Immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced neurotoxicity is not associated with seroprevalence of neurotropic infections

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) substantially improve outcome for patients with cancer. However, the majority of patients develops immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which can be persistent and significantly reduce quality of life. Neurological irAEs occur in 1-5% of patients and can induce severe, permanent sequelae or even be fatal. In order to improve the diagnosis and treatment of neurological irAEs and to better understand their pathogenesis, we assessed whether previous neurotropic infections are associated with neurological irAEs.

METHODS

Neurotropic infections that might predispose to ICI-induced neurological irAEs were analyzed in 61 melanoma patients from 3 countries, the Netherlands, Australia and Germany, including 24 patients with neurotoxicity and 37 control patients. In total, 14 viral, 6 bacterial, and 1 protozoal infections previously reported to trigger neurological pathologies were assessed using routine serology testing. The Dutch and Australian cohorts (NL) included pre-treatment plasma samples of patients treated with neoadjuvant ICI therapy (OpACIN-neo and PRADO trials; NCT02977052). In the Dutch/Australian cohort a total of 11 patients with neurological irAEs were compared to 27 control patients (patients without neurological irAEs). The German cohort (LMU) consisted of serum samples of 13 patients with neurological irAE and 10 control patients without any documented irAE under ICI therapy.

RESULTS

The association of neurological irAEs with 21 possible preceding infections was assessed by measuring specific antibodies against investigated agents. The seroprevalence of all the tested viral (cytomegalovirus, Epstein-Barr-Virus, varicella-zoster virus, measles, rubella, influenza A and B, human herpes virus 6 and 7, herpes simplex virus 1 and 2, parvovirus B19, hepatitis A and E and human T-lymphotropic virus type 1 and 2), bacterial (Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, Campylobacter jejuni, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Coxiella burnetti, Helicobacter pylori, Yersinia enterocolitica and Y. pseudotuberculosis) and protozoal (Toxoplasma gondii) infections was similar for patients who developed neurological irAEs as compared to control patients. Thus, the analysis provided no evidence for an association of described agents tested for seroprevalence with ICI induced neurotoxicity.

CONCLUSION

Previous viral, bacterial and protozoal neurotropic infections appear not to be associated with the development of neurological irAEs in melanoma patients who underwent therapy with ICI across 3 countries. Further efforts are needed to unravel the factors underlying neurological irAEs in order to identify risk factors for these toxicities, especially with the increasing use of ICI in earlier stage disease.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors for the treatment of advanced melanoma in patients with concomitant chronic lymphocytic leukemia

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the management of advanced melanoma (AM). However, data on ICI effectiveness have largely been restricted to clinical trials, thereby excluding patients with co-existing malignancies. Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most prevalent adult leukemia and is associated with increased risk of melanoma. CLL alters systemic immunity and can induce T-cell exhaustion, which may limit the efficacy of ICIs in patients with CLL. We, therefore, sought to examine the efficacy of ICI in patients with these co-occurring diagnoses.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this international multicenter study, a retrospective review of clinical databases identified patients with concomitant diagnoses of CLL and AM treated with ICI (US-MD Anderson Cancer Center, N = 24; US-Mayo Clinic, N = 15; AUS, N = 19). Objective response rates (ORRs), assessed by RECIST v1.1, and survival outcomes [overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS)] among patients with CLL and AM were assessed. Clinical factors associated with improved ORR and survival were explored. Additionally, ORR and survival outcomes were compared between the Australian CLL/AM cohort and a control cohort of 148 Australian patients with AM alone.

RESULTS

Between 1997 and 2020, 58 patients with concomitant CLL and AM were treated with ICI. ORRs were comparable between AUS-CLL/AM and AM control cohorts (53% versus 48%, P = 0.81). PFS and OS from ICI initiation were also comparable between cohorts. Among CLL/AM patients, a majority were untreated for their CLL (64%) at the time of ICI. Patients with prior history of chemoimmunotherapy treatment for CLL (19%) had significantly reduced ORRs, PFS, and OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our case series of patients with concomitant CLL and melanoma demonstrate frequent, durable clinical responses to ICI. However, those with prior chemoimmunotherapy treatment for CLL had significantly worse outcomes. We found that CLL disease course is largely unchanged by treatment with ICI.

Challenges in oncology career: are we closing the gender gap? Results of the new ESMO Women for Oncology Committee survey

BACKGROUND

Following a European Society for Medical Oncology Women for Oncology (ESMO W4O) survey in 2016 showing severe under-representation of female oncologists in leadership roles, ESMO launched a series of initiatives to address obstacles to gender equity. A follow-up survey in October 2021 investigated progress achieved.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The W4O questionnaire 2021 expanded on the 2016 survey, with additional questions on the impact of ethnicity, sexual orientation and religion on career development. Results were analysed according to respondent gender and age.

RESULTS

The survey sample was larger than in 2016 (n = 1473 versus 482), especially among men. Significantly fewer respondents had managerial or leadership roles than in 2016 (31.8% versus 51.7%). Lack of leadership development for women and unconscious bias were considered more important in 2021 than in 2016. In 2021, more people reported harassment in the workplace than in 2016 (50.3% versus 41.0%). In 2021, ethnicity, sexual orientation and religion were considered to have little or no impact on professional career opportunities, salary setting or related potential pay gap. However, gender had a significant or major impact on career development (25.5% of respondents), especially in respondents ≤40 years of age and women. As in 2016, highest ranked initiatives to foster workplace equity were promotion of work-life balance, development and leadership training and flexible working. Significantly more 2021 respondents (mainly women) supported the need for culture and gender equity education at work than in 2016.

CONCLUSIONS

Gender remains a major barrier to career progression in oncology and, although some obstacles may have been reduced since 2016, we are a long way from closing the gender gap. Increased reporting of discrimination and inappropriate behaviour in the workplace is a major, priority concern. The W4O 2021 survey findings provide new evidence and highlight the areas for future ESMO interventions to support equity and diversity in oncology career development.

Survival update of neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab in macroscopic stage III melanoma in the OpACIN and OpACIN-neo trials

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab has yielded high response rates in patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma. These response rates translated to high short-term survival rates. However, data on long-term survival and disease recurrence are lacking.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In OpACIN, 20 patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma were randomized to ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg q3w four cycles of adjuvant or split two cycles of neoadjuvant and two adjuvant. In OpACIN-neo, 86 patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma were randomized to arm A (2× ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg q3w; n = 30), arm B (2× ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg q3w; n = 30), or arm C (2× ipilimumab 3 mg/kg q3w plus 2× nivolumab 3 mg/kg q2w; n = 26) followed by surgery.

RESULTS

The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached in either trial. After a median follow-up of 69 months for OpACIN, 1/7 patients with a pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy had disease recurrence. The estimated 5-year RFS and OS rates for the neoadjuvant arm were 70% and 90% versus 60% and 70% for the adjuvant arm. After a median follow-up of 47 months for OpACIN-neo, the estimated 3-year RFS and OS rates were 82% and 92%, respectively. The estimated 3-year RFS rate for OpACIN-neo was 95% for patients with a pathologic response versus 37% for patients without a pathologic response (P < 0.001). In multiple regression analyses, pathologic response was the strongest predictor of disease recurrence. Of the 12 patients with distant disease recurrence after neoadjuvant therapy, 5 responded to subsequent anti-PD-1 and 8 to targeted therapy, although 7 patients showed progression after the initial response.

CONCLUSIONS

Updated data confirm the high survival rates after neoadjuvant combination checkpoint inhibition in macroscopic stage III melanoma, especially for patients with a pathologic response. Pathologic response is the strongest surrogate marker for long-term outcome.

Single-agent anti-PD-1 or combined with ipilimumab in patients with mucosal melanoma: an international, retrospective, cohort study

BACKGROUND

Mucosal melanoma (MM) is a rare melanoma subtype with distinct biology and poor prognosis. Data on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is limited. We determined the efficacy of ICIs in MM, analysed by primary site and ethnicity/race.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective cohort study from 25 cancer centres in Australia, Europe, USA and Asia. Patients with histologically confirmed MM were treated with anti-PD1+/-ipilimumab. Primary endpoints were response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) by primary site (naso-oral, urogenital, anorectal, other), ethnicity/race (Caucasian, Asian, Other) and treatment. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard model analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

In total, 545 patients were included: 331 (63%) Caucasian, 176 (33%) Asian and 20 (4%) Other. Primary sites included 113 (21%) anorectal, 178 (32%) urogenital, 206 (38%) naso-oral and 45 (8%) other. 348 (64%) received anti-PD1 and 197 (36%) anti-PD1/ipilimumab. RR, PFS and OS did not differ by primary site, ethnicity/race or treatment. RR for naso-oral was numerically higher for anti-PD1/ipilimumab (40%, 95% CI 29-54%) compared with anti-PD1 (29%, 95% CI 21-37%). 35% of patients that initially responded progressed. Median duration of response (mDOR) was 26 months (95% CI 18-NR [Not Reached]). Factors associated with short PFS were ECOG PS ≥3 (p<0.01), LDH >ULN (p=0.01), lung metastases (p<0.01) and ≥1 previous treatments (p<0.01). Factors associated with short OS were ECOG PS ≥1 (p<0.01), LDH >ULN (p=0.03), lung metastases (p<0.01) and ≥1 previous treatments (p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

MM has poor prognosis. Treatment efficacy of anti-PD1+/-ipilimumab was similar and did not differ by ethnicity/race. Naso-oral primaries had numerically higher response to anti-PD1/ipilimumab, without difference in survival. The addition of ipilimumab did not show greater benefit over anti-PD1 for other primary sites. In responders, mDOR was short and acquired resistance was common. Other factors, including site and number of metastases were associated with survival.

Cutaneous sarcoidosis due to immune‐checkpoint inhibition and exacerbated by a novel BRAF dimerization inhibitor

Sarcoidosis is a non‐infective granulomatous disorder of unknown aetiology, with cutaneous involvement affecting up to 30% of patients. Drug‐induced sarcoidosis has been reported secondary to modern melanoma therapies including immune‐checkpoint inhibitors and first generation BRAF inhibitors such as vemurafenib and dabrafenib. Herein, we report a case of cutaneous micropapular sarcoidosis that first developed on immune‐checkpoint inhibition with ipilimumab and nivolumab for metastatic melanoma, which was exacerbated and further complicated by pityriasis rubra pilaris‐like palmar plaques upon transition to a next‐generation BRAF‐dimerisation inhibitor. Both the micropapular eruption and palmar plaques rapidly resolved after cessation of the novel BRAF‐inhibitor and concurrent commencement of hydroxychloroquine. It is unclear how inhibition of BRAF‐dimerisation results in granuloma formation, though upregulation of T_H1/T_H17 T‐cells and impairment of T‐reg cells may be responsible. Clinicians should be aware of the potential for exacerbation of sarcoidosis when transitioning from immune‐checkpoint inhibitors to these novel BRAF‐dimerisation inhibitors, particularly as their uptake in treating cancers increases beyond clinical trials. Further studies are required to assess whether these next‐generation agents can trigger sarcoidosis de‐novo, or simply exacerbate pre‐existing sarcoidosis.

Immunotherapy use outside clinical trial populations: never say never?

BACKGROUND

Based on favourable outcomes in clinical trials, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), most notably programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) inhibitors, are now widely used across multiple cancer types. However, due to their strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, clinical studies often do not address challenges presented by non-trial populations.

DESIGN

This review summarises available data on the efficacy and safety of ICIs in trial-ineligible patients, including those with autoimmune disease, chronic viral infections, organ transplants, organ dysfunction, poor performance status, and brain metastases, as well as the elderly, children, and those who are pregnant. In addition, we review data concerning other real-world challenges with ICIs, including timing of therapy switch, relationships to radiotherapy or surgery, re-treatment after an immune-related toxicity, vaccinations in patients on ICIs, and current experience around ICI and coronavirus disease-19. Where possible, we provide recommendations to aid the often-difficult decision-making process in those settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Data suggest that ICIs are often active and have an acceptable safety profile in the populations described above, with the exception of PD-1 inhibitors in solid organ transplant recipients. Decisions about whether to treat with ICIs should be personalised and require multidisciplinary input and careful counselling of patients with respect to potential risks and benefits. Clinical judgements need to be carefully weighed, considering factors such as underlying cancer type, feasibility of alternative treatment options, or activity in trial-eligible patients.

Delayed immune-related adverse events with anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy in melanoma

BACKGROUND

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) typically occur within 4 months of starting anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)-based therapy [anti-PD-1 ± anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA4)], but delayed irAEs (onset >12 months after commencement) can also occur. This study describes the incidence, nature and management of delayed irAEs in patients receiving anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with delayed irAEs from 20 centres were studied. The incidence of delayed irAEs was estimated as a proportion of melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1-based therapy and surviving >1 year. Onset, clinical features, management and outcomes of irAEs were examined.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighteen patients developed a total of 140 delayed irAEs (20 after initial combination with anti-CTLA4), with an estimated incidence of 5.3% (95% confidence interval 4.0-6.9, 53/999 patients at sites with available data). The median onset of delayed irAE was 16 months (range 12-53 months). Eighty-seven patients (74%) were on anti-PD-1 at irAE onset, 15 patients (12%) were <3 months from the last dose and 16 patients (14%) were >3 months from the last dose of anti-PD-1. The most common delayed irAEs were colitis, rash and pneumonitis; 55 of all irAEs (39%) were ≥grade 3. Steroids were required in 80 patients (68%), as well as an additional immunosuppressive agent in 27 patients (23%). There were two irAE-related deaths: encephalitis with onset during anti-PD-1 and a multiple-organ irAE with onset 11 months after ceasing anti-PD-1. Early irAEs (<12 months) had also occurred in 69 patients (58%), affecting a different organ from the delayed irAE in 59 patients (86%).

CONCLUSIONS

Delayed irAEs occur in a small but relevant subset of patients. Delayed irAEs are often different from previous irAEs, may be high grade and can lead to death. They mostly occur in patients still receiving anti-PD-1. The risk of delayed irAE should be considered when deciding the duration of treatment in responding patients. However, patients who stop treatment may also rarely develop delayed irAE.

Pathological response and tumour bed histopathological features correlate with survival following neoadjuvant immunotherapy in stage III melanoma

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for pathological evaluation of neoadjuvant specimens and pathological response categories have been developed by the International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium (INMC). As part of the Optimal Neo-adjuvant Combination Scheme of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab (OpACIN-neo) clinical trial of neoadjuvant combination anti-programmed cell death protein 1/anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 immunotherapy for stage III melanoma, we sought to determine interobserver reproducibility of INMC histopathological assessment principles, identify specific tumour bed histopathological features of immunotherapeutic response that correlated with recurrence and relapse-free survival (RFS) and evaluate proposed INMC pathological response categories for predicting recurrence and RFS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Clinicopathological characteristics of lymph node dissection specimens of 83 patients enrolled in the OpACIN-neo clinical trial were evaluated. Two methods of assessing histological features of immunotherapeutic response were evaluated: the previously described immune-related pathologic response (irPR) score and our novel immunotherapeutic response score (ITRS). For a subset of cases (n = 29), cellular composition of the tumour bed was analysed by flow cytometry.

RESULTS

There was strong interobserver reproducibility in assessment of pathological response (κ = 0.879) and percentage residual viable melanoma (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.965). The immunotherapeutic response subtype with high fibrosis had the strongest association with lack of recurrence (P = 0.008) and prolonged RFS (P = 0.019). Amongst patients with criteria for pathological non-response (pNR, >50% viable tumour), all who recurred had ≥70% viable melanoma. Higher ITRS and irPR scores correlated with lack of recurrence in the entire cohort (P = 0.002 and P ≤ 0.0001). The number of B lymphocytes was significantly increased in patients with a high fibrosis subtype of treatment response (P = 0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

There is strong reproducibility for assessment of pathological response using INMC criteria. Immunotherapeutic response of fibrosis subtype correlated with improved RFS, and may represent a biomarker. Potential B-cell contribution to fibrosis development warrants further study. Reclassification of pNR to a threshold of ≥70% viable melanoma and incorporating additional criteria of <10% fibrosis subtype of response may identify those at highest risk of recurrence, but requires validation.

Histopathological features of complete pathological response predict recurrence-free survival following neoadjuvant targeted therapy for metastatic melanoma

BACKGROUND

Recent clinical trials demonstrated the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib (DT) among patients with surgically resectable clinical stage III BRAFV600E/K mutant melanoma. Although patients achieving a complete pathological response (pCR) exhibited superior recurrence-free survival (RFS) versus those who did not, 30% of pCR patients relapsed. We sought to identify whether histopathological features of the pathological response further delineated risk of relapse.

METHODS

Surgical resection specimens from DT-treated patients in two phase 2 clinical trials were reviewed. Histopathological features, including relative amounts of viable tumour, necrosis, melanosis, and fibrosis (hyalinized or immature/proliferative) were assessed for associations with patient outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients underwent surgical resection following neoadjuvant DT. Patients achieving pCR (49%) had longer RFS compared with patients who did not (P = 0.005). Patients whose treated tumour showed any hyalinized fibrosis had longer RFS versus those without (P = 0.014), whereas necrosis (P = 0.012) and/or immature/proliferative fibrosis (P = 0.026) correlated with shorter RFS. Multivariable analyses showed absence of pCR or presence of immature fibrosis independently predicted shorter RFS. Among pCR patients, mature/hyalinized-type fibrosis correlated with improved RFS (P = 0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

The extent and composition of the pathological response following neoadjuvant DT in BRAFV600E/K mutant melanoma correlates with RFS, including pCR patients. These findings support the need for detailed histological analysis of specimens collected after neoadjuvant therapy.

L3 Update of the OpACIN and OpACIN-neo trials: 36-months and 24-months relapse-free survival after (neo)adjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab in macroscopic stage III melanoma patients

Background

Before adjuvant checkpoint inhibition the 5-year overall survival (OS) rate was poor (<50%) in high-risk stage III melanoma patients. Adjuvant CTLA-4 (ipilimumab, IPI) and PD-1 (nivolumab, NIVO, or pembrolizumab) blockade have been shown to improve relapse-free survival (RFS) and OS (latter only for IPI so far). Due to a broader immune activation neoadjuvant therapy with checkpoint inhibitors might be more effective than adjuvant, as suggested in preclinical experiments. The OpACIN trial compared neoadjuvant versus adjuvant IPI plus NIVO, while the subsequent OpACIN-neo trial tested three different dosing schedules of neoadjuvant IPI plus NIVO without adjuvant therapy. High pathologic response rates of 74–78% were induced by neoadjuvant IPI plus NIVO. Here, we present the 36- and 24-months RFS of the OpACIN and OpACIN-neo trial, respectively.

Materials and Methods

The phase 1b OpACIN trial included 20 stage IIIB/IIIC melanoma patients, which were randomized to receive IPI 3 mg/kg plus NIVO 1 mg/kg either adjuvant 4 cycles or split 2 cycles neoadjuvant and 2 adjuvant. In the phase 2 OpACIN-neo trial, 86 patients were randomized to 2 cycles neoadjuvant treatment, either in arm A: 2x IPI 3 mg/kg plus NIVO 1 mg/kg q3w (n=30), arm B: 2x IPI 1 mg/kg plus NIVO 3 mg/kg q3w (n=30), or arm C: 2x IPI 3 mg/kg q3w followed immediately by 2x NIVO 3 mg/kg q3w (n=26). Pathologic response was defined as <50% viable tumor cells and in both trials centrally reviewed by a blinded pathologist. RFS rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

Only 1 of 71 (1.4%) patients with a pathologic response on neoadjuvant therapy had relapsed, versus 16 of 23 patients (69.6%) without a pathologic response, after a median follow-up of 36 months for the OpACIN and 24 months for the OpACIN-neo trial. In the OpACIN trial, the estimated 3-year RFS rate for the neoadjuvant arm was 80% (95% CI: 59%-100%) versus 60% (95% CI: 36%-100%) for the adjuvant arm. Median RFS was not reached for any of the arms within the OpACIN-neo trial. Estimated 24-months RFS rate was 84% for all patients (95% CI: 76%-92%); 90% for arm A (95% CI: 80%-100%), 78% for arm B (95% CI: 63%-96%) and 83% for arm C (95% CI: 70%-100%). Baseline interferon-γ gene expression score and tumor mutational burden predict response.

Conclusions

OpACIN for the first time showed a potential benefit of neoadjuvant IPI plus NIVO versus adjuvant immunotherapy, whereas the OpACIN-neo trial confirmed the high pathologic response rates that can be achieved by neoadjuvant IPI plus NIVO. Both trials show that pathologic response can function as a surrogate markers for RFS.

Clinical trial information

NCT02437279, NCT02977052

Disclosure Information

J.M. Versluis: None. E.A. Rozeman: None. A.M. Menzies: F. Consultant/Advisory Board; Modest; BMS, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Pierre-Fabre. I.L.M. Reijers: None. O. Krijgsman: B. Research Grant (principal investigator, collaborator or consultant and pending grants as well as grants already received); Modest; BMS. E.P. Hoefsmit: None. B.A. van de Wiel: None. K. Sikorska: None. C. Bierman: None. P. Dimitriadis: None. M. Gonzalez: None. A. Broeks: None. R.M. Kerkhoven: None. A.J. Spillane: None. J.B.A.G. Haanen: B. Research Grant (principal investigator, collaborator or consultant and pending grants as well as grants already received); Modest; BMS, MSD, Neon Therapeutics, Novartis. F. Consultant/Advisory Board; Modest; BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, AZ/MedImmune, Rocher/Genentech, Ipsen, Bayer, Immunocore, SeattleGenetics, Neon Therapeutics, Celsius Therapeutics, Gadet, GSK. W.J. van Houdt: None. R.P.M. Saw: None. H. Eriksson: None. A.C.J. van Akkooi: B. Research Grant (principal investigator, collaborator or consultant and pending grants as well as grants already received); Modest; Amgen, BMS, Novartis. F. Consultant/Advisory Board; Modest; Amgen, BMS, Novartis, MSD Merck, Merck-Pfizer, 4SC. R.A. Scolyer: F. Consultant/Advisory Board; Modest; MSD, Neracare, Myriad, Novartis. T.N. Schumacher: B. Research Grant (principal investigator, collaborator or consultant and pending grants as well as grants already received); Modest; MSD, BMS, Merck. E. Ownership Interest (stock, stock options, patent or other intellectual property); Modest; AIMM Therapeutics, Allogene Therapeutics, Amgen, Merus, Neogene Therapeutics, Neon Therapeutics. F. Consultant/Advisory Board; Modest; Adaptive Biotechnologies, AIMM Therapeutics, Allogene Therapeutics, Amgen, Merus, Neon Therapeutics, Scenic Biotech. Other; Modest; Third Rock Ventures. G.V. Long: F. Consultant/Advisory Board; Modest; Aduro, Amgen, BMS, Mass-Array, Pierre-Fabre, Novartis, Merck MSD, Roche. C.U. Blank: B. Research Grant (principal investigator, collaborator or consultant and pending grants as well as grants already received); Modest; BMS, Novartis, NanoString. E. Ownership Interest (stock, stock options, patent or other intellectual property); Modest; Uniti Cars, Neon Therapeutics, Forty Seven. F. Consultant/Advisory Board; Modest; BMS, MSD, Roche, Novartis, GSK, AZ, Pfizer, Lilly, GenMab, Pierre-Fabre.

Mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) cells are activated in the gastrointestinal tissue of patients with combination ipilimumab and nivolumab therapy-related colitis in a pathology distinct from ulcerative colitis

The aim of this study was to investigate the pathogenesis of combination ipilimumab and nivolumab-associated colitis (IN-COL) by measuring gut-derived and peripheral blood mononuclear cell (GMNC; PBMC) profiles. We studied GMNC and PBMC from patients with IN-COL, IN-treated with no adverse-events (IN-NAE), ulcerative colitis (UC) and healthy volunteers using flow cytometry. In the gastrointestinal-derived cells we found high levels of activated CD8⁺ T cells and mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) cells in IN-COL, changes that were not evident in IN-NAE or UC. UC, but not IN-C, was associated with a high proportion of regulatory T cells (T_reg ). We sought to determine if local tissue responses could be measured in peripheral blood. Peripherally, checkpoint inhibition instigated a rise in activated memory CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells, regardless of colitis. Low circulating MAIT cells at baseline was associated with IN-COL patients compared with IN-NAE in one of two cohorts. UC, but not IN-COL, was associated with high levels of circulating plasmablasts. In summary, the alterations in T cell subsets measured in IN-COL-affected tissue, characterized by high levels of activated CD8⁺ T cells and MAIT cells and a low proportion of T_reg , reflected a pathology distinct from UC. These tissue changes differed from the periphery, where T cell activation was a widespread on-treatment effect, and circulating MAIT cell count was low but not reliably predictive of colitis.

Management of early melanoma recurrence despite adjuvant anti-PD-1 antibody therapy☆

BACKGROUND

Anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) antibodies (PD1) prolong recurrence-free survival in high-risk resected melanoma; however, approximately 25%-30% of patients recur within 1 year. This study describes the pattern of recurrence, management and outcomes of patients who recur with adjuvant PD1 therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients from 16 centres who recurred having received adjuvant PD1 therapy for resected stage III/IV melanoma were studied. Recurrence characteristics, management and outcomes were examined; patients with mucosal melanoma were analysed separately.

RESULTS

Melanoma recurrence occurred in 147 (17%) of ∼850 patients treated with adjuvant PD1. In those with cutaneous melanoma (n = 136), median time to recurrence was 4.6 months (range 0.3-35.7); 104 (76%) recurred during (ON) adjuvant PD1 after a median 3.2 months and 32 (24%) following (OFF) treatment cessation after a median 12.5 months, including in 21 (15%) who ceased early for toxicity. Fifty-nine (43%) recurred with locoregional disease only and 77 (57%) with distant disease. Of those who recurred locally, 22/59 (37%) subsequently recurred distantly. Eighty-nine (65%) patients received systemic therapy after recurrence. Of those who recurred ON adjuvant PD1, none (0/6) responded to PD1 alone; 8/33 assessable patients (24%) responded to ipilimumab (alone or in combination with PD1) and 18/23 (78%) responded to BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Of those who recurred OFF adjuvant PD1, two out of five (40%) responded to PD1 monotherapy, two out of five (40%) responded to ipilimumab-based therapy and 9/10 (90%) responded to BRAF/MEK inhibitors.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients who recur early despite adjuvant PD1 develop distant metastases. In those who recur ON adjuvant PD1, there is minimal activity of further PD1 monotherapy, but ipilimumab (alone or in combination with PD1) and BRAF/MEK inhibitors have clinical utility. Retreatment with PD1 may have activity in select patients who recur OFF PD1.

Autoimmune diseases and immune-checkpoint inhibitors for cancer therapy: review of the literature and personalized risk-based prevention strategy

Patients with cancer and with preexisting active autoimmune diseases (ADs) have been excluded from immunotherapy clinical trials because of concerns for high susceptibility to the development of severe adverse events resulting from exacerbation of their preexisting ADs. However, a growing body of evidence indicates that immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may be safe and effective in this patient population. However, baseline corticosteroids and other nonselective immunosuppressants appear to negatively impact drug efficacy, whereas retrospective and case report data suggest that use of specific immunosuppressants may not have the same consequences. Therefore, we propose here a two-step strategy. First, to lower the risk of compromising ICI efficacy before their initiation, nonselective immunosuppressants could be replaced by specific selective immunosuppressant drugs following a short rotation phase. Subsequently, combining ICI with the selective immunosuppressant could prevent exacerbation of the AD. For the most common active ADs encountered in the context of cancer, we propose specific algorithms to optimize ICI therapy. These preventive strategies go beyond current practices and recommendations, and should be practiced in ICI-specialized clinics, as these require multidisciplinary teams with extensive knowledge in the field of clinical immunology and oncology. In addition, we challenge the exclusion from ICI therapy for patients with cancer and active ADs and propose the implementation of an international registry to study such novel strategies in a prospective fashion.

Pathological assessment of resection specimens after neoadjuvant therapy for metastatic melanoma

Background

Clinical trials have recently evaluated safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy among patients with surgically resectable regional melanoma metastases. To capture informative prognostic data connected to pathological response in such trials, it is critical to standardize pathologic assessment and reporting of tumor response after this treatment.

Methods

The International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium meetings in 2016 and 2017 assembled pathologists from academic centers to develop consensus guidelines for pathologic examination and reporting of surgical specimens from AJCC (8th edition) stage IIIB/C/D or oligometastatic stage IV melanoma patients treated with neoadjuvant-targeted or immune therapy. Patterns of pathologic response are provided context to inform these guidelines.

Results

Based on our collective experience and guided by efforts in well-established neoadjuvant settings like breast cancer, procedures directing handling of pre- and post-neoadjuvant therapy-treated melanoma specimens are provided to facilitate comparison of findings across different trials and centers. Definitions of pathologic response are provided together with guidelines for reporting and quantifying the extent of pathologic response. Finally, the spectrum of histopathologic responses observed following neoadjuvant-targeted and immune-checkpoint therapy is described and illustrated.

Conclusions

Standardizing pathologic evaluation of resected melanoma metastases following neoadjuvant-targeted or immune-checkpoint therapy allows more robust stratification of patient outcomes. This includes recognizing the spectrum of histopathologic response patterns to neoadjuvant therapy and a standard approach to grading pathologic responses. Such an approach will facilitate comparison of results across clinical trials and inform ongoing correlative studies into the mechanisms of response and resistance to agents applied in the neoadjuvant setting.

FDG-PET response and outcome from anti-PD-1 therapy in metastatic melanoma

Background

Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy has resulted in impressive and durable clinical activity for many cancers including melanoma; however, there remain few reliable predictors for long-term response. This study investigated whether [18F]2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG-PET) imaging may better predict long-term outcomes compared with standard computed tomography (CT) response criteria.

Patients and methods

Retrospective analysis of metastatic melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy with baseline and 1-year FDG-PET and CT imaging at Melanoma Institute Australia. One-year response was determined using RECIST for CT and EORTC criteria for PET, coded as complete response (CR or CMR), partial response (PR or PMR), stable disease (SD or SMD) or progressive disease (PD or PMD). Progression-free survival (PFS) was determined from the 1-year landmark.

Results

Patients (n = 104) were evaluated with median follow-up 30.1 months and 98% remain alive. Most received anti-PD-1 as monotherapy (67%) or combined with ipilimumab (31%). At 1 year, 28% had CR, 66% had PR and 6% had SD on CT, while 75% had CMR, 16% PMR and 9% SMD/PMD on PET. CMR was observed in 68% of patients with PR on CT. RECIST PFS post 1-year landmark was similar in patients with CR versus PR/SD, but improved in patients with CMR versus non-CMR {median not reached [NR] versus 12.8 month; hazard ratio [HR] 0.06 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02-0.23]; P < 0.01}. In patients with PR on CT, PFS was improved in patients with PR + CMR versus PR + non-CMR (median NR versus 12.8 months; HR 0.07 [95% CI 0.02-0.27]; P < 0.01). In the 78 CMR patients, 78% had discontinued treatment and 96% had ongoing response.

Conclusions

Whilst only a small proportion of patients have a CR at 1 year, most patients with a PR have CMR on PET. Almost all patients with CMR at 1 year have ongoing response to therapy thereafter. PET may have utility in predicting long-term benefit and help guide discontinuation of therapy.

Discontinuation of anti-PD-1 antibody therapy in the absence of disease progression or treatment limiting toxicity: clinical outcomes in advanced melanoma

BACKGROUND

Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blocking monoclonal antibodies improve the overall survival of patients with advanced melanoma but the optimal duration of treatment has not been established.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This academic real-world cohort study investigated the outcome of 185 advanced melanoma patients who electively discontinued anti-PD-1 therapy with pembrolizumab (N = 167) or nivolumab (N = 18) in the absence of disease progression (PD) or treatment limiting toxicity (TLT) at 14 medical centres across Europe and Australia.

RESULTS

Median time on treatment was 12 months (range 0.7-43). The best objective tumour response at the time of treatment discontinuation was complete response (CR) in 117 (63%) patients, partial response (PR) in 44 (24%) patients and stable disease (SD) in 16 (9%) patients; 8 (4%) patients had no evaluable disease (NE). After a median follow-up of 18 months (range 0.7-48) after treatment discontinuation, 78% of patients remained free of progression. Median time to progression was 12 months (range 2-23). PD was less frequent in patients with CR (14%) compared with patients with PR (32%) and SD (50%). Six out of 19 (32%) patients who were retreated with an anti-PD-1 at the time of PD obtained a new antitumour response.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world cohort of advanced melanoma patients discontinuing anti-PD-1 therapy in the absence of TLT or PD, the duration of anti-PD-1 therapy was shorter when compared with clinical trials. In patients obtaining a CR, and being treated for >6 months, the risk of relapse after treatment discontinuation was low. Patients achieving a PR or SD as best tumour response were at higher risk for progression after discontinuing therapy, and defining optimal treatment duration in such patients deserves further study. Retreatment with an anti-PD-1 at the time of progression may lead to renewed antitumour activity in some patients.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02673970 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02673970?cond=melanoma&cntry=BE&city=Jette&rank=3).

Pre-operative ctDNA predicts survival in high-risk stage III cutaneous melanoma patients

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of patients with stage III cutaneous melanoma who undergo complete surgical resection can be highly variable, and estimation of individual risk of disease recurrence and mortality remains imprecise. With recent demonstrations of effective adjuvant targeted and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, more precise stratification of patients for costly and potentially toxic adjuvant therapy is needed. We report the utility of pre-operative circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) in patients with high-risk stage III melanoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ctDNA was analysed in blood specimens that were collected pre-operatively from 174 patients with stage III melanoma undergoing complete lymph node (LN) dissection. Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate the prognostic significance of ctDNA for distant metastasis recurrence-free survival and melanoma-specific survival (MSS).

RESULTS

The detection of ctDNA in the discovery and validation cohort was 34% and 33%, respectively, and was associated with larger nodal melanoma deposit, higher number of melanoma involved LNs, more advanced stage and high lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels. Detectable ctDNA was significantly associated with worse MSS in the discovery [hazard ratio (HR) 2.11 P < 0.01] and validation cohort (HR 2.29, P = 0.04) and remained significant in a multivariable analysis (HR 1.85, P = 0.04). ctDNA further sub-stratified patients with AJCC stage III substage, with increasing significance observed in more advanced stage melanoma.

CONCLUSION

Pre-operative ctDNA predicts MSS in high-risk stage III melanoma patients undergoing complete LN dissection, independent of stage III substage. This biomarker may have an important role in determining prognosis and stratifying patients for adjuvant treatment.

Safety of resuming anti-PD-1 in patients with immune-related adverse events (irAEs) during combined anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD1 in metastatic melanoma

Background

Combined cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed death 1 (PD-1) blockade induces high rates of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The safety of resuming anti-PD-1 in patients who discontinue combination therapy due to irAEs is not known.

Patients and methods

We assessed patients who experienced clinically significant irAEs from combined CTLA-4 and PD-1 blockade leading to treatment discontinuation at four academic centers. We assessed the safety of resuming anti-PD-1 in terms of recurrent and distinct irAEs.

Results

Eighty patients discontinued combination therapy due to irAEs, including colitis (41%), hepatitis (36%), and pneumonitis (4%). Of these, 96% received corticosteroids and 21% received additional immunosuppression (e.g. infliximab). All were rechallenged with anti-PD-1, and 14 (18%) had recurrent irAEs at a median of 14 days after therapy resumption (six grade 1-2, seven grade 3-4, and one grade 5 Steven-Johnson Syndrome). Colitis was less likely to recur than other irAEs (6% versus 28%, P = 0.01). Clinically significant but distinct toxicities occurred in an additional 17 (21%) patients (11 grade 1-2 and 6 grade 3-4). Duration of steroid taper, severity of initial irAEs and use of additional immunosuppressants did not predict for toxicity on rechallenge, although patients remaining on steroid therapy at anti-PD-1 resumption had higher rates of toxicities (55% versus 31%, P = 0.03).

Conclusions

Patients who discontinued CTLA-4/PD-1 blockade for severe irAEs had relatively high rates of recurrent or distinct toxicities with anti-PD-1 resumption. However, many patients, particularly with combination-induced colitis, tolerated anti-PD-1 rechallenge well, and this approach can be considered in selected patients.

Anti-PD-1 therapy in patients with advanced melanoma and preexisting autoimmune disorders or major toxicity with ipilimumab

Background

Anti-PD-1 antibodies (anti-PD-1) have clinical activity in a number of malignancies. All clinical trials have excluded patients with significant preexisting autoimmune disorders (ADs) and only one has included patients with immune-related adverse events (irAEs) with ipilimumab. We sought to explore the safety and efficacy of anti-PD-1 in such patients.

Patients and methods

Patients with advanced melanoma and preexisting ADs and/or major immune-related adverse events (irAEs) with ipilimumab (requiring systemic immunosuppression) that were treated with anti-PD-1 between 1 July 2012 and 30 September 2015 were retrospectively identified.

Results

One hundred and nineteen patients from 13 academic tertiary referral centers were treated with anti-PD-1. In patients with preexisting AD (N = 52), the response rate was 33%. 20 (38%) patients had a flare of AD requiring immunosuppression, including 7/13 with rheumatoid arthritis, 3/3 with polymyalgia rheumatica, 2/2 with Sjogren's syndrome, 2/2 with immune thrombocytopaenic purpura and 3/8 with psoriasis. No patients with gastrointestinal (N = 6) or neurological disorders (N = 5) flared. Only 2 (4%) patients discontinued treatment due to flare, but 15 (29%) developed other irAEs and 4 (8%) discontinued treatment. In patients with prior ipilimumab irAEs requiring immunosuppression (N = 67) the response rate was 40%. Two (3%) patients had a recurrence of the same ipilimumab irAEs, but 23 (34%) developed new irAEs (14, 21% grade 3-4) and 8 (12%) discontinued treatment. There were no treatment-related deaths.

Conclusions

In melanoma patients with preexisting ADs or major irAEs with ipilimumab, anti-PD-1 induced relatively frequent immune toxicities, but these were often mild, easily managed and did not necessitate discontinuation of therapy, and a significant proportion of patients achieved clinical responses. The results support that anti-PD-1 can be administered safely and can achieve clinical benefit in patients with preexisting ADs or prior major irAEs with ipilimumab.

Activity and safety of radiotherapy with anti-PD-1 drug therapy in patients with metastatic melanoma

The anti-PD-1 antibodies nivolumab and pembrolizumab are active in metastatic melanoma; however, there is limited data on combining anti-PD-1 antibody and radiotherapy (RT). We sought to review clinical outcomes of patients receiving RT and anti-PD-1 therapy. All patients receiving anti-PD-1 antibody and RT for metastatic melanoma were identified. RT and systemic treatment, clinical outcome, and toxicity data were collected. Fifty-three patients were included; 35 patients received extracranial RT and/or intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and 21 received whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) (three of whom also received SRS/extracranial RT). Patients treated with extracranial RT or SRS received treatment either sequentially (RT then anti-PD-1, n = 11), concurrently (n = 16), or concurrent "salvage" treatment to lesions progressing on anti-PD-1 therapy (n = 15). There was no excessive anti-PD-1 or RT toxicity observed in patients receiving extracranial RT. Of six patients receiving SRS, one patient developed grade 3 radiation necrosis. In 21 patients receiving WBRT, one patient developed Stevens-Johnson syndrome, one patient developed acute neurocognitive decline, and one patient developed significant cerebral edema in the setting of disease. Response in irradiated extracranial/intracranial SRS lesions was 44% for sequential treatment and 64% for concurrent treatment (p=0.448). Likewise there was no significant difference between sequential or concurrent treatment in lesional response of non-irradiated lesions. For progressing lesions subsequently irradiated, response rate was 45%. RT and anti-PD-1 antibodies can be safely combined, with no detectable excess toxicity in extracranial sites. WBRT and anti-PD-1 therapy is well tolerated, although there are rare toxicities and the role of either anti-PD-1 or WBRT in the etiology of these is uncertain.

Characteristics of pyrexia in BRAFV600E/K metastatic melanoma patients treated with combined dabrafenib and trametinib in a phase I/II clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Pyrexia is a frequent adverse event with combined dabrafenib and trametinib therapy (CombiDT), but little is known of its clinical associations, etiology, or appropriate management.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients on the BRF133220 phase I/II trial of CombiDT treated at the standard dose (150/2) were included for assessment of pyrexia (n = 201). BRAF and MEK inhibitor-naïve patients (n = 117) were included for efficacy analyses. Pyrexia was defined as temperature ≥38°C (≥100.4(°)F) or related symptoms.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine percent of patients developed pyrexia during treatment, 24% of which had pyrexia symptoms without a recorded elevation in body temperature. Pyrexia was grade 2+ in 60% of pyrexia patients. Median time to onset of first pyrexia was 19 days, with a median duration of 9 days. Pyrexia patients had a median of two pyrexia events, but 21% had three or more events. Various pyrexia management approaches were conducted in this study. A trend was observed between dabrafenib and hydroxy-dabrafenib exposure and pyrexia. No baseline clinical characteristics predicted pyrexia, and pyrexia was not statistically significantly associated with treatment outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Pyrexia is a frequent and recurrent toxicity with CombiDT treatment. No baseline features predict pyrexia, and it is not associated with clinical outcome. Dabrafenib and metabolite exposure may contribute to the etiology of pyrexia. The optimal secondary prophylaxis for pyrexia is best studied in a prospective trial.

Correlation of BRAF and NRAS mutation status with outcome, site of distant metastasis and response to chemotherapy in metastatic melanoma

BACKGROUND

The prognostic significance of BRAF and NRAS mutations in metastatic melanoma patients remains uncertain, with several studies reporting conflicting results, often biased by the inclusion of patients treated with BRAF and MEK (MAPK) inhibitors. We therefore interrogated a historical cohort of patients free of the confounding influence of MAPK inhibitor therapy.

METHODS

Patients with available archival tissue first diagnosed with metastatic melanoma between 2002 and 2006 were analysed. Mutational analysis was performed using the OncoCarta Panel. Patient characteristics, treatment outcome and survival were correlated with BRAF/NRAS mutation status.

RESULTS

In 193 patients, 92 (48%) melanomas were BRAF-mutant, 39 (20%) were NRAS-mutant and 62 (32%) were wild-type for BRAF/NRAS mutations (wt). There was no difference in response to chemotherapy based on mutation status (35-37%). The distant disease-free interval (DDFI) was significantly shorter in patients with wt melanoma (27.9 months vs 35.1 for BRAF and 49.1 for NRAS) although this was not significant in multivariate analysis. Survival from stage IV melanoma diagnosis was not significantly different based on mutation status. The DDFI was significantly shorter in patients with BRAF(V600K/R) versus BRAF(V600E) melanoma in univariate and multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

BRAF and NRAS mutation status does not influence survival in metastatic melanoma.

BRAF(V600E) protein expression and outcome from BRAF inhibitor treatment in BRAF(V600E) metastatic melanoma

BACKGROUND

To examine the association between level and patterns of baseline intra-tumoural BRAF(V600E) protein expression and clinical outcome of BRAF(V600E) melanoma patients treated with selective BRAF inhibitors.

METHODS

Fifty-eight BRAF(V600E) metastatic melanoma patients treated with dabrafenib or vemurafenib on clinical trials had pre-treatment tumour BRAF(V600E) protein expression immunohistochemically (IHC) assessed using the BRAF V600E mutant-specific antibody VE1. Sections were examined for staining intensity (score 1-3) and percentage of immunoreactive tumour cells, and from this an immunoreactive score (IRS) was derived (intensity × per cent positive/10). The presence of intra-tumoural heterogeneity for BRAF(V600E) protein expression was also assessed. BRAF(V600E) expression was correlated with RECIST response, time to best response (TTBR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Expression was generally high (median IRS 28 (range 5-30)) and homogeneous (78%). Expression of mutated protein BRAF(V600E) as measured by intensity, per cent immunoreactive cells, or IRS did not correlate with RECIST response, TTBR, PFS or OS, including on multivariate analysis. Heterogeneity of staining was seen in 22% of cases and did not correlate with outcome.

CONCLUSION

In the current study population, IHC-measured pre-treatment BRAF(V600E) protein expression does not predict response or outcome to BRAF inhibitor therapy in BRAF(V600E) metastatic melanoma patients.