1
|
Checkpoint Inhibitors Immunotherapy in Metastatic Melanoma: When to Stop Treatment? Biomedicines 2022; 10:biomedicines10102424. [PMID: 36289687 PMCID: PMC9599026 DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10102424] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2022] [Revised: 09/21/2022] [Accepted: 09/23/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) has significantly improved the survival of metastatic melanoma (MM) with a significant proportion of patients obtaining long-lasting responses. However, ICI also exposes patients to new, heavy, and sometimes irreversible toxicities. Thus, identifying the minimal amount of treatment time is extremely urgent. Methods: We researched English peer-reviewed literature from electronic databases (MEDLINE and PubMed) until July 2022 with the aim of evaluating the clinical outcomes after the cessation of ICI therapy due to elective study plans, clinician–patient sharing, and adverse events. Results: Although most of the data are from retrospective studies, considering that most patients with major responses maintain it after treatment cessation, it is proposed that for complete response (CR)/near CR, a further six months of therapy after best response may be considered enough. For partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD), treatment must be continued for at least 2 years and, in some cases, indefinitely, based on residual disease, the patient’s will, and the toxic profile. Of note, in spite of the best response, 25–30% of patients relapsed, and, when retreated, responded far less than in front-line treatment. Conclusions: Most of the data being from retrospective and heterogeneous experiences, their grade of evidence is limited and no consensus has been reached on the optimal treatment duration. Controlled prospective studies are needed.
Collapse
|
2
|
Mulder EEAP, de Joode K, Litière S, Ten Tije AJ, Suijkerbuijk KPM, Boers-Sonderen MJ, Hospers GAP, de Groot JWB, van den Eertwegh AJM, Aarts MJB, Piersma D, van Rijn RS, Kapiteijn E, Vreugdenhil G, van den Berkmortel FWPJ, Hoop EOD, Franken MG, Ryll B, Rutkowski P, Sleijfer S, Haanen JBAG, van der Veldt AAM. Early discontinuation of PD-1 blockade upon achieving a complete or partial response in patients with advanced melanoma: the multicentre prospective Safe Stop trial. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:323. [PMID: 33765967 PMCID: PMC7993897 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08018-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2020] [Accepted: 03/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The introduction of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blockers (i.e. nivolumab and pembrolizumab) has significantly improved the prognosis of patients with advanced melanoma. However, the long treatment duration (i.e. two years or longer) has a high impact on patients and healthcare systems in terms of (severe) toxicity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), resource use, and healthcare costs. While durable tumour responses have been observed and PD-1 blockade is discontinued on an individual basis, no consensus has been reached on the optimal treatment duration. The objective of the Safe Stop trial is to evaluate whether early discontinuation of first-line PD-1 blockade is safe in patients with advanced and metastatic melanoma who achieve a radiological response. Methods The Safe Stop trial is a nationwide, multicentre, prospective, single-arm, interventional study in the Netherlands. A total of 200 patients with advanced and metastatic cutaneous melanoma and a confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) v1.1 will be included to early discontinue first-line monotherapy with nivolumab or pembrolizumab. The primary objective is the rate of ongoing responses at 24 months after discontinuation of PD-1 blockade. Secondary objectives include best overall and duration of response, need and outcome of rechallenge with PD-1 blockade, and changes in (serious) adverse events and HRQoL. The impact of treatment discontinuation on healthcare resource use, productivity losses, and hours of informal care will also be assessed. Results will be compared to those from patients with CR or PR who completed 24 months of treatment with PD-1 blockade and had an ongoing response at treatment discontinuation. It is hypothesised that it is safe to early stop first-line nivolumab or pembrolizumab at confirmed tumour response while improving HRQoL and reducing costs. Discussion From a patient, healthcare, and economic perspective, shorter treatment duration is preferred and overtreatment should be prevented. If early discontinuation of first-line PD-1 blockade appears to be safe, early discontinuation of PD-1 blockade may be implemented as the standard of care in a selected group of patients. Trial registration The Safe Stop trial has been registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR), Trial NL7293 (old NTR ID: 7502), https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7293. Date of registration September 30, 2018.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E E A P Mulder
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - K de Joode
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S Litière
- European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), Brussels, Belgium
| | - A J Ten Tije
- Department of Internal Medicine, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - K P M Suijkerbuijk
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Utrecht Cancer Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M J Boers-Sonderen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - G A P Hospers
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - J W B de Groot
- Department of Medical Oncology, Isala Oncological Centre, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - A J M van den Eertwegh
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centre - location VU, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M J B Aarts
- Department of Medical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre +, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - D Piersma
- Department of Internal Medicine, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - R S van Rijn
- Department of Internal Medicine, Medical Centre Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
| | - E Kapiteijn
- Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - G Vreugdenhil
- Department of Internal Medicine, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, The Netherlands
| | | | - E Oomen-de Hoop
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M G Franken
- Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B Ryll
- Melanoma Patient Network Europe, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - P Rutkowski
- Department of Soft Tissue/Bone Sarcoma and Melanoma, Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
| | - S Sleijfer
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J B A G Haanen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - A A M van der Veldt
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. .,Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Tarhini A, Benedict A, McDermott D, Rao S, Ambavane A, Gupte-Singh K, Sabater J, Ritchings C, Aponte-Ribero V, Regan MM, Atkins M. Sequential treatment approaches in the management of BRAF wild-type advanced melanoma: a cost–effectiveness analysis. Immunotherapy 2018; 10:1241-1252. [DOI: 10.2217/imt-2018-0085] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate the cost–effectiveness of treatment sequences with checkpoint inhibitors in patients with BRAF wild-type melanoma. Materials & methods: Using a discrete event simulation model, cost and health outcomes were estimated. Pooled data from CheckMate 067/069 trials were used to calculate survival outcomes including treatment-free interval extrapolated over a patient's lifetime. Costs accounted for treatment, administration, toxicity, and disease management. Results: First-line anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4 initiating sequences had the highest estimated mean survival gain (7.6–7.7 years), driven by a longer estimated mean treatment-free interval (5.3 years). Incremental costs per incremental quality-adjusted life year gained for anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4 followed by chemotherapy were US$30,955 versus anti-PD-1 initiating sequences, within the willingness-to-pay threshold. Conclusion: Anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4 initiating sequences for BRAF wild-type melanoma are cost-effective versus anti-PD-1.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahmad Tarhini
- Department of Hematology & Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Taussig Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Agnes Benedict
- Modelling & Simulation (HEOR), Evidera, a wholly owned subsidiary of Pharmaceutical Product Development, LLC, Budapest, Hungary
| | - David McDermott
- Biologic Therapy & Cutaneous Oncology Program, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Sumati Rao
- Health Economics Outcomes Research, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA
| | - Apoorva Ambavane
- Modeling & Simulation, Evidera, a wholly owned subsidiary of Pharmaceutical Product Development, LLC, London, UK
| | - Komal Gupte-Singh
- Health Economics Outcomes Research, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA
| | - Javier Sabater
- Health Economics Outcomes Research, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA
| | - Corey Ritchings
- Health Economics Outcomes Research, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA
| | - Valerie Aponte-Ribero
- Modeling & Simulation, Evidera, a wholly owned subsidiary of Pharmaceutical Product Development, LLC, London, UK
| | - Meredith M Regan
- Biostatistics & Computational Biology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Michael Atkins
- Oncology, Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC, USA
| |
Collapse
|