Immunotherapy in malignant melanoma: recent approaches and new perspectives

Systemic CD4 Immunity and PD-L1/PD-1 Blockade Immunotherapy

PD-L1/PD-1 blockade immunotherapy has changed the therapeutic approaches for the treatment of many cancers. Nevertheless, the mechanisms underlying its efficacy or treatment failure are still unclear. Proficient systemic immunity seems to be a prerequisite for efficacy, as recently shown in patients and in mouse models. It is widely accepted that expansion of anti-tumor CD8 T cell populations is principally responsible for anti-tumor responses. In contrast, the role of CD4 T cells has been less studied. Here we review and discuss the evidence supporting the contribution of CD4 T cells to anti-tumor immunity, especially recent advances linking CD4 T cell subsets to efficacious PD-L1/PD-1 blockade immunotherapy. We also discuss the role of CD4 T cell memory subsets present in peripheral blood before the start of immunotherapies, and their utility as predictors of response.

Economic and health care resource utilization burden of central nervous system metastases in patients with metastatic melanoma

BACKGROUND: In patients with metastatic melanoma, central nervous system (CNS) involvement is associated with poor prognosis, increased costs, and higher health care resource utilization (HCRU); however, previous cost-estimate studies were conducted before widespread use of targeted therapies and immunotherapies. OBJECTIVE: To estimate costs and HCRU in patients with metastatic melanoma with and without CNS metastases in the current treatment era following introduction of targeted therapies and immunotherapies. METHODS: This real-world retrospective cohort study used data from the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus claims database to estimate and compare costs and HCRU in patients with metastatic melanoma by presence or absence of CNS metastases between January 2011 and June 2019. Patients with at least 2 melanoma claims, at least 2 metastatic claims, and continuous enrollment at least 6 months before and at least 1 month after first metastatic diagnosis were included. Mean per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs are reported in 2019 US dollars. Analyses were also conducted by time period of first metastatic diagnosis: 2011-2014 (reflecting BRAF inhibitor monotherapy and anti-CTLA-4 therapy) and 2015-2019 (reflecting availability of BRAF and MEK inhibitor combinations and anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies). RESULTS: Of 4,078 patients, 1,253 (30.7%) had CNS metastases. Patients with CNS metastases were more likely to receive any treatment (89.1% vs 58.9%; P < 0.001), including systemic treatment (73.3% vs 55.4%; P < 0.001) and radiation (65.8% vs 11.8%; P < 0.001), and to have brain imaging any time after metastatic diagnosis (98.3% vs 67.2%; P < 0.001). In patients with CNS metastases, 40.0% had dexamethasone 4 mg within 30 days of CNS metastatic diagnosis. Patients with CNS metastases incurred higher total mean PPPM costs ($29,953 vs $14,996; P < 0.001). The largest contributors were total radiology ($2,351 vs $1,110), targeted therapies ($2,499 vs $638), and immunotherapies ($7,398 vs $5,036). HCRU and costs were higher in patients with vs without CNS metastases regardless of time period of first metastatic diagnosis. In patients with CNS metastases, use of any systemic treatment was increased in 2015-2019 vs 2011-2014 (81.2% vs 64.5%; P < 0.001), including chemotherapy (68.1% vs 50.0%; P < 0.001), immunotherapy (60.9% vs 30.1%; P < 0.001), and/or targeted therapies (32.7% vs 27.4%; P = 0.05). Mean total PPPM costs for patients with CNS metastases increased from $28,183 in 2011-2014 to $31,569 in 2015-2019 (P < 0.001); main drivers were immunotherapies and targeted therapies. CONCLUSIONS: CNS metastases occur frequently in patients with metastatic melanoma and are associated with significantly increased economic burden compared with patients without CNS metastases; the largest contributors to total costs in the current treatment era are radiology, targeted therapies, and immunotherapies. Brain imaging remains underused, and there is an opportunity to improve outcomes through early detection of CNS metastases, potentially reducing the high HCRU and costs associated with CNS metastases. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. The sponsor was involved in the study design, data collection, data analysis, manuscript preparation, and publication decisions. Seetasith and Lee are employed by and report stock ownership in Genentech, Inc. Bartley and McKenna were employed by Genentech, Inc., at the time of this study and report stock ownership. Tawbi reports grants and personal fees from Genentech/Roche, Novartis, BMS, and Merck; grants from GSK and Celgene; and personal fees from Eisai, outside the submitted work. Kent, Burton, and Haydu have nothing to disclose. The results of this study were presented in part at the AMCP Nexus 2020 Virtual Meeting, October 19-23, 2020.

Vulvar melanoma: an analysis of prognostic factors and treatment patterns

Objective

Melanoma comprises 5% to 10% of vulvar cancers and prognosis is poor. The purpose of this study was to identify prognostic factors and treatment patterns for vulvar melanoma using the National Cancer Database (NCDB).

Methods

The NCDB was queried for patients with invasive vulvar melanoma from 2004–2015. Descriptive statistics were generated to describe clinical and treatment details. Multivariable Cox regression and the Kaplan-Meier method were used to examine overall survival (OS).

Results

1,917 patients with vulvar melanoma met inclusion criteria. Median follow-up time was 32 months (range, 0–151 months). Older age, larger tumor size, advanced disease stage, increased Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score, and care at a non-academic center were independent predictors for decreased OS. Surgical management of the primary site, lymph node surgery, and insurance provided a significant survival benefit. Use of immunotherapy for vulvar melanoma has increased over time. Two-year OS with immunotherapy in patients with distant metastatic disease was higher, although this did not reach statistical significance (33% vs. 12%, p=0.054).

Conclusions

Vulvar melanoma has a poor prognosis for those with regional and distant metastatic disease. Extent of disease, tumor size, and patient age are important prognostic factors. Other favorable factors included insurance and surgical management. The use of immunotherapy has increased over time and may improve survival in those with distant disease. These data support further investigation into the role of immunotherapy for vulvar melanoma to optimize outcomes.

CCR2 signaling in breast carcinoma cells promotes tumor growth and invasion by promoting CCL2 and suppressing CD154 effects on the angiogenic and immune microenvironments

Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer related deaths for women, due mainly to metastatic disease. Invasive tumors exhibit aberrations in recruitment and activity of immune cells, including decreased cytotoxic T cells. Restoring the levels and activity of cytotoxic T cells is a promising anti-cancer strategy; but its success is tumor type-dependent. The mechanisms that coordinate recruitment and activity of immune cells and other stromal cells in breast cancer remain poorly understood. Using the MMTV-PyVmT/FVB mammary tumor model, we demonstrate a novel role for CCL2/CCR2 chemokine signaling in tumor progression by altering the microenvironment. Selective targeting of CCR2 in the PyVmT mammary epithelium inhibited tumor growth and invasion, elevated CD8+ T cells, decreased M2 macrophages and decreased angiogenesis. Co-culture models demonstrated these stromal cell responses were mediated by tumor derived CCL2 and CCR2-mediated suppression of the T cell activating cytokine, CD154. Co-culture analysis indicated that CCR2-induced stromal reactivity was important for tumor cell proliferation and invasion. In breast tumor tissues, CD154 expression inversely correlated with CCR2 expression and correlated with relapse free survival. Targeting the CCL2/CCR2 signaling pathway may reprogram the immune angiogenic and microenvironments and enhance effectiveness of targeted and immuno-therapies.

The intracellular signalosome of PD-L1 in cancer cells

Programmed cell death-1 ligand-1 (PD-L1) overexpression in cancer cells accelerates tumor progression. PD-L1 possesses two main pro-oncogenic functions. First, PD-L1 is a strong immunosuppressive molecule that inactivates tumor-specific T cells by binding to the inhibitory receptor PD-1. Second, PD-L1 function relies on the delivery of intrinsic intracellular signals that enhance cancer cell survival, regulate stress responses and confer resistance toward pro-apoptotic stimuli, such as interferons. Here, we review the current knowledge on intracellular signal transduction pathways regulated by PD-L1, describe its associated signalosome and discuss potential combinations of targeted therapies against the signalosome with PD-L1/PD-1 blockade therapies.

Combatting mucosal melanoma: recent advances and future perspectives

Mucosal melanomas are a rare subtype of melanoma and are associated with a particularly poor prognosis. Due to the rarity of the diagnosis, and the pace with which the management of cutaneous melanoma has evolved over recent years, there is little good evidence to guide management and evidence-based clinical guidelines are still in development in the UK. In this review we provide an overview of the management of mucosal melanoma, highlighting the critical differences between cutaneous and mucosal melanomas, before examining recent advances in the systemic treatment of this disease and likely future directions.