Phase III Randomized Study of 4 Weeks of High-Dose Interferon-α-2b in Stage T2bNO, T3a-bNO, T4a-bNO, and T1-4N1a-2a (microscopic) Melanoma: A Trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cancer Research Group (E1697)

Systemic Therapy for Melanoma: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

The updated review identified 21 additional randomized trials.

UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS

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

Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, version 3.0

Since the first approval for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma more than a decade ago, immunotherapy has completely transformed the treatment landscape of this chemotherapy-resistant disease. Combination regimens including ICIs directed against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) with anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) agents or, more recently, anti-lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) agents, have gained regulatory approvals for the treatment of metastatic cutaneous melanoma, with long-term follow-up data suggesting the possibility of cure for some patients with advanced disease. In the resectable setting, adjuvant ICIs prolong recurrence-free survival, and neoadjuvant strategies are an active area of investigation. Other immunotherapy strategies, such as oncolytic virotherapy for injectable cutaneous melanoma and bispecific T-cell engager therapy for HLA-A*02:01 genotype-positive uveal melanoma, are also available to patients. Despite the remarkable efficacy of these regimens for many patients with cutaneous melanoma, traditional immunotherapy biomarkers (ie, programmed death-ligand 1 expression, tumor mutational burden, T-cell infiltrate and/or microsatellite stability) have failed to reliably predict response. Furthermore, ICIs are associated with unique toxicity profiles, particularly for the highly active combination of anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 agents. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to develop this clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, including rare subtypes of the disease (eg, uveal, mucosal), with the goal of improving patient care by providing guidance to the oncology community. Drawing from published data and clinical experience, the Expert Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for healthcare professionals using immunotherapy to treat melanoma, with topics including therapy selection in the advanced and perioperative settings, intratumoral immunotherapy, when to use immunotherapy for patients with BRAFV600-mutated disease, management of patients with brain metastases, evaluation of treatment response, special patient populations, patient education, quality of life, and survivorship, among others.

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.

Comparison of efficacy and tolerability of adjuvant therapy for resected high-risk stage III-IV cutaneous melanoma: a systemic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

Background

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted therapies have been widely used as adjuvant treatment for resected melanoma, the optimal therapy remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted this updated network meta-analysis (NMA) to assess the efficacy and tolerability of adjuvant therapies for cutaneous melanoma.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Web of Science were systematically searched for relevant literatures published in the last 30 years. Disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and serious adverse events were considered as the efficacy and tolerability outcomes.

Results

In all, 27 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 16,709 stage III-IV melanoma patients were enrolled in this NMA. For BRAF wild-type melanoma, our analysis showed that both nivolumab and pembrolizumab demonstrated significantly better DFS and tolerability than ipilimumab (10 mg/kg). Nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab (3 mg/kg), and ipilimumab (10 mg/kg) all appeared to be effective in prolonging OS, but no therapy demonstrated significantly better OS than ipilimumab (10 mg/kg). Nivolumab + ipilimumab showed the best DFS, but did not appear to be effective in improving OS and ranked only seventh in tolerability. Vaccines and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor therapies were well tolerated, but all failed to improve the DFS or OS in stage III melanoma patients. In terms of BRAF mutation-positive melanoma, ICIs (nivolumab + ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab; 10 mg/kg) exhibited comparable efficacy to dabrafenib + trametinib, and all these therapies showed significantly better DFS than placebo.

Conclusion

Considering efficacy and tolerability, nivolumab and pembrolizumab seem to be preferable adjuvant therapies for patients with stage III-IV melanoma. For BRAF mutation-positive patients, more RCTs are still required to determine which is better between ICIs and targeted therapy.

Adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected high-risk stage II melanoma: Health-related quality of life from the randomized phase 3 KEYNOTE-716 study

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant pembrolizumab significantly improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) versus placebo in resected stage IIB and IIC melanoma in the phase 3 KEYNOTE-716 study. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) results are reported.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg (2 mg/kg, patients ≥12 to <18 years) Q3W or placebo for ≤17 cycles or until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal. Change from baseline in EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/quality of life (QoL) was a prespecified exploratory end point. Change in EORTC QLQ-C30 functioning, symptom, and single-item scales, and EQ-5D-5L visual analog scale (VAS) were also summarized. Primary analyses were performed at week 48 to ensure adequate completion/compliance. The HRQoL population comprised patients who received ≥1 dose of treatment and completed ≥1 assessment.

RESULTS

The HRQoL population included 969 patients (pembrolizumab, n = 483; placebo, n = 486). Compliance at week 48 was ≥80% for both instruments. EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL, physical functioning, role functioning, and EQ-5D-5L VAS scores were stable from baseline to week 48 in both arms, with no clinically meaningful decline observed. Scores did not differ significantly between pembrolizumab and placebo. EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QoL, physical functioning, role functioning, and EQ-5D-5L VAS scores remained stable through week 96 in both arms.

CONCLUSIONS

HRQoL was stable with adjuvant pembrolizumab, with no clinically meaningful decline observed. Change from baseline in HRQoL was similar between arms. These results, in conjunction with the improved RFS and manageable safety previously reported, support the use of adjuvant pembrolizumab for high-risk stage II melanoma.

Adjuvant Therapy for Cutaneous Melanoma

This article presents the current data supporting adjuvant therapy for patients with cutaneous melanoma. With the recent development of novel immunotherapy agents as well as targeted therapy, there are strong data to support the use of these therapies in patients at high risk of developing recurrent or metastatic disease.

Interferon-α1b for the treatment of metastatic melanoma: results of a retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

Recombinant human interferon-α1b (IFN-α1b) is the first genetic engineered drug of China and is approved for cancer treatment by Chinese Food and Drug Administration. Although recombinant IFN-α1b is biologically and therapeutically active, its long-term efficacy against advanced melanoma is unknown.

METHODS

Ninety patients who were diagnosed with stage IV melanoma and received recombinant IFN-α1b therapy in our department were included in this study. The safety and efficacy of IFN-α1b were analyzed.

RESULTS

IFN-α1b was overall well tolerated, with only 7.8% of the patients showing grade 3 toxicity and none with grade 4 toxicity or treatment-related death. The most common adverse effect was fever (78.9%). Furthermore, increasing the drug dosage showed no increase in the incidence of adverse events. The median overall survival (mOS) of the cohort was 14.1 months (95% confidence interval, 11.3-16.9 months). There was no significant difference of the mOS between samples of various primary sites. In the 42 patients who had not received prior adjuvant interferon therapy, the objective response rate, disease control rate and clinical benefit rate were 7.1, 28.5 and 21.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that systemic IFN-α1b treatment is a relatively safe therapy and could prolong the survival of patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma.

Pulmonary metastasectomy in the era of targeted therapy and immunotherapy

Metastatic melanoma is a fatal malignancy with a high mortality and morbidity. Since the early 1970s, available medical therapies were limited in improving survival. Surgery represented the best chance for a cure. However, surgery could only be offered to selected patients. The current landscape of treatment has radically evolved since the introduction of targeted and immunotherapies including BRAF and MEK inhibitors, and checkpoint blockers, like PD-1 and CTLA-4 antibodies. These new therapies have seen survival rates matching, and in some cases surpassing, that of surgery. Anti-PD1 and CTLA-4 combination treatments are associated with severe side effects and BRAF and MEK inhibitor combinations may trigger initial tumour responses but prolonged use have resulted in the development of resistant tumour clones and disease relapse. This review examines the role of pulmonary metastasectomy for lung metastasis from malignant melanoma in the current landscape of effective targeted therapy and immunotherapy.

State of Melanoma: An Historic Overview of a Field in Transition

The management of melanoma significantly improved within the last 25 years. Chemotherapy was the first approved systemic therapeutic approach and resulted in a median overall of survival less than 1 year, without survival improvement in phase III trials. High-dose interferon α2b and IL-2 were introduced for resectable high-risk and advanced disease, respectively, resulting in improved survival and response rates. The anti-CTLA4 and anti-programmed death 1 monoclonal antibodies along with BRAF/MEK targeted therapies are the dominant therapeutic classes of agent for melanoma. This article provides an historic overview of the evolution of melanoma management.

Adjuvant Therapy of Melanoma

as adjuvant therapy for high-risk melanoma was extensively studied in regimens that varied by dosage, route of administration, formulation, and therapy duration. The high-dose regimen (HDI) showed significant improvements in relapse-free survival (RFS) in 3 trials and overall survival (OS) in 2. Ipilimumab at 3 mg/kg demonstrated significant OS benefits compared with HDI and less toxicity compared with ipilimumab at 10 mg/kg. More recently, the standard of care has changed in favor of nivolumab and pembrolizumab and BRAF-MEK inhibitors dabrafenib plus trametinib (for BRAF mutated melanoma), based on significant RFS benefits and more favorable toxicity profiles.

Comparative efficacy and safety of adjuvant nivolumab versus other treatments in adults with resected melanoma: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies are approved for adjuvant treatment of patients with resected melanoma; however, they have not been compared in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We compared the efficacy and safety of adjuvant nivolumab with other approved treatments using available evidence from RCTs in a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods

A systematic literature review was conducted through May 2019 to identify relevant RCTs evaluating approved adjuvant treatments. Outcomes of interest included recurrence-free survival (RFS)/disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), all-cause grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs), discontinuations, and discontinuations due to AEs. Time-to-event outcomes (RFS/DFS and DMFS) were analyzed both assuming that hazard ratios (HRs) are constant over time and that they vary.

Results

Of 26 identified RCTs, 19 were included in the NMA following a feasibility assessment. Based on HRs for RFS/DFS, the risk of recurrence with nivolumab was similar to that of pembrolizumab and lower than that of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, ipilimumab 10 mg/kg, or interferon. Risk of recurrence with nivolumab was similar to that of dabrafenib plus trametinib at 12 months, however, was lower beyond 12 months (HR [95% credible interval] at 24 months, 0.46 [0.27–0.78]; at 36 months, 0.28 [0.14–0.59]). Based on HRs for DMFS, the risk of developing distant metastases was lower with nivolumab than with ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or interferon and was similar to dabrafenib plus trametinib.

Conclusion

Adjuvant therapy with nivolumab provides an effective treatment option with a promising risk–benefit profile.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s12885-020-07538-1.

Systemic Therapy for Melanoma: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

ASCO convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the literature.

RESULTS

A systematic review, one meta-analysis, and 34 additional randomized trials were identified. The published studies included a wide range of systemic therapies in cutaneous and noncutaneous melanoma.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In the adjuvant setting, nivolumab or pembrolizumab should be offered to patients with resected stage IIIA/B/C/D BRAF wild-type cutaneous melanoma, while either of those two agents or the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib should be offered in BRAF-mutant disease. No recommendation could be made for or against the use of neoadjuvant therapy in cutaneous melanoma. In the unresectable/metastatic setting, ipilimumab plus nivolumab, nivolumab alone, or pembrolizumab alone should be offered to patients with BRAF wild-type cutaneous melanoma, while those three regimens or combination BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy with dabrafenib/trametinib, encorafenib/binimetinib, or vemurafenib/cobimetinib should be offered in BRAF-mutant disease. Patients with mucosal melanoma may be offered the same therapies recommended for cutaneous melanoma. No recommendation could be made for or against specific therapy for uveal melanoma. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/melanoma-guidelines.

Systemic adjuvant therapy for adult patients at high risk for recurrent melanoma: A systematic review

Cutaneous melanoma is typically treated with wide local excision and, when appropriate, a sentinel node biopsy. Many patients are cured with this approach but for patients who have cancers with high risk features there is a significant risk of local and distant relapse and death. Interferon-based adjuvant therapy was recommended in the past but had modest results with significant toxicity. Recently, new therapies (immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies) have been found to be effective in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma and many of these therapies have been evaluated and found to be effective in the adjuvant treatment of high risk patients with melanoma. This systematic review of adjuvant therapies for cutaneous and mucosal melanoma was conducted for Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) as the basis of a clinical practice guideline to address the question of whether patients with completely resected melanoma should be considered for adjuvant systemic therapy and which adjuvant therapy should be used.

The extent of surgery for stage III melanoma: how much is appropriate?

Since the first documented lymph node dissection in 1892, many trials have investigated the potential effect of this surgical procedure on survival in patients with melanoma. Two randomised controlled trials were unable to demonstrate improved survival with completion lymph node dissection versus nodal observation in patients with sentinel node-positive disease, although patients with larger sentinel node metastases (>1 mm) might benefit more from observation than from dissection, and could potentially be considered for adjuvant systemic therapy instead of complete dissection. Adjuvant immunotherapy with high-dose ipilimumab has led to improvements in overall survival, whereas therapy with nivolumab and pembrolizumab has improved relapse-free survival with greater safety. Furthermore, adjuvant-targeted therapy with dabrafenib and trametinib has improved survival outcomes in BRAF^V600E and BRAF^V600K-mutated melanomas. Three neoadjuvant trials have all shown high response rates, including complete responses, after short-term combination therapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab with no recurrences so far, although follow-up is still short. Despite the absence of a survival benefit with completion lymph node dissection in patients with sentinel node-positive or negative disease, the use of sentinel node staging will increase because of the introduction of effective adjuvant therapies. However, routine completion lymph node dissection for sentinel node-positive disease should be reconsidered. Accordingly, existing clinical guidelines are currently being revised. For palpable (macroscopic) nodal disease, the type and extent of surgery could be reduced if the index node can accurately predict the response and if studies show that lymph node dissection can be safely foregone in patients with a complete response. Overall, the appropriate type and extent of surgery for stage III melanoma is changing and becoming more personalised.

Modelling Survival of Patients Treated with Adjuvant Nivolumab Who Have Melanoma with Lymph Node Involvement or Metastatic Disease After Complete Resection

INTRODUCTION

Nivolumab demonstrated significant recurrence-free survival (RFS) gains versus ipilimumab in the CheckMate-238 trial, whereas the CA184-029 trial showed superior RFS gains for ipilimumab versus placebo. No head-to-head trial data were available to compare the efficacy of nivolumab to that of observation, so indirect treatment comparisons were required. Additionally, overall survival (OS) data were not available from CheckMate-238, and the clinical pathway for melanoma has changed significantly over the last decade. Four modelling options were developed using different methods and evidence sources to estimate OS and the impact of nivolumab on predicted life-years in the adjuvant setting; however, this article focuses on two primary methods.

METHODS

RFS for nivolumab and observation were informed by a patient-level data meta-regression. The first model was a partitioned survival model, where the parametric OS curve for observation was derived from CA184-029 and nivolumab OS was based on a surrogacy relationship between RFS and OS specific to adjuvant melanoma. The other option used a state-transition model to estimate post-recurrence survival using different data sources.

RESULTS

The modelling options estimated different OS for both nivolumab and observation but demonstrated at least a 32% increase in life-years gained for nivolumab versus observation.

CONCLUSION

This analysis demonstrated the difficulties in modelling within the adjuvant setting. Each model produced different survival projections, showing the need to explore different techniques to address the extent of uncertainty. This also highlighted the importance of understanding the impact of RFS in the long term in a setting where the aim of treatment is to remain disease free.

Melanoma suppression by quercein is correlated with RIG-I and type I interferon signaling

Melanoma is a life-threatening cancer with limited treatments. Retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIG-I) is a cytosolic pattern recognition receptor (PRR) crucial to RNA virus sensing, interferon production, and tumor suppression. Quercetin, a natural flavonoid, has particularly therapeutic interests to prevent and treat cancer, for its pharmacological effects against oxidant, inflammation, and angiogenesis. Quercetin was investigated for its anti-melanoma activity and potential mechanisms in this study. We found that quercetin inhibited mouse melanoma growth in vivo, and suppressed proliferation and promoted apoptosis of both B16 and A375 cells in vitro. Quercetin upregulated IFN-α and IFN-β expression through activating RIG-I promoter in B16 cells. The induction of IFN-α and IFN-β, which could be severely impaired by silencing RIG-I induced interferon stimulated genes (ISGs). Moreover, RIG-I likely amplifies antitumor effects by activating signal transduction and activator of transcription 1 (STAT1) in the IFN-JAK-STAT pathway in an autocrine and paracrine manner. Our study provided novel insights regarding biological and anti-proliferative activities of quercetin against melanoma, and we identified RIG-I as a potential target in anti-tumor therapies.

Patient Experience Captured by Quality-of-Life Measurement in Oncology Clinical Trials

IMPORTANCE

Quality of life (QoL) is an important consideration in cancer medicine, especially because drugs are becoming more costly and may only result in modest gains in overall survival. However, there has been no descriptive analysis for the points at which QoL is measured in cancer trials.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence of studies that measure QoL at different points and see how many studies measure QoL for the entirety of a patient's life.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional analysis includes all articles on oncology clinical trials in the 3 highest-impact oncology journals, published between July 2015 and June 2018, that reported QoL outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Data were abstracted on when QoL was assessed and the characteristics of these studies.

RESULTS

For all 149 studies that met inclusion criteria, QoL assessment was high during treatment (104 articles [69.8%]), during follow-up (81 articles [54.4%]), and after the end of the intervention (68 articles [45.6%]). In 5 of the 149 studies (3.4%), QoL was assessed until death, including in only 1 of the 74 studies on metastatic or incurable cancers. Among these 5 studies, only 1 (20%) used a drug intervention, 1 (20%) used a behavioral intervention, and 2 (40%) used a radiation intervention; only 1 of 5 was in the metastatic setting. The number of studies that reported a positive QoL outcome (ie, QoL outcome was more favorable in the intervention group than in the control group) was between 42 of 81 articles (51.9%) and 16 of 28 articles (57.1%) for most QoL assessment points but only 1 of 5 articles (20%) for studies measuring QoL until death.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that most clinical trials assessed QoL during the treatment or intervention and often during a given amount of follow-up but infrequently assessed QoL on disease progression and rarely followed QoL until the end of the patient's life. Most studies reporting QoL until the end of life reported worse QoL outcomes for the intervention group than the control group. Future research and policy recommendations should consider not just short-term QoL outcomes but QoL outcomes throughout the patient's cancer care.

The underreporting of phase III chemo-therapeutic clinical trial data of older patients with cancer: A systematic review

PURPOSE

Inspired by the American Society of Clinical Oncology's recommendations to strengthen the evidence base for older adults with cancer, the purpose of this systematic review is to identify the reporting of treatment efficacy and adverse events specific to older adults with cancer in Phase III chemo-therapeutic clinical trials. This review also investigates the frequency with which these data points were reported in the literature to identify gaps in reporting and opportunities to expand the knowledge base on clinical outcomes for older adults with cancer.

METHODS

Chemo-therapeutic clinical trial data published from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017 was reviewed. Manuscripts (n = 929) were identified based on keyword searches of EMBASE and PubMed. After removal of duplicates (n = 116) and articles that did not meet this study's inclusion criteria (n = 654), 159 articles were identified for review.

RESULTS

Reviewed papers were published in 36 different scientific journals and included twenty-five different cancer types. Of the 159 articles, 117 (73.6%) reported age-specific medians and 75 (47.2%) included stratifications of data by age. Treatment efficacy was reported in 96.2% of the articles with 39.9% reporting effectiveness of treatment by age. Reporting of adverse events was included in 84.9% of the articles with only 8.9% reporting these events stratified by age.

CONCLUSION

Results suggest inadequate reporting of treatment efficacy and adverse events as well as basic descriptive statistics about the age distribution of study subjects. Conscious efforts are needed to address these deficiencies at every level of planning and conducting clinical trials as wells as reporting outcomes stratified by age. Ultimately, standardized reporting could lead to improved treatment decisions and outcomes for older adults with cancer.

Considering adjuvant therapy for stage II melanoma

Melanoma is among the few cancers that demonstrate an increasing incidence over time. Simultaneously, this trend has been marked by an epidemiologic shift to earlier stage at diagnosis. Before 2011, treatment options were limited for patients with metastatic disease, and the median overall survival was less than 1 year. Since then, the field of melanoma therapeutics has undergone major changes. The use of anti–CTLA‐4 and anti‐PD1 immune checkpoint inhibitors and combination BRAF/MEK inhibitors for patients with BRAF V600 mutations has significantly extended survival and allowed some patients to remain in durable disease remission off therapy. It has now been confirmed that these classes of agents have a benefit for patients with stage III melanoma after surgical resection, and anti‐PD1 and BRAF/MEK inhibitors are standards of care in this setting. Some patients with stage II disease (lymph node‐negative; American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IIB and IIC) have worse melanoma‐specific survival relative to some patients with stage III disease. Given these results, expanding the population of patients who are considered for adjuvant therapy to include those with stage II melanoma has become a priority, and randomized phase 3 clinical trials are underway. Moving into the future, the validation of patient risk‐stratification and treatment‐benefit prediction models will be important to improve the number needed to treat and limit exposure to toxicity in the large population of patients with early stage melanoma.

Adjuvant therapy has improved outcomes in patients with stage III melanoma and is being explored in those with stage II melanoma. Stage III data as well as risk‐stratification tools and clinical considerations for the lymph node‐negative population are reviewed.

Comparative efficacy and safety of dabrafenib in combination with trametinib versus competing adjuvant therapies for high-risk melanoma

Aim To conduct a systematic literature review of high-risk resectable cutaneous melanoma adjuvant therapeutics and compare safety and efficacy. Methods: The systematic literature review included randomized controlled trials investigating: dabrafenib plus trametinib (DAB + TRAM), nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, vemurafenib, chemotherapy and interferons. Outcomes included overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival and safety. All outcomes were synthesized using Bayesian network meta-analysis. Results: Across relapse-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival and OS, DAB + TRAM had the lowest estimated hazards of respective events relative to all other treatments (exception relative to nivolumab in OS). Differences were significant relative to placebo, chemotherapy, interferons and ipilimumab. Conclusion: DAB + TRAM has improved efficacy over historical treatment options (ipilimumab, interferons and chemotherapy) and comparable efficacy with other targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Survival Comparison between Melanoma Patients Treated with Patient-Specific Dendritic Cell Vaccines and Other Immunotherapies Based on Extent of Disease at the Time of Treatment

Encouraging survival was observed in single arm and randomized phase 2 trials of patient-specific dendritic cell vaccines presenting autologous tumor antigens from autologous cancer cells that were derived from surgically resected metastases whose cells were self-renewing in vitro. Based on most advanced clinical stage and extent of tumor at the time of treatment, survival was best in patients classified as recurrent stage 3 without measurable disease. Next best was in stage 4 without measurable disease, and the worst survival was for measurable stage 4 disease. In this study, the survival of these patients was compared to the best contemporary controls that were gleaned from the clinical trial literature. The most comparable controls typically were from clinical trials testing other immunotherapy approaches. Even though contemporary controls typically had better prognostic features, median and/or long-term survival was consistently better in patients treated with this dendritic cell vaccine, except when compared to anti-programmed death molecule 1 (anti-PD-1). The clinical benefit of this patient-specific vaccine appears superior to a number of other immunotherapy approaches, but it is more complex to deliver than anti-PD-1 while equally effective. However, there is a strong rationale for combining such a product with anti-PD-1 in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma.

Adjuvant therapy versus watch-and-wait post surgery for stage III melanoma: a multicountry retrospective chart review

AIM

To describe treatment patterns among patients with stage III melanoma who underwent surgical excision in years 2011-2016, and assess outcomes among patients who subsequently received systemic adjuvant therapy versus watch-and-wait.

METHODS

Chart review of 380 patients from 17 melanoma centers in North America, South America and Europe.

RESULTS

Of 129 (34%) patients treated with adjuvant therapy, 85% received interferon α-2b and 56% discontinued treatment (mostly due to adverse events). Relapse-free survival was significantly longer for patients treated with adjuvant therapy versus watch-and-wait (hazard ratio = 0.63; p < 0.05). There was considerable heterogeneity in adjuvant treatment schedules and doses. Similar results were found in patients who received interferon-based adjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant therapies with better safety/efficacy profiles will improve clinical outcomes in patients with stage III melanoma.

Clinicopathologic features correlated with paradoxical outcomes in stage IIC versus IIIA melanoma patients

Under current AJCC staging criteria, stage IIC patients paradoxically have worse outcomes than IIIA patients despite the lack of nodal metastatic disease. This study sought to identify additional clinicopathologic characteristics correlated with worse patient outcomes. Retrospective chart review of stage IIC and IIIA melanoma patients were evaluated between 1995 and 2011 with clinical follow-up through 2015. Records were reviewed for demographics, clinical characteristics, and tumor pathology. Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon's rank-sum test were used to assess group differences. Clinicopathologic features were evaluated relative to overall survival (OS), time to distant metastases, and local/regional recurrence. Overall, 128 patients were included (45 stage IIC and 83 stage IIIA) with a median follow-up time of 5.7 years. Compared with stage IIIA patients, stage IIC patients were older, and their melanomas were more likely to be nodular, amelanotic, thicker, have higher mitotic rate, tumor lymphocytic infiltrate, no radial growth phase, and less likely to have associated precursor lesions. Stage IIC patients had shorter OS and time to distant metastases; multivariate regression revealed that older age (>55 years) and mitotic rate (>5 mitoses/mm) were independent predictors of OS. Melanomas in stage IIC disease may be biologically distinct from those that are seen in stage IIIA. While sentinel node biopsies remain the standard-of-care, these results suggest that clinicians may want to assess the clinicopathologic characteristics described above to aggressively counsel, screen for distant disease, and consider adjuvant therapy, in particular for older patients and higher mitotic rates in thicker primary tumors, regardless of nodal status.

Association of Industry and Academic Sponsorship With Negative Phase 3 Oncology Trials and Reported Outcomes on Participant Survival: A Pooled Analysis

Importance

Only 3.4% of cancer drugs evaluated in phase 1 trials are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, with most failing in phase 3 trials.

Objective

To investigate whether an association exists between the sponsorship and conduct of a negative phase 3 randomized clinical trial (RCT) investigating a cancer drug that lacked supporting phase 2 trial evidence for that drug, and to evaluate the association with overall survival among patients randomized to the experimental arm of such phase 3 trials.

Data Sources

Articles in the Lancet, Lancet Oncology, JAMA, JAMA Oncology, and Journal of Clinical Oncology published between January 2016 and June 2018 were searched.

Study Selection

Phase 3 RCTs of cancer drugs that failed to improve the primary end point were selected and any prior phase 2 trial of the same drug that supported the phase 3 trial was selected without any date or journal restrictions.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Percentages of negative phase 3 RCTs of cancer drugs that lacked any phase 2 evidence, had a negative phase 2 trial, or had a positive phase 2 study were extracted. Associations were assessed using the Fisher exact test. Pooled hazard ratios and 95% CIs for the overall survival of patients enrolled in these negative phase 3 RCTs were estimated using a random-effects model.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Negative phase 3 RCTs with a lack of a phase 2 trial or the presence of a negative phase 2 trial and overall survival of enrolled patients in the phase 3 RCTs.

Results

In this meta-epidemiological study, 67 negative phase 3 RCTs on cancer drugs, which included 64 600 patients, met the criteria of being sponsored by industry or academic groups, of which 42 RCTs (63%) were industry sponsored and the remaining 25 RCTs (37%) were academic. A phase 2 trial was not available for 28 of these trials (42%). Of 29 trials (43%) with a phase 2 trial available, 8 trials (28%) failed to meet their primary end points and 5 of those were industry sponsored. There was no association with overall survival for patients participating in these negative phase 3 RCTs (pooled hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96-1.02). When the pooled analysis was limited to the 27 RCTs with a hazard ratio above 1.00, the overall pooled hazard ratio for overall survival was 1.11 (95% CI, 1.06-1.16). No association between having a negative or undefined phase 2 trial and trial sponsorship was found using the Fisher exact test.

Conclusions and Relevance

More than 40% of the negative phase 3 RCTs in oncology published in these 5 journals were conducted without a supporting phase 2 trial and were sponsored by both academia and industry. Running such trials not only may risk loss of resources owing to a failed trial but also may be associated with decreased patient survival. Further research and regulations in this area appear warranted.

Update on adjuvant melanoma therapy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review the results from relevant clinical trials and discuss current strategies in the melanoma adjuvant setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

The favorable therapeutic efficacy and the significant less toxicity of nivolumab compared with ipilimumab, fully substitutes today's approval of ipilimumab, regardless mutation status, whereas in BRAF-mutated patients, dabrafenib and trametinib seem to confirm their high efficacy also in adjuvant setting. The use of interferon is restricted to patients with ulcerated melanoma and countries with no access to the new drugs.

SUMMARY

Systemic adjuvant treatment after complete disease resection in high-risk melanoma patients aims to increase relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). According to the eighth edition of melanoma classification of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC), the prognosis in stage III patients is heterogeneous and depends not only on N (nodal) but also on T (tumor thickness) category criteria. Recent data from randomized, phase-3 clinical trials analyzing the use of adjuvant anti-programmed death-1 and targeted therapies ultimately affect the standard of care and change the landscape of the adjuvant treatment.

Quality of life measurement in skin cancer patients: literature review and position paper of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes, Melanoma and Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer

The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Forces (TFs) on Quality of Life (QoL) and Patient Oriented Outcomes, Melanoma and Non-Melanoma Skin Cancer (NMSC) present a review of the literature and position statement on health-related (HR) QoL assessment in skin cancer patients. A literature search was carried out to identify publications since 1980 that included information about the impact of SC on QoL. Generic, dermatology-specific, cancer-specific, SC-specific, facial SC-specific, NMSC-specific, basal cell carcinoma-specific and melanoma-specific QoL questionnaires have been used to assess HRQoL in SC patients. HRQoL was assessed in the context of creation and validation of the HRQoL instruments, clinical trials, comparison of QoL in SC and other cancers, other diseases or controls, HRQoL assessment after treatment, comorbidities, behaviour modification, predictors of QoL and survival, supportive care needs, coping strategies and fear of cancer recurrence. The most widely used instruments for HRQoL assessment in SC patients are the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M), Skin Cancer Index (SCI), Short Form 36 Item Health Survey (SF-36) and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). The TFs recommend the use of the cancer-specific EORTC QLQ-C30, especially in late stages of disease, and the melanoma-specific FACT-M and SC-specific SCI questionnaires. These instruments have been well validated and used in several studies. Other HRQoL instruments, also with good basic validation, are not currently recommended because the experience of their use is too limited. Dermatology-specific HRQoL instruments can be used to assess the impact of skin-related problems in SC. The TFs encourage further studies to validate HRQoL instruments for use in different stages of SC, in order to allow more detailed practical recommendations on HRQoL assessment in SC.

Interferon-α versus interleukin-2 in Chinese patients with malignant melanoma: a randomized, controlled, trial

The US Food and Drug Association has approved interferon-α (IFN-α) and interleukin-2 (IL-2) as adjuvant therapy in malignant melanoma. The objective of the study was to compare efficacy and safety of subcutaneous interferon-α with continuous intravenous IL-2 in Chinese patients with malignant melanoma. A total of 250 patients with unresectable malignant melanoma were subjected to randomized in 1 : 1 ratio. Patients received subcutaneous 9×10 IU/m IFN-α (IFN-α group, n=125) or continuous intravenous 9×10 IU/m IL-2 (IL-2 group, n=125) at every 21 days for 4 months. The response, progression-free survival, overall survival, adverse effects, and cost were evaluated by experts in the field. IL-2 and IFN-α were effective in improvement of malignant melanoma after 4 months of intervention. IL-2 was effective in improving brain metastasis. Patients of the IL-2 group had a higher overall survival (P<0.0001) and a higher progression-free survival (P=0.002) than those of IFN-α group. The IL-2 group reported hypotension, kidney dysfunction, liver dysfunctions, flu-like symptoms, and capillary leak syndrome as adverse effects. IFN-α group reported thrombocytopenia and neutropenia as adverse effects. Healthcare management and expert charges lead to increase in the cost of treatment for IL-2 group patients than IFN-α group (P<0.0001). Continuous intravenous IL-2 should be recommended in relapse-free Chinese patients with malignant melanoma. Level of Evidence: I.

Perspectives in melanoma: Meeting report from the Melanoma Bridge (30 November-2 December, 2017, Naples, Italy)

Metastatic melanoma represents a challenging clinical situation and, until relatively recently, there was an absence of effective treatment options. However, in 2011, the advanced melanoma treatment landscape was revolutionised with the approval of the anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein-4 checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab and the selective BRAF kinase inhibitor vemurafenib, both of which significantly improved overall survival. Since then, availability of new immunotherapies, especially the anti-programmed death-1 checkpoint inhibitors, as well as other targeted therapies, have further improved outcomes for patients with advanced melanoma. Seven years on from the first approval of these novel therapies, evidence for the use of various immune-based and targeted approaches is continuing to increase at a rapid rate. Improved understanding of the tumour microenvironment and tumour immuno-evasion strategies has resulted in different approaches to target and harness the immune response. These new immune-based approaches offer the opportunity for various approaches with distinct modes of action being used in combination with one another, as well as combined with other treatment modalities such as targeted therapy, electrochemotherapy and surgery. The increasing number of treatment options that are now available has resulted in a growing need to identify which patients will derive most benefit from which treatments. Much research is now focused on the identification of biomarkers that can be utilised to help select patients for treatment. These and other recent advances in the management of melanoma were the focus of discussions at the third Melanoma Bridge meeting (30 November-2 December, 2017, Naples, Italy), which is summarised in this report.

It is finally time for adjuvant therapy in melanoma

Although melanoma is amenable to early detection, there has been no decline in the mortality rate of this disease and the prognosis of patients with high-risk primary melanoma or with macroscopic nodal involvement remains poor. The best option for patients with higher-risk melanoma is to receive effective adjuvant therapy in order to reduce their chances of recurrence. Multiple systemic therapeutic agents have been tested as adjuvant therapy for melanoma with durable benefits seen only with interferon- to date. More recently ipilimumab at the high dose of 10 mg/kg has shown a significant improvement in terms of Relapse free survival and Overall survival for stage III melanoma patients but at a significant cost in terms of immune-related toxicities. More recently, novel treatment options have emerged. The results from the latest trials with immunotherapy (PD-1 inhibitors) and molecular targeted therapy (BRAF inhibitor + MEK inhibitor) have revolutionized the management of adjuvant treatment for melanoma. As the results from these trials will mature in the next years, a change in the landscape of adjuvant treatment for melanoma is expected, resulting in new challenges in treatment decisions such as optimizing patients' selection through predictive and prognostic biomarkers, and management of treatment related adverse events, in particular immune related toxicities.

An update on the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer consensus statement on tumor immunotherapy for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma: version 2.0

BACKGROUND

Cancer immunotherapy has been firmly established as a standard of care for patients with advanced and metastatic melanoma. Therapeutic outcomes in clinical trials have resulted in the approval of 11 new drugs and/or combination regimens for patients with melanoma. However, prospective data to support evidence-based clinical decisions with respect to the optimal schedule and sequencing of immunotherapy and targeted agents, how best to manage emerging toxicities and when to stop treatment are not yet available.

METHODS

To address this knowledge gap, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) Melanoma Task Force developed a process for consensus recommendations for physicians treating patients with melanoma integrating evidence-based data, where available, with best expert consensus opinion. The initial consensus statement was published in 2013, and version 2.0 of this report is an update based on a recent meeting of the Task Force and extensive subsequent discussions on new agents, contemporary peer-reviewed literature and emerging clinical data. The Academy of Medicine (formerly Institute of Medicine) clinical practice guidelines were used as a basis for consensus development with an updated literature search for important studies published between 1992 and 2017 and supplemented, as appropriate, by recommendations from Task Force participants.

RESULTS

The Task Force considered patients with stage II-IV melanoma and here provide consensus recommendations for how they would incorporate the many immunotherapy options into clinical pathways for patients with cutaneous melanoma.

CONCLUSION

These clinical guidleines provide physicians and healthcare providers with consensus recommendations for managing melanoma patients electing treatment with tumor immunotherapy.