1
|
Pavlick AC, Ariyan CE, Buchbinder EI, Davar D, Gibney GT, Hamid O, Hieken TJ, Izar B, Johnson DB, Kulkarni RP, Luke JJ, Mitchell TC, Mooradian MJ, Rubin KM, Salama AK, Shirai K, Taube JM, Tawbi HA, Tolley JK, Valdueza C, Weiss SA, Wong MK, Sullivan RJ. Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, version 3.0. J Immunother Cancer 2023; 11:e006947. [PMID: 37852736 PMCID: PMC10603365 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2023-006947] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/16/2023] [Indexed: 10/20/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Charlotte E Ariyan
- Department of Surgery Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA
| | | | - Diwakar Davar
- Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburg Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Geoffrey T Gibney
- Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | - Omid Hamid
- The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, A Cedars-Sinai Affiliate, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | - Tina J Hieken
- Department of Surgery and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| | - Benjamin Izar
- Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York, USA
| | - Douglas B Johnson
- Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
| | - Rajan P Kulkarni
- Departments of Dermatology, Oncological Sciences, Biomedical Engineering, and Center for Cancer Early Detection Advanced Research, Knight Cancer Institute, OHSU, Portland, Oregon, USA
- Operative Care Division, VA Portland Health Care System (VAPORHCS), Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - Jason J Luke
- Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Tara C Mitchell
- Abramson Cancer Center, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Meghan J Mooradian
- Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Krista M Rubin
- Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - April Ks Salama
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, Duke University, Durham, Carolina, USA
| | - Keisuke Shirai
- Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA
| | - Janis M Taube
- Department of Dermatology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Hussein A Tawbi
- Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - J Keith Tolley
- Patient Advocate, Melanoma Research Alliance, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Caressa Valdueza
- Cutaneous Oncology Program, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York, USA
| | - Sarah A Weiss
- Department of Medical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA
| | - Michael K Wong
- Patient Advocate, Melanoma Research Alliance, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Ryan J Sullivan
- Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sharon CE, Tortorello GN, Ma K, Sinnamon AJ, Mitchell TC, Karakousis GC, Miura JT. Impact of Adjuvant Immunotherapy on Overall Survival in a Contemporary Cohort of Patients with Stage III Melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:5329-5332. [PMID: 37332026 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-13736-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2023] [Accepted: 06/01/2023] [Indexed: 06/20/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Cimarron E Sharon
- Department of Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| | - Gabriella N Tortorello
- Department of Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Kevin Ma
- Division of Endocrine and Oncologic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Andrew J Sinnamon
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Tara C Mitchell
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Giorgos C Karakousis
- Division of Endocrine and Oncologic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - John T Miura
- Division of Endocrine and Oncologic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Augustin RC, Luke JJ. Top advances of the year: Melanoma. Cancer 2023; 129:822-828. [PMID: 36629350 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34590] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/12/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Ryan C Augustin
- UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.,Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Jason J Luke
- UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.,Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Abboud K, Umoru G, Esmail A, Abudayyeh A, Murakami N, Al-Shamsi HO, Javle M, Saharia A, Connor AA, Kodali S, Ghobrial RM, Abdelrahim M. Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Solid Tumors in the Adjuvant Setting: Current Progress, Future Directions, and Role in Transplant Oncology. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15:cancers15051433. [PMID: 36900226 PMCID: PMC10000896 DOI: 10.3390/cancers15051433] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2023] [Revised: 02/16/2023] [Accepted: 02/20/2023] [Indexed: 02/26/2023] Open
Abstract
The rationale for administering immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the adjuvant setting is to eradicate micro-metastases and, ultimately, prolong survival. Thus far, clinical trials have demonstrated that 1-year adjuvant courses of ICIs reduce the risk of recurrence in melanoma, urothelial cancer, renal cell carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers. Overall survival benefit has been shown in melanoma while survival data are still not mature in other malignancies. Emerging data also show the feasibility of utilizing ICIs in the peri-transplant setting for hepatobiliary malignancies. While ICIs are generally well-tolerated, the development of chronic immune-related adverse events, typically endocrinopathies or neurotoxicities, as well as delayed immune-related adverse events, warrants further scrutiny regarding the optimal duration of adjuvant therapy and requires a thorough risk-benefit determination. The advent of blood-based, dynamic biomarkers such as circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can help detect minimal residual disease and identify the subset of patients who would likely benefit from adjuvant treatment. In addition, the characterization of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and ctDNA-adjusted blood tumor mutation burden (bTMB) has also shown promise in predicting response to immunotherapy. Until additional, prospective studies delineate the magnitude of overall survival benefit and validate the use of predictive biomarkers, a tailored, patient-centered approach to adjuvant ICIs that includes extensive patient counseling on potentially irreversible adverse effects should be routinely incorporated into clinical practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karen Abboud
- Department of Pharmacy, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Godsfavour Umoru
- Department of Pharmacy, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Abdullah Esmail
- Section of GI Oncology, Department of Medical Oncology, Houston Methodist Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
- Correspondence: (A.E.); (M.A.)
| | - Ala Abudayyeh
- Section of Nephrology, Division of Internal Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Naoka Murakami
- Division of Renal Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Humaid O. Al-Shamsi
- Department of Oncology, Burjeel Cancer Institute, Burjeel Medical City, Abu Dhabi P.O. Box 92510, United Arab Emirates
| | - Milind Javle
- Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, Division of Cancer Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Ashish Saharia
- JC Walter Jr Center for Transplantation and Sherrie and Alan Conover Center for Liver Disease and Transplantation, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Ashton A. Connor
- JC Walter Jr Center for Transplantation and Sherrie and Alan Conover Center for Liver Disease and Transplantation, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Sudha Kodali
- JC Walter Jr Center for Transplantation and Sherrie and Alan Conover Center for Liver Disease and Transplantation, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Rafik M. Ghobrial
- JC Walter Jr Center for Transplantation and Sherrie and Alan Conover Center for Liver Disease and Transplantation, Houston, TX 77030, USA
| | - Maen Abdelrahim
- Section of GI Oncology, Department of Medical Oncology, Houston Methodist Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA
- Cockrell Center of Advanced Therapeutics Phase I Program, Houston Methodist Research Institute, Houston, TX 77030, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY 14853, USA
- Correspondence: (A.E.); (M.A.)
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Clinical Trials in Melanoma: Margins, Lymph Nodes, Targeted and Immunotherapy. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2023; 32:47-63. [PMID: 36410921 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2022.07.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
Multiple randomized controlled trials have influenced the current standard of care for patients with cutaneous melanoma. Since the development of targeted and immune therapy, studies of adjuvant therapy for patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma have led to the approval of combined B-raf proto-oncogene (BRAF) and mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase inhibitors for patients with a BRAF mutation, and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein-4 or antiprogrammed cell death-1 therapy for patients without a BRAF mutation. This article discusses the details of the trials that have influenced these treatment decisions, in addition to discussing ongoing trials and possible future directions.
Collapse
|
6
|
Li T, Xu Y, Sun W, Yan W, Wang C, Hu T, Zhang X, Luo Z, Liu X, Chen Y. Adjuvant Anti-PD-1 Immunotherapy versus Conventional Therapy for Stage III Melanoma: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study. Pharmaceuticals (Basel) 2022; 16:ph16010041. [PMID: 36678538 PMCID: PMC9867270 DOI: 10.3390/ph16010041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2022] [Revised: 12/22/2022] [Accepted: 12/23/2022] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
The use of adjuvant therapy has provided survival benefits in patients with advanced melanoma. This study aimed to explore the recurrence and prognosis of the PD-1 inhibitor, conventional interferon (IFN), or observation (OBS) on resected stage III acral and cutaneous melanoma patients through a retrospective analysis. Patients with resected stage III melanoma at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center from 2017 to 2021 were enrolled with all of their clinicopathologic characteristics collected. They were divided into three groups: PD-1 inhibitor, IFN, and OBS. Survival analyses were performed to indicate the significance of different adjuvant therapies. A total of 199 patients were enrolled (PD-1 n = 126; IFN n = 31; and OBS n = 42), with their median follow-up times being 21 months, 24 months, and 49 months, respectively. The PD-1 inhibitor significantly improved relapse-free survival (p = 0.027) and overall survival (p = 0.033) compared with conventional treatment (IFN+OBS). The superiority of the PD-1 inhibitor was witnessed in stage IIIC/D (p = 0.000) acral (p = 0.05) melanoma patients with ulceration (p = 0.011) or lymph node macrometastasis (p = 0.010). The PD-1 inhibitor significantly reduced local recurrence and systemic metastasis compared with conventional therapy (p = 0.002). In conclusion, adjuvant anti-PD-1 immunotherapy can achieve better survival outcomes in acral and cutaneous melanoma patients compared with conventional treatment, without considering adverse events. More clinical benefits were seen in later-stage acral melanoma patients with ulceration or lymph node macrometastasis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tong Li
- Department of Pancreatic Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China
- Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China
- Shanghai Pancreatic Cancer Institute, Shanghai 200032, China
- Pancreatic Cancer Institute, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China
| | - Yu Xu
- Department of Musculoskeletal Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China
| | - Wei Sun
- Department of Musculoskeletal Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China
| | - Wangjun Yan
- Department of Musculoskeletal Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China
| | - Chunmeng Wang
- Department of Musculoskeletal Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China
| | - Tu Hu
- Department of Musculoskeletal Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China
| | - Xiaowei Zhang
- Department of Internal Medicine of Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China
| | - Zhiguo Luo
- Department of Internal Medicine of Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China
| | - Xin Liu
- Department of Internal Medicine of Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China
- Department of Head and Neck and Neuroendocrine Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China
| | - Yong Chen
- Department of Musculoskeletal Oncology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai 200032, China
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Augustin RC, Luke JJ. Progression/Recurrence-Free Survival 2 in Adjuvant Melanoma. NEJM EVIDENCE 2022; 1:EVIDe2200240. [PMID: 38319859 DOI: 10.1056/evide2200240] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2024]
Abstract
The long-term outcome of patients with stage III melanoma - that is, melanoma that has spread to nearby lymph nodes, lymphatics, or skin - who have received treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors is of substantial interest. The article by Eggermont et al.1 published in this issue of NEJM Evidence reports 5-year outcomes from the stage III melanoma trial, KEYNOTE-054, which compared pembrolizumab (anti-programmed cell death protein 1 [PD-1]) with placebo. The data show durable recurrence-free survival (RFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ryan C Augustin
- UPMC Hillman Cancer Center and University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh
| | - Jason J Luke
- UPMC Hillman Cancer Center and University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Kobeissi I, Tarhini AA. Systemic adjuvant therapy for high-risk cutaneous melanoma. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2022; 14:17588359221134087. [PMID: 36324735 PMCID: PMC9619267 DOI: 10.1177/17588359221134087] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2022] [Accepted: 10/03/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Cutaneous melanoma continues to increase in incidence and poses a significant mortality risk. Surgical excision of melanoma in its early stages is often curative. However, patients with resected stages IIB-IV are considered at high risk for relapse and death from melanoma where systemic adjuvant therapy is indicated. The long-studied high-dose interferon-α was shown to improve relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) but is no longer in use. Adjuvant therapy with ipilimumab at 10 mg/kg (ipi10) demonstrated significant RFS and OS improvements but at a high cost in terms of toxicity, while adjuvant ipilimumab 3 mg/kg was shown to be equally effective and less toxic. More recently, the adjuvant therapy for resected stages III-IV melanoma in clinical practice has changed in favor of nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and BRAF-MEK inhibitors dabrafenib plus trametinib (for BRAF mutant melanoma) based on significant improvements in RFS as compared to ipi10 (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) and placebo (dabrafenib plus trametinib). For resected stages IIB-IIC melanoma, pembrolizumab achieved regulatory approval in the United States based on significant RFS benefits. In this article, we review completed and ongoing phase III adjuvant therapy trials. We also briefly discuss neoadjuvant therapy for locoregionally advanced melanoma. Finally, we explore recent studies on predictive and prognostic melanoma biomarkers in the adjuvant setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Iyad Kobeissi
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Queiroz MM, Bertolli E, Belfort FA, Munhoz RR. Management of In-Transit Metastases. Curr Oncol Rep 2022; 24:573-583. [PMID: 35192119 DOI: 10.1007/s11912-022-01216-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/05/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW The purpose of this study is to discuss the current knowledge and future perspectives regarding the treatment options for in-transit metastases (ITM), along with the optimal algorithms for patients presenting with this adverse manifestation of melanoma. RECENT FINDINGS In addition to procedures historically accepted for the management of ITM, encompassing surgery and regional techniques, novel medications in the form of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and targeted therapies now represent standard options, allowing for the possibility of combined approaches, with an expanding role of systemic therapies. Melanoma in-transit metastases consist of intralymphatic neoplastic implants distributed between the primary site and the regional nodal basin, within the subepidermal and dermal lymphatics. Distinct risk factors may influence the development of ITM, and the clinical presentation can be highly heterogeneous, enhancing the complexity of the management of ITM. Surgical resection, when feasible, continues to represent a standard approach for patients with curative intent. Patients with extensive or unresectable disease may also benefit from regional approaches that include isolated limb perfusion or infusion, electrochemotherapy, and a wide variety of intralesional therapies. Over the past decade, regimens with ICI and BRAF/MEK inhibitors dramatically expanded the benefit of systemic treatments for patients with melanoma, both in the adjuvant setting and for those with advanced disease, and the combination of these modalities with regional treatments, as well as neoadjuvant approaches, may represent the future for the treatment of patients with ITM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Eduardo Bertolli
- Cutaneous Oncology and Sarcomas Group, Hospital Sírio Libanês, São Paulo, Brazil.,Skin Cancer Department, AC Camargo Cancer Center, São Paulo, Brazil.,Melanoma and Sarcoma Group, Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
| | | | - Rodrigo Ramella Munhoz
- Oncology Center, Hospital Sírio Libanês, São Paulo, Brazil. .,Cutaneous Oncology and Sarcomas Group, Hospital Sírio Libanês, São Paulo, Brazil.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Low-Dose Nivolumab with or without Ipilimumab as Adjuvant Therapy Following the Resection of Melanoma Metastases: A Sequential Dual Cohort Phase II Clinical Trial. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14030682. [PMID: 35158952 PMCID: PMC8833641 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14030682] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/24/2021] [Revised: 01/23/2022] [Accepted: 01/25/2022] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Optimal dosing and duration of adjuvant treatment with PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors in melanoma patients have not been established. The investigated low-dose regimen of nivolumab with or without ipilimumab (in a sequential dual-cohort phase II trial), resulted in a 12-months relapse-free survival (RFS) rate and tolerability that was comparable to what has been served with standard dosing of nivolumab or pembrolizumab when patients were matched for stage. The incidence of immune-related adverse events was similar to what has been reported from registration trials in this indication. Immunohistochemical quantification of intra- and peritumoral immune cells, but not PD-1/PD-L1 staining, correlated significantly with RFS. Therefore, low-dose regimes of PD-1 blocking monoclonal antibodies deserve further study as cost-effective alternatives for currently approved standard dosing regimens, with baseline immunohistochemical tumor profiling to be further explored as a promising biomarker. Abstract Background: Optimal dosing and duration of adjuvant treatment with PD-1 and CTLA-4 immune checkpoint inhibitors have not been established. Prior to their regulatory approval we investigated a low-dose regimen of nivolumab with or without ipilimumab in a sequential dual-cohort phase II clinical trial. Methods: Following the complete resection of melanoma metastases, patients were treated with a single fixed dose of ipilimumab (50 mg) plus 4 bi-weekly fixed doses of nivolumab (10 mg) (cohort-1), or nivolumab for 1 year (10 mg fixed dose, Q2w x9, followed by Q8w x4) (cohort-2). Twelve-months relapse-free survival (RFS) served as the primary endpoint. Results: After a median follow-up of 235 weeks for cohort-1 (34 patients), and 190 weeks for cohort-2 (21 patients), the 12-months RFS-rate was, respectively, 55.9% (95% CI, 39–72), and 85.7% (95% CI, 70–100). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 27 (79%), and 18 (86%) patients, with 3 (9%), and 1 (5%) grade 3 adverse events in cohort-1 and -2, respectively. Immunohistochemical quantification of intra- and peritumoral CD3+ T cells and CD20+ B cells, but not PD-1/PD-L1 staining, correlated significantly with RFS. Conclusions: One year of adjuvant low-dose nivolumab could be an effective and economically advantageous alternative for standard dosing, at the condition of further confirmation in a larger patient cohort. A shorter low-dose nivolumab plus ipilimumab regimen seems inferior and less tolerable.
Collapse
|
11
|
Amabile S, Roccuzzo G, Pala V, Tonella L, Rubatto M, Merli M, Fava P, Ribero S, Fierro MT, Queirolo P, Quaglino P. Clinical Significance of Distant Metastasis-Free Survival (DMFS) in Melanoma: A Narrative Review from Adjuvant Clinical Trials. J Clin Med 2021; 10:jcm10235475. [PMID: 34884176 PMCID: PMC8658595 DOI: 10.3390/jcm10235475] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/26/2021] [Revised: 11/04/2021] [Accepted: 11/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Cutaneous melanoma is the most dangerous skin cancer, with high death rates in advanced stages. To assess the impact of each treatment on patient outcomes, most studies use relapse-free survival (RFS) as a primary endpoint and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) as a secondary endpoint. The aim of this narrative review of the main adjuvant studies for resected stage III/IV melanoma, with a specific focus on DMFS, is to evaluate DMFS trends and their potential association with RFS, identify which treatments are possibly associated with better outcomes in terms of DMFS and their potential predictive factors, and discuss DMFS trends in terms of patient management in daily practice. We outline the impact of each available treatment option on DMFS and RFS according to the years of follow-up and compare data from different studies. Overall, the trends of DMFS closely follow those of RFS, with most patients relapsing at visceral rather than regional sites. As it captures the burden of patients who develop distant relapse, DMFS could be considered a primary endpoint, in addition to RFS, in adjuvant trials, identifying patients whose relapse is associated with a worse prognosis and who may need further systemic treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Simone Amabile
- Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy; (S.A.); (V.P.); (L.T.); (M.R.); (M.M.); (P.F.); (S.R.); (M.T.F.); (P.Q.)
| | - Gabriele Roccuzzo
- Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy; (S.A.); (V.P.); (L.T.); (M.R.); (M.M.); (P.F.); (S.R.); (M.T.F.); (P.Q.)
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-01-1633-5843
| | - Valentina Pala
- Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy; (S.A.); (V.P.); (L.T.); (M.R.); (M.M.); (P.F.); (S.R.); (M.T.F.); (P.Q.)
| | - Luca Tonella
- Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy; (S.A.); (V.P.); (L.T.); (M.R.); (M.M.); (P.F.); (S.R.); (M.T.F.); (P.Q.)
| | - Marco Rubatto
- Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy; (S.A.); (V.P.); (L.T.); (M.R.); (M.M.); (P.F.); (S.R.); (M.T.F.); (P.Q.)
| | - Martina Merli
- Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy; (S.A.); (V.P.); (L.T.); (M.R.); (M.M.); (P.F.); (S.R.); (M.T.F.); (P.Q.)
| | - Paolo Fava
- Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy; (S.A.); (V.P.); (L.T.); (M.R.); (M.M.); (P.F.); (S.R.); (M.T.F.); (P.Q.)
| | - Simone Ribero
- Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy; (S.A.); (V.P.); (L.T.); (M.R.); (M.M.); (P.F.); (S.R.); (M.T.F.); (P.Q.)
| | - Maria Teresa Fierro
- Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy; (S.A.); (V.P.); (L.T.); (M.R.); (M.M.); (P.F.); (S.R.); (M.T.F.); (P.Q.)
| | - Paola Queirolo
- Division of Medical Oncology for Melanoma, Sarcoma, and Rare Tumors, European Institute of Oncology (IEO), European Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), 20141 Milan, Italy;
| | - Pietro Quaglino
- Section of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy; (S.A.); (V.P.); (L.T.); (M.R.); (M.M.); (P.F.); (S.R.); (M.T.F.); (P.Q.)
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Slingluff CL, Lewis KD, Andtbacka R, Hyngstrom J, Milhem M, Markovic SN, Bowles T, Hamid O, Hernandez-Aya L, Claveau J, Jang S, Philips P, Holtan SG, Shaheen MF, Curti B, Schmidt W, Butler MO, Paramo J, Lutzky J, Padmanabhan A, Thomas S, Milton D, Pecora A, Sato T, Hsueh E, Badarinath S, Keech J, Kalmadi S, Kumar P, Weber R, Levine E, Berger A, Bar A, Beck JT, Travers JB, Mihalcioiu C, Gastman B, Beitsch P, Rapisuwon S, Glaspy J, McCarron EC, Gupta V, Behl D, Blumenstein B, Peterkin JJ. Multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of seviprotimut-L polyvalent melanoma vaccine in patients with post-resection melanoma at high risk of recurrence. J Immunother Cancer 2021; 9:jitc-2021-003272. [PMID: 34599031 PMCID: PMC8488725 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2021-003272] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Most patients with advanced melanomas relapse after checkpoint blockade therapy. Thus, immunotherapies are needed that can be applied safely early, in the adjuvant setting. Seviprotimut-L is a vaccine containing human melanoma antigens, plus alum. To assess the efficacy of seviprotimut-L, the Melanoma Antigen Vaccine Immunotherapy Study (MAVIS) was initiated as a three-part multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial. Results from part B1 are reported here. METHODS Patients with AJCC V.7 stage IIB-III cutaneous melanoma after resection were randomized 2:1, with stage stratification (IIB/C, IIIA, IIIB/C), to seviprotimut-L 40 mcg or placebo. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was the primary endpoint. For an hypothesized HR of 0.625, one-sided alpha of 0.10, and power 80%, target enrollment was 325 patients. RESULTS For randomized patients (n=347), arms were well-balanced, and treatment-emergent adverse events were similar for seviprotimut-L and placebo. For the primary intent-to-treat endpoint of RFS, the estimated HR was 0.881 (95% CI: 0.629 to 1.233), with stratified logrank p=0.46. However, estimated HRs were not uniform over the stage randomized strata, with HRs (95% CIs) for stages IIB/IIC, IIIA, IIIB/IIIC of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.37 to 1.19), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.35 to 1.50), and 1.19 (95% CI: 0.72 to 1.97), respectively. In the stage IIB/IIC stratum, the effect on RFS was greatest for patients <60 years old (HR=0.324 (95% CI: 0.121 to 0.864)) and those with ulcerated primary melanomas (HR=0.493 (95% CI: 0.255 to 0.952)). CONCLUSIONS Seviprotimut-L is very well tolerated. Exploratory efficacy model estimation supports further study in stage IIB/IIC patients, especially younger patients and those with ulcerated melanomas. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT01546571.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Craig L Slingluff
- Department of Surgery, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA
| | - Karl D Lewis
- University of Colorado - Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado, USA
| | - Robert Andtbacka
- Huntsman Cancer Institute Cancer Hospital, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - John Hyngstrom
- Huntsman Cancer Institute Cancer Hospital, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Mohammed Milhem
- The University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
| | | | | | - Omid Hamid
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Santa Monica, California, USA
| | - Leonel Hernandez-Aya
- Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in Saint Louis, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Joel Claveau
- CHU de Quebec-Universite Laval, Quebec, Québec, Canada
| | - Sekwon Jang
- Department of Medical Oncology, Inova Health System, Falls Church, Virginia, USA
| | | | - Shernan G Holtan
- University of Minnesota Academic Health Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Montaser F Shaheen
- University of Arizona Medical Center - University Campus, Tucson, Arizona, USA
| | - Brendan Curti
- Earle A Chiles Research Institute, Providence Portland Medical Center, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | | | - Marcus O Butler
- Princess Margaret Hospital Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Juan Paramo
- Mount Sinai Medical Center, Miami Beach, Florida, USA
| | - Jose Lutzky
- Department of Oncology, Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, Florida, USA
| | | | - Sajeve Thomas
- MD Anderson Cancer Center Orlando, Orlando, Florida, USA
| | - Daniel Milton
- Investigative Clinical Research of Indiana, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
| | - Andrew Pecora
- Department of Oncology, John Theurer Cancer Center, Hackensack, New Jersey, USA
| | - Takami Sato
- Department of Medical Oncology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Eddy Hsueh
- St. Louis University Hospital, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | | | - John Keech
- Multicare Institute for Research and Innovation, Tacoma, Washington, USA
| | - Sujith Kalmadi
- Ironwood Cancer and Research Centers, Chandler, Arizona, USA
| | - Pallavi Kumar
- Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Cancer Institute at Franklin Square, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Robert Weber
- St. Mary's Hospital and Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA
| | - Edward Levine
- Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA
| | - Adam Berger
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA
| | - Anna Bar
- Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA
| | - J Thaddeus Beck
- Department of Medical Oncology, Highlands Oncology Group, Fayetteville, Arkansas, USA
| | | | | | - Brian Gastman
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | | | - Suthee Rapisuwon
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA,Department of Hematology/Oncology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
| | - John Glaspy
- University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA
| | | | - Vinay Gupta
- MedStar Franklin Square Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Deepti Behl
- Sutter Institute for Medical Research, Sacramento, California, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|