA/B (48%), N = 85 stage IIIC/D/IV (52%). 72/165 patients (44%) suffered a relapse, 44/72 (61%) with only loco regional and 28/72 (39%) with distant metastases. Sequencing results were available from 83 to 85 patients with stage IIIC/D/IV. BRAF mutation status (HR 2.12, 95% CI 1.12-4.08; p = 0.022) and TMB (HR 7.11, 95% CI 2.19-23.11; p = 0.001) were significant and independent predictive factors for relapse-free survival (RFS).

CONCLUSION

BRAF mutation status and TMB were independent predictive factors for RFS. Patients with BRAF V600E/K mutation and TMB high had the best outcome. A classification based on BRAF mutation status and TMB is proposed to predict RFS in melanoma patients with adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy.

Approximation of Long-Term Survival with Polatuzumab Vedotin Plus Bendamustine and Rituximab for Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Results Based on The GO29365 Trial

BACKGROUND

To inform healthcare professionals, payers and health technology organisations of estimated survival benefits of new treatments, statistical methods can be used to model the projected clinical benefits versus costs of new interventions. This is particularly relevant for new treatments where data describing all progression events are incomplete and long-term survival outcomes are not yet established. In patients with the fast-growing B-cell cancer, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), heterogeneous clinical efficacy outcomes are observed with the presence of both 'cured' (long-term survivors [LTS]) and 'non-cured' patients. Mixture cure rate models represent an alternative approach to traditional standard parametric survival models as they capture this heterogeneity. The aim of this analysis was to use progression-free survival (PFS) as an intermediate endpoint to estimate long-term survival with polatuzumab vedotin (Pola) + bendamustine (B) + rituximab (R) treatment (Pola+BR); these survival estimates will be utilised to inform future economic analyses.

METHODS

Using data from the Phase II randomised cohort of the GO29365 trial (NCT02257567), we estimated the overall survival (OS) benefit and proportion of LTS with Pola+BR versus BR alone in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL. Alongside standard parametric survival models, a mixture cure rate model was evaluated for each treatment arm, exploring both OS and OS informed by PFS.

RESULTS

The estimated mean OS was 3.78 years for Pola+BR versus 1.07 years for BR using standard parametric methods and 4.00 years versus 1.02 years using a mixture cure rate model (OS informed by PFS). The proportion of LTS using the mixture cure rate model was 23.0% (95% confidence interval: 9.3, 45.36) for Pola+BR versus 0% for BR (assuming a generalised gamma distribution). Of the extrapolation methods tested, mixture cure rate model predictions were best aligned with the observed survival data in GO29365.

CONCLUSIONS

These models suggest that compared with BR alone, Pola+BR is associated with a higher proportion of LTS ranging from 22.0 to 26.6%, depending on the distribution assumed. However, the upper and lower limits of the confidence intervals of the point estimates are reaching from 9 to 45%.

BRAF and MEK Inhibitors and Their Toxicities: A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis summarizes the incidence of treatment-related adverse events (AE) of BRAFi and MEKi.

METHODS

A systematic search of Medline/PubMed was conducted to identify suitable articles published in English up to 31 December 2021. The primary outcomes were profiles for all-grade and grade 3 or higher treatment-related AEs, and the analysis of single side effects belonging to both categories.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of treatment-related all-grade Aes was 99% for Encorafenib (95% CI: 0.97-1.00) and 97% for Trametinib (95% CI: 0.92-0.99; I² = 66%) and Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.94-0.99; I² = 0%). In combined therapies, the rate was 98% for both Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (95% CI: 0.96-0.99; I² = 77%) and Encorafenib + Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.96-1.00). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in 69% of cases for Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.50-0.84; I² = 71%), 68% for Encorafenib (95% CI: 0.61-0.74), and 72% for Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (95% CI: 0.65-0.79; I² = 84%). The most common grade 1-2 AEs were pyrexia (43%) and fatigue (28%) for Dabrafenib + Trametinib and diarrhea for both Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (52%) and Encorafenib + Binimetinib (34%). The most common AEs of grade 3 or higher were pyrexia, rash, and hypertension for Dabrafenib + Trametinib (6%), rash and hypertension for Encorafenib + Binimetinib (6%), and increased AST and ALT for Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (10%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides comprehensive data on treatment-related adverse events of BRAFi and MEKi combination therapies, showing related toxicity profiles to offer a helpful tool for clinicians in the choice of therapy.

Clinical Outcomes and Risk Stratification of Early-Stage Melanoma Micrometastases From an International Multicenter Study: Implications for the Management of American Joint Committee on Cancer IIIA Disease

PURPOSE

Indications for offering adjuvant systemic therapy for patients with early-stage melanomas with low disease burden sentinel node (SN) micrometastases, namely, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC; eighth edition) stage IIIA disease, are presently controversial. The current study sought to identify high-risk SN-positive AJCC stage IIIA patients who are more likely to derive benefit from adjuvant systemic therapy.

METHODS

Patients were recruited from an intercontinental (Australia/Europe/North America) consortium of nine high-volume cancer centers. All were adult patients with pathologic stage pT1b/pT2a primary cutaneous melanomas who underwent SN biopsy between 2005 and 2020. Patient data, primary tumor and SN characteristics, and survival outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Three thousand six hundred seven patients were included. The median follow-up was 34 months. Pairwise disease comparison demonstrated no significant survival difference between N1a and N2a subgroups. Survival analysis identified a SN tumor deposit maximum dimension of 0.3 mm as the optimal cut point for stratifying survival. Five-year disease-specific survival rates were 80.3% and 94.1% for patients with SN metastatic tumor deposits ≥ 0.3 mm and < 0.3 mm, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.26 [1.11 to 1.44]; P < .0001). Similar findings were seen for overall disease-free and distant metastasis-free survival. There were no survival differences between the AJCC IB patients and low-risk (< 0.3 mm) AJCC IIIA patients. The newly identified high-risk (≥ 0.3 mm) subgroup comprised 271 (66.4%) of the AJCC IIIA cohort, whereas only 142 (34.8%) patients had SN tumor deposits > 1 mm in maximum dimension.

CONCLUSION

Patients with AJCC IIIA melanoma with SN tumor deposits ≥ 0.3 mm in maximum dimension are at higher risk of disease progression and may benefit from adjuvant systemic therapy or enrollment into a clinical trial. Patients with SN deposits < 0.3 mm in maximum dimension can be managed similar to their SN-negative, AJCC IB counterparts, thereby avoiding regular radiological surveillance and more intensive follow-up.

The future of targeted kinase inhibitors in melanoma

Melanoma is a cancer of the pigment-producing cells of the body and its incidence is rising. Targeted inhibitors that act against kinases in the MAPK pathway are approved for BRAF-mutant metastatic cutaneous melanoma and increase patients' survival. Response to these therapies is limited by drug resistance and is less durable than with immune checkpoint inhibition. Conversely, rare melanoma subtypes have few therapeutic options for advanced disease and MAPK pathway targeting agents show minimal anti-tumor effects. Nevertheless, there is a future for targeted kinase inhibitors in melanoma: in new applications such as adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy and in novel combinations with immunotherapies or other targeted therapies. Pre-clinical studies continue to identify tumor dependencies and their corresponding actionable drug targets, paving the way for rational targeted kinase inhibitor combinations as a personalized medicine approach for melanoma.

Five-Year Analysis of Adjuvant Pembrolizumab or Placebo in Stage III Melanoma

Pembrolizumab or Placebo in Stage III MelanomaPatients with stage III melanoma randomly received adjuvant pembrolizumab or placebo. Five-year recurrence-free survival was 55.4% (95% CI, 50.8 to 59.8) versus 38.3% (33.9 to 42.7) and 5-year metastasis-free survival was 60.6% (56.0 to 64.9) versus 44.5% (39.9 to 48.9) for adjuvant pembrolizumab and placebo, respectively. No new safety signals were associated with adjuvant pembrolizumab.

Treatment related toxicities with combination BRAF and MEK inhibitor therapy in resected stage III melanoma

Combination dabrafenib (D) and trametinib (T) is an FDA approved adjuvant therapy for patients with resected stage III BRAF-mutant melanoma. We describe treatment-related toxicities with adjuvant D+T in a real-world population through a retrospective case series. The primary endpoint was development of toxicities.

Cumulative incidence and risk factors of brain metastasis for acral and mucosal melanoma patients with stages I-III

PURPOSE

Few studies focused on the incidence of brain metastasis in patients with acral and mucosal melanoma, and a better understanding of the incidences and predictors of brain metastasis is needed in these patients.

METHOD

A prospectively accrued cohort of 799 patients with acral and mucosal melanoma in stages I-III from July 2011 to December 2015 at Peking University Cancer Hospital were included in this study. Competing risk models (Fine and Gray) were used to estimate the cumulative incidence of brain metastasis and compare the differences in cumulative incidence curves between different primary lesions, stages, and molecular types.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up time of 68.0 months, 60 of the 779 patients (7.7%) developed brain metastasis, and 261 (33.5%) patients developed extracranial metastasis. Considering the risk of competition, the cumulative incidence of brain metastasis at one year, two years, and five years after diagnosis were 5.1%, 10.2%, and 19.5%, respectively. Stage III, BRAF mutations, and NRAS mutations were associated with a high risk of brain metastasis in univariable analysis. Multivariate analysis showed BRAF mutations, and NRAS mutations had statistically correlated with an increased cumulative incidence of brain metastasis at diagnosis and all-time point of one year and two years after diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first to report the cumulative incidence and risk factors of brain metastasis for patients with acral and mucosal melanoma in stages I-III. Patients with BRAF and NRAS mutations had a higher incidence at diagnosis and all-time point, providing the basis for surveillance guidelines and further mechanic exploration.

Neoadjuvant therapy for melanoma: A critical appraisal

The treatment of advanced melanoma has significantly changed since the development of targeted and immune therapy. To date, these agents have primarily been used in the adjuvant or metastatic setting. Given several theoretical advantages, there is increased interest in the use of these new therapeutics in the neoadjuvant setting. In this review, we detail the potential benefits and pitfalls of neoadjuvant therapy for melanoma, review the currently available data, and describe ongoing neoadjuvant trials.

Evaluation of the Indications for Sentinel Node Biopsy in Early-Stage Melanoma with the Advent of Adjuvant Systemic Therapy: An International, Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Patients presenting with early-stage melanoma (AJCC pT1b-pT2a) reportedly have a relatively low risk of a positive SNB (~5-10%). Those patients are usually found to have low-volume metastatic disease after SNB, typically reclassified to AJCC stage IIIA, with an excellent prognosis of ~90% 5-year survival. Currently, adjuvant systemic therapy is not routinely recommended for most patients with AJCC stage IIIA melanoma. The purpose was to assess the SN-positivity rate in early-stage melanoma and to identify primary tumor characteristics associated with high-risk nodal disease eligible for adjuvant systemic therapy METHODS: An international, multicenter retrospective cohort study from 7 large-volume cancer centers identified 3,610 patients with early primary cutaneous melanomas 0.8-2.0 mm in Breslow thickness (pT1b-pT2a; AJCC 8th edition). Patient demographics, primary tumor characteristics, and SNB status/details were analyzed.

RESULTS

The overall SNB-positivity rate was 11.4% (412/3610). Virtually all SNB-positive patients (409/412; 99.3%) were reclassified to AJCC stage IIIA. Multivariate analysis identified age, T-stage, mitotic rate, primary site and subtype, and lymphovascular invasion as independent predictors of sentinel node status. A mitotic rate of >1/mm2 was associated with a significantly increased SN-positivity rate and was the only significant independent predictor of high-risk SNB metastases (>1 mm maximum diameter).

CONCLUSIONS

The new treatment paradigm brings into question the role of SNB for patients with early-stage melanoma. The results of this large international cohort study suggest that a reevaluation of the indications for SNB for some patients with early-stage melanoma is required.

Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab (CheckMate 238 trial): Reassessment of 4-year efficacy outcomes in patients with stage III melanoma per AJCC-8 staging criteria

PURPOSE

Nivolumab was approved as adjuvant therapy for melanoma based on data from CheckMate 238, which enrolled patients per American Joint Committee on Cancer version 7 (AJCC-7) criteria. Here, we analyse long-term outcomes per AJCC-8 staging criteria compared with AJCC-7 results to inform clinical decisions for patients diagnosed per AJCC-8.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In a double-blind, phase 3 trial (NCT02388906), patients aged ≥15 years with resected, histologically confirmed AJCC-7 stage IIIB, IIIC, or IV melanoma were randomised to receive nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for 4 doses and then every 12 weeks, both intravenously ≤1 year. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were assessed in patients with stage III disease, per AJCC-7 and AJCC-8.

RESULTS

Per AJCC-7 staging, 42.4% and 57.3% of patients were in substage IIIB and IIIC, respectively; per AJCC-8, 1.1%, 30.4%, 62.8%, and 5.0% were in IIIA, IIIB, IIIC, and IIID. After 4 years' minimum follow-up, the AJCC-7 superior efficacy of nivolumab over ipilimumab in patients with resected stage III melanoma was preserved per AJCC-8 analysis. No statistically significant difference in RFS between stage III substage hazard ratios was observed per AJCC-7 or -8 staging criteria (interaction test: AJCC-7, P = 0.8115; AJCC-8, P = 0.1051; P = 0.8392 ((AJCC-7) and P = 0.8678 (AJCC-8) for DMFS).

CONCLUSIONS

CheckMate 238 4-year RFS and DMFS outcomes are consistent per AJCC-7 and AJCC-8 staging criteria. Outcome benefits can therefore be translated for patients diagnosed per AJCC-8.

Genetic and Methylation Analysis of CTNNB1 in Benign and Malignant Melanocytic Lesions

Simple Summary

Recurrent CTNNB1 exon 3 mutations have been recognized in the distinct group of melanocytic tumors showing deep penetrating nevus-like morphology and in 1–2% of advanced melanoma. We performed a detailed genetic analysis of difficult-to-classify nevi and melanomas with CTNNB1 mutations and found that benign tumors (nevi) show characteristic morphological, genetic and epigenetic traits, which distinguish them from other nevi and melanoma. Malignant CTNNB1-mutant tumors (melanoma) demonstrated a different genetic profile, grouping clearly with other non-CTNNB1 melanomas in methylation assays. To further evaluate the role of CTNNB1 mutations in melanoma, we assessed a large cohort of clinically sequenced melanomas, identifying 38 tumors with CTNNB1 exon 3 mutations, including recurrent S45 (n = 13, 34%), G34 (n = 5, 13%), and S27 (n = 5, 13%) mutations. Locations and histological subtype of CTNNB1-mutated melanoma varied; none were reported as showing deep penetrating nevus-like morphology. The most frequent concurrent activating mutations were BRAF V600 (55%) and NRAS Q61 (34%).

Abstract

Melanocytic neoplasms have been genetically characterized in detail during the last decade. Recurrent CTNNB1 exon 3 mutations have been recognized in the distinct group of melanocytic tumors showing deep penetrating nevus-like morphology. In addition, they have been identified in 1–2% of advanced melanoma. Performing a detailed genetic analysis of difficult-to-classify nevi and melanomas with CTNNB1 mutations, we found that benign tumors (nevi) show characteristic morphological, genetic and epigenetic traits, which distinguish them from other nevi and melanoma. Malignant CTNNB1-mutant tumors (melanomas) demonstrated a different genetic profile, instead grouping clearly with other non-CTNNB1 melanomas in methylation assays. To further evaluate the role of CTNNB1 mutations in melanoma, we assessed a large cohort of clinically sequenced melanomas, identifying 38 tumors with CTNNB1 exon 3 mutations, including recurrent S45 (n = 13, 34%), G34 (n = 5, 13%), and S27 (n = 5, 13%) mutations. Locations and histological subtype of CTNNB1-mutated melanoma varied; none were reported as showing deep penetrating nevus-like morphology. The most frequent concurrent activating mutations were BRAF V600 (n = 21, 55%) and NRAS Q61 (n = 13, 34%). In our cohort, four of seven (58%) and one of nine (11%) patients treated with targeted therapy (BRAF and MEK Inhibitors) or immune-checkpoint therapy, respectively, showed disease control (partial response or stable disease). In summary, CTNNB1 mutations are associated with a unique melanocytic tumor type in benign tumors (nevi), which can be applied in a diagnostic setting. In advanced disease, no clear characteristics distinguishing CTNNB1-mutant from other melanomas were observed; however, studies of larger, optimally prospective, cohorts are warranted.

Treatment of Metastatic Melanoma with a Combination of Immunotherapies and Molecularly Targeted Therapies

Simple Summary

Immunotherapies and molecularly targeted therapies have drastically changed the therapeutic approach for unresectable advanced or metastatic melanoma. The majority of melanoma patients have benefitted from these therapies; however, some patients acquire resistance to them. Novel combinations of immunotherapies and molecularly targeted therapies may be more efficient in treating these patients. In this review, we discuss various combination therapies under pre-clinical and clinical development which can reduce toxicity, enhance efficacy, and prevent recurrences in patients with metastatic melanoma.

Abstract

Melanoma possesses invasive metastatic growth patterns and is one of the most aggressive types of skin cancer. In 2021, it is estimated that 7180 deaths were attributed to melanoma in the United States alone. Once melanoma metastasizes, traditional therapies are no longer effective. Instead, immunotherapies, such as ipilimumab, pembrolizumab, and nivolumab, are the treatment options for malignant melanoma. Several biomarkers involved in tumorigenesis have been identified as potential targets for molecularly targeted melanoma therapy, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Unfortunately, melanoma quickly acquires resistance to these molecularly targeted therapies. To bypass resistance, combination treatment with immunotherapies and single or multiple TKIs have been employed and have been shown to improve the prognosis of melanoma patients compared to monotherapy. This review discusses several combination therapies that target melanoma biomarkers, such as BRAF, MEK, RAS, c-KIT, VEGFR, c-MET and PI3K. Several of these regimens are already FDA-approved for treating metastatic melanoma, while others are still in clinical trials. Continued research into the causes of resistance and factors influencing the efficacy of these combination treatments, such as specific mutations in oncogenic proteins, may further improve the effectiveness of combination therapies, providing a better prognosis for melanoma patients.

Optimal systemic therapy for high-risk resectable melanoma

Immunotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors and molecularly targeted therapy with BRAF inhibitors were pioneered in the setting of advanced-stage, unresectable melanoma, where they revolutionized treatment and considerably improved patient survival. These therapeutic approaches have also been successfully transitioned into the resectable disease setting, with the regulatory approvals of ipilimumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab, and dabrafenib plus trametinib as postoperative (adjuvant) treatments for various, overlapping groups of patients with high-risk melanoma. Moreover, these agents have shown variable promise when used in the preoperative (neoadjuvant) period. The expanding range of treatment options available for resectable high-risk melanoma, all of which come with risks as well as benefits, raises questions over selection of the optimal therapeutic strategy and agents for each individual, also considering that many patients might be cured with surgery alone. Furthermore, the use of perioperative therapy has potentially important implications for the management of patients who have disease recurrence. In this Viewpoint, we asked four expert investigators and medical or surgical oncologists who have been involved in the key studies of perioperative systemic therapies for their perspectives on the optimal management of patients with high-risk melanoma.

Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy (NAST) in Patients with Melanoma: Surgical Considerations by the International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium (INMC)

Exciting advances in melanoma systemic therapies have presented the opportunity for surgical oncologists and their multidisciplinary colleagues to test the neoadjuvant systemic treatment approach in high-risk, resectable metastatic melanomas. Here we describe the state of the science of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) for melanoma, focusing on the surgical aspects and the key role of the surgical oncologist in this treatment paradigm. This paper summarizes the past decade of developments in melanoma treatment and the current evidence for NAST in stage III melanoma specifically. Issues of surgical relevance are discussed, including the risk of progression on NAST prior to surgery. Technical aspects, such as the definition of resectability for melanoma and the extent and scope of routine surgery are presented. Other important issues, such as the utility of radiographic response evaluation and method of pathologic response evaluation, are addressed. Surgical complications and perioperative management of NAST related adverse events are considered. The International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium has the goal of harmonizing NAST trials in melanoma to facilitate rapid advances with new approaches, and facilitating the comparison of results across trials evaluating different treatment regimens. Our ultimate goals are to provide definitive proof of the safety and efficacy of NAST in melanoma, sufficient for NAST to become an acceptable standard of care, and to leverage this platform to allow more personalized, biomarker-driven, tailored approaches to subsequent treatment and surveillance.

Short-term and long-term prognostic value of histological response and intensified chemotherapy in osteosarcoma: a retrospective reanalysis of the BO06 trial

OBJECTIVES

Cure rate models accounting for cured and uncured patients, provide additional insights into long and short-term survival. We aim to evaluate the prognostic value of histological response and chemotherapy intensification on the cure fraction and progression-free survival (PFS) for the uncured patients.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of a randomised controlled trial, MRC BO06 (EORTC 80931).

SETTING

Population-based study but proposed methodology can be applied to other trial designs.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 497 patients with resectable highgrade osteosarcoma, of which 118 were excluded because chemotherapy was not started, histological response was not reported, abnormal dose was reported or had disease progression during treatment.

INTERVENTIONS

Two regimens with the same anticipated cumulative dose (doxorubicin 6×75 mg/m²/week; cisplatin 6×100 mg/m²/week) over different time schedules: every 3 weeks in regimen-C and every 2 weeks in regimen-DI.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome is PFS computed from end of treatment because cure, if it occurs, may happen at any time during treatment. A mixture cure model is used to study the effect of histological response and intensified chemotherapy on the cure status and PFS for the uncured patients.

RESULTS

Histological response is a strong prognostic factor for the cure status (OR 3.00, 95% CI 1.75 to 5.17), but it has no clear effect on PFS for the uncured patients (HR 0.78, -95% CI 0.53 to 1.16). The cure fractions are 55% (46%-63%) and 29% (22%-35%), respectively, among patients with good and poor histological response (GR, PR). The intensified regimen was associated with a higher cure fraction among PR (OR 1.90, 95% CI 0.93 to 3.89), with no evidence of effect for GR (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.59).

CONCLUSIONS

Accounting for cured patients is valuable in distinguishing the covariate effects on cure and PFS. Estimating cure chances based on these prognostic factors is relevant for counselling patients and can have an impact on treatment decisions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN86294690.

Population-based assessment of sentinel lymph node biopsy in the management of cutaneous melanoma

BACKGROUND

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for melanoma plays a central role in determining prognosis and guiding treatment and surveillance strategies. Despite widely published guidelines for SLNB, variation exists in its use. We aimed to determine the frequency of and predictive factors for SLNB in patients with clinically node-negative melanoma in British Columbia.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of patients with clinically node-negative melanoma diagnosed between January 2015 and December 2017. Patients included had a Breslow depth greater than 0.75 mm or a Breslow depth less than or equal to 0.75 mm with ulceration, or a mitotic rate greater than or equal to 1/mm2. SLNB was considered to be indicated for clinical stages IB to IIC (American Joint Committee on Cancer's AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, seventh edition).

RESULTS

A total of 759 patients were included. SLNB was performed in 54.8% (363/662) of patients when indicated. SLNB was more likely to be performed for tumours with a Breslow depth greater than 1.0 mm or a mitotic rate greater than or equal to 1/mm2. SLNB was less likely to be performed in patients older than 75 years and with a nonextremity tumour location. Compliance with SLNB guidelines decreased distant recurrence but did not significantly affect regional recurrence, nor did it have a significant impact on overall survival among patients aged 75 years and younger.

CONCLUSION

SLNB is being underutilized in British Columbia. These results are concerning and highly relevant given the rapidly evolving field of adjuvant systemic therapy for high-risk patients and the increased proportion of patients who should be considered for SLNB on the basis of the eighth edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual and current guidelines. Efforts should be made to increase the use of SLNB in appropriate patients.

Turnaround Times in Melanoma BRAF Testing and the Impact on the Initiation of Systemic Therapy at a Single Tertiary Care Cancer Center

PURPOSE

The identification of BRAF mutations in melanoma enables targeted therapy and improves patient outcomes. Barriers to BRAF molecular testing affect the quality of care and therapeutic options.

METHODS

This retrospective study mapped BRAF testing timelines in adult patients with melanoma at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre to identify obstacles to timely BRAF reporting and its impact on the initiation of therapy.

RESULTS

Sixty-six cases were included. The median time between BRAF request and result was 12 days (95% CI, 8 to 15) when the BRAF test was ordered by pathology, compared with 20 days (95% CI, 16 to 23) if the test was requested by another specialist (P < .001). When the BRAF test and biopsy were performed within the same institution, the BRAF median turnaround time (TAT) was 13 days (95% CI, 6 to 19) compared with 19 days (95% CI, 16 to 21) if the sample was transferred from another institution (P = .02). Forty-seven patients received systemic therapy, and 20 had metastatic disease. In the metastatic subgroup, if the BRAF result was available at the first medical oncology visit, the initiation of treatment was 20 days (95% CI, 9.6 to 30.3), but was delayed to 31 days (95% CI, 10.8 to 51.1) if the BRAF result was not available (P = .03).

CONCLUSION

This study showed variations in BRAF test results in TAT. One factor affecting this timeline is the transfer time, which can be streamlined by pathology reflex testing. Delays in TAT affect the timing and type of therapeutic intervention, especially in patients with stage IV disease.

Comparison of Two Rapid Assays for the Detection of BRAF V600 Mutations in Metastatic Melanoma including Positive Sentinel Lymph Nodes

Testing for the BRAF mutation is mandatory for the management of patients with locally advanced or metastatic melanoma. Molecular analysis based on DNA sequencing remains the gold-standard method for the screening of the different BRAF mutations. These methods must be rapid, sensitive, and specific enough to allow optimal therapeutic management in daily practice and also to include patients in clinical trials. Here, we compared the Idylla BRAF Mutation Test and the anti-BRAF V600E (clone VE1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) in 90 melanoma samples, with a focus on a challenging cohort of 32 positive sentinel lymph nodes. The BRAF status was assessed with both methods independently of the percentage of tumor cells. The concordance rate was calculated excluding both non-contributory analyses and BRAFV600K/R/M mutants due to the specific V600E-IHC test design. The incidence of the BRAFV600E mutation was 33% with both BRAF Idylla and BRAF IHC. The agreement rate was 91% (72/79). Although the agreement rate was high, we suggest that the use of IHC is more suitable for rapid BRAF testing on sentinel lymph node biopsies when associated with a low percentage and scattered tumor cells, which gave a high risk of non-contributory analysis and/or false negative results with the Idylla^TMBRAF Mutation Test.

Circulating Tumour DNA in Melanoma-Clinic Ready?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Liquid biopsies, including circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA), can inform a variety of clinical questions. This review examines the potential role of ctDNA as a clinical tool to inform clinical decision-making from early to late stage cutaneous melanoma.

RECENT FINDINGS

In pre-clinical studies, ctDNA has been shown to detect minimal residual disease and molecular relapse; predict and monitor response to therapy; and identify key resistance mechanisms. Here, we examine the potential utility of ctDNA and discuss its limitations for use in patients with melanoma. We present novel clinical trials, which are testing its value as a tool to augment clinical decision-making. Finally, we discuss the steps that are needed to ensure that ctDNA is used optimally in order to improve outcomes for patients with melanoma. Preclinical studies have shown that ctDNA has huge potential to provide real-time information about disease status in patients with melanoma. It is now time to test it rigorously within clinical trials to assess how it can be optimally used to benefit patients in the clinic.

Improved pyrexia-related outcomes associated with an adapted pyrexia adverse event management algorithm in patients treated with adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib: Primary results of COMBI-APlus

BACKGROUND

COMBI-AD demonstrated long-term benefit of adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with resected stage III BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma; however, 9% of patients permanently discontinued therapy due to pyrexia. COMBI-APlus evaluated whether an adapted pyrexia management algorithm reduces high-grade pyrexia and pyrexia-related adverse outcomes.

METHODS

COMBI-APlus is an open-label, phase IIIb trial evaluating an adapted pyrexia management algorithm in patients with high-risk resected stage III BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma treated with up to 12 months of adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib. Both drugs were interrupted for pyrexia (temperature ≥38°C) or the occurrence of pyrexia syndrome for suspected recurrent pyrexia. Treatment was restarted at the same dose once patients were symptom free for ≥24 h. The primary endpoint was the composite rate of grade 3/4 pyrexia, hospitalisation due to pyrexia, or permanent discontinuation due to pyrexia versus historical COMBI-AD control (20.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 16.3%-24.1%).

RESULTS

At data cutoff (5 October 2020), COMBI-APlus met its primary endpoint of significant improvement in the composite rate of pyrexia (8.0% [95% CI, 5.9%-10.6%]), with rates of 3.8% for grade 3/4 pyrexia, 4.3% for hospitalisation due to pyrexia, and 2.4% for discontinuation due to pyrexia. Estimated 12-month relapse-free survival was 91.8% (95% CI, 89.0%-93.9%). The most common adverse events were consistent with those in COMBI-AD, and 14.7% of patients permanently discontinued treatment due to adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The adapted pyrexia management algorithm appears to reduce the incidence of severe pyrexia outcomes, enables patients to manage pyrexia at home, and helps patients remain on treatment.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03551626.

The Impact of Hyaluronan on Tumor Progression in Cutaneous Melanoma

The incidence of cutaneous melanoma is rapidly increasing worldwide. Cutaneous melanoma is an aggressive type of skin cancer, which originates from malignant transformation of pigment producing melanocytes. The main risk factor for melanoma is ultraviolet (UV) radiation, and thus it often arises from highly sun-exposed skin areas and is characterized by a high mutational burden. In addition to melanoma-associated mutations such as BRAF, NRAS, PTEN and cell cycle regulators, the expansion of melanoma is affected by the extracellular matrix surrounding the tumor together with immune cells. In the early phases of the disease, hyaluronan is the major matrix component in cutaneous melanoma microenvironment. It is a high-molecular weight polysaccharide involved in several physiological and pathological processes. Hyaluronan is involved in the inflammatory reactions associated with UV radiation but its role in melanomagenesis is still unclear. Although abundant hyaluronan surrounds epidermal and dermal cells in normal skin and benign nevi, its content is further elevated in dysplastic lesions and local tumors. At this stage hyaluronan matrix may act as a protective barrier against melanoma progression, or alternatively against immune cell attack. While in advanced melanoma, the content of hyaluronan decreases due to altered synthesis and degradation, and this correlates with poor prognosis. This review focuses on hyaluronan matrix in cutaneous melanoma and how the changes in hyaluronan metabolism affect the progression of melanoma.

Adjuvant treatment of high-risk melanoma - cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment options for BRAF 600 mutated tumors

INTRODUCTION

Until recently, adjuvant treatment options for higher stage resectable cutaneous melanoma were limited. Two studies with a similar set-up, published 2017, led to registration of targeted therapy for BRAF-mutated melanoma with dabrafenib and trametinib as well as of the immunotherapy with nivolumab irrespective of BRAF-mutation status. Both options have been positively assessed in Germany since 2019 for the adjuvant treatment of BRAF-V600 mutated melanoma. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of both treatment alternatives (dabrafenib/trametinib and nivolumab) against observation as a comparative therapy from the perspective of German statutory health funds.

METHODS

Partitioned survival analysis based on published survival curves for the investigated treatment options was used for a cohort model for the health states relapse free survival, progression, and death. The partitioned survival analysis approach was based on the survival curves published for the key studies Combi AD and Checkmate-238. The modelling was performed for the remaining lifetime for a cohort with starting age of 50 years. For extrapolation of the survival curves, convergence to general population mortality rates was assumed in the long term. Within the progression state, a Markov model uses three levels of progressions (locoregional, distant metastases with 1st and 2nd line treatment). Lifetime treatment costs were calculated using the German statutory health fund reimbursement scheme. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) associated to the health states were adopted from previously published utilities based on the Combi AD study.

RESULTS

The treatment with dabrafenib/trametinib yielded an increase in quality adjusted life years of 2.28 QALY at an incremental lifetime cost of 86.1 T€. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio of dabrafenib/trametinib and nivolumab was comparable with 37.8 T€/QALY and 30.0 T€/QALY, respectively. Several sensitivity analyses proved the result to be insensitive. General model parameters like discount rate and length of the time horizon had stronger influence. For nivolumab, the model showed lower discounted lifetime costs (118.1 T€) compared to dabrafenib/trametinib [155.1 T€], associated with a lower gain in QALYs (1.64 years) compared to observation.

CONCLUSION

Both dabrafenib/trametinib and nivolumab turned out to be cost effective within internationally accepted Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) thresholds with comparable cost effectiveness ratios.

Immunotherapy for Melanoma

Melanoma is the leading cause of death from skin cancer and is responsible for over 7000 deaths in the USA each year alone. For many decades, limited treatment options were available for patients with metastatic melanoma; however, over the last decade, a new era in treatment dawned for oncologists and their patients. Targeted therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors represents an important cornerstone in the treatment of metastatic melanoma; however, this chapter carefully reviews the past and current therapy options available, with a significant focus on immunotherapy-based approaches. In addition, we provide an overview of the results of recent advances in the adjuvant setting for patients with resected stage III and stage IV melanoma, as well as in patients with melanoma brain metastases. Finally, we provide a brief overview of the current research efforts in the field of immuno-oncology for melanoma.

Monoclonal Antibodies to CTLA-4 with Focus on Ipilimumab

The immune checkpoint cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4 or CD152) is a negative regulator of T-cell-mediated immune responses which plays a critical role in suppressing autoimmunity and maintaining immune homeostasis. Because of its inhibitory activity on T cells, CTLA-4 has been investigated as a drug target to induce immunostimulation, blocking the interaction with its ligands. The antitumor effects mediated by CTLA-4 blockade have been attributed to a sustained active immune response against cancer cells, due to the release of a brake on T cell activation. Ipilimumab (Yervoy, Bristol-Myers Squibb) is a fully human anti-CTLA-4 IgG1κ monoclonal antibody (mAb) that represents the first immune checkpoint inhibitor approved as monotherapy by FDA and EMA in 2011 for the treatment of unresectable/metastatic melanoma. In 2015, FDA also granted approval to ipilimumab monotherapy as adjuvant treatment of stage III melanoma to reduce the risk of tumour recurrence. The subsequent approved indications of ipilimumab for metastatic melanoma, regardless of BRAF mutational status, and other advanced/metastatic solid tumours always involve its use in association with the anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) mAb nivolumab. Currently, ipilimumab is evaluated in ongoing clinical trials for refractory/advanced solid tumours mainly in combination with additional immunostimulating agents.