Exploring Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors' Experience with Cancer Treatment-Related Symptoms: A Qualitative Analysis of Semi-Structured Interviews

Purpose: Few studies have specifically targeted symptom management interventions for adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors. A greater understanding of AYA cancer survivors' experiences with cancer treatment-related symptoms would help develop age-appropriate oncology symptom management interventions. The purpose of this qualitative analysis was to explore AYA cancer survivors' experience with cancer treatment-related symptoms. Methods: Nineteen post-treatment AYA cancer survivors (18-39 years old) who self-reported moderate-severe cancer treatment-related symptom severity participated in video conferencing or telephone interviews. The questions in the interview guide queried participants to share their experience with cancer treatment-related symptoms. Inductive content analysis was used to identify themes from the interviews. Results: The themes that emerged from the interviews included (1) cancer treatment-related symptoms negatively affected AYA cancer survivors' quality of life (e.g., symptoms served as a reminder of cancer recurrence possibility); (2) AYA cancer survivors' attitudes and feelings about communicating cancer treatment-related symptom concerns to clinicians (e.g., patient-clinician communication was bolstered when AYAs perceived that symptoms were being taken seriously); (3) AYA cancer survivors are interested in oncology symptom management clinical trials, but logistical challenges are barriers to participation; and (4) AYA cancer survivors are interested in nonpharmacological treatments for symptom management. Conclusion: Results highlight the burden of cancer treatment-related symptoms on day-to-day life among post-treatment AYA cancer survivors. Future work is needed to identify nonpharmacological symptom management interventions, strategies to improve patient-clinician communication about symptoms, and strategies to increase the visibility and accessibility of symptom management clinical trials for AYA cancer survivors.

The impact of cancer metastases on COVID-19 outcomes: A COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry-based retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 can have a particularly detrimental effect on patients with cancer, but no studies to date have examined if the presence, or site, of metastatic cancer is related to COVID-19 outcomes.

METHODS

Using the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry, the authors identified 10,065 patients with COVID-19 and cancer (2325 with and 7740 without metastasis at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis). The primary ordinal outcome was COVID-19 severity: not hospitalized, hospitalized but did not receive supplemental O2 , hospitalized and received supplemental O2 , admitted to an intensive care unit, received mechanical ventilation, or died from any cause. The authors used ordinal logistic regression models to compare COVID-19 severity by presence and specific site of metastatic cancer. They used logistic regression models to assess 30-day all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Compared to patients without metastasis, patients with metastases have increased hospitalization rates (59% vs. 49%) and higher 30 day mortality (18% vs. 9%). Patients with metastasis to bone, lung, liver, lymph nodes, and brain have significantly higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted odds ratios [ORs], 1.38, 1.59, 1.38, 1.00, and 2.21) compared to patients without metastases at those sites. Patients with metastasis to the lung have significantly higher odds of 30-day mortality (adjusted OR, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.00) when adjusting for COVID-19 severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with metastatic cancer, especially with metastasis to the brain, are more likely to have severe outcomes after COVID-19 whereas patients with metastasis to the lung, compared to patients with cancer metastasis to other sites, have the highest 30-day mortality after COVID-19.

Adjuvant Nivolumab versus Ipilimumab in Resected Stage III/IV Melanoma: 5-Year Efficacy and Biomarker Results from CheckMate 238

PURPOSE

In the phase III CheckMate 238 study, adjuvant nivolumab significantly improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) and distant metastasis-free survival versus ipilimumab in patients with resected stage IIIB-C or stage IV melanoma, with benefit sustained at 4 years. We report updated 5-year efficacy and biomarker findings.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with resected stage IIIB-C/IV melanoma were stratified by stage and baseline programmed death cell ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses and then every 12 weeks, both intravenously for 1 year until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was RFS.

RESULTS

At a minimum follow-up of 62 months, RFS with nivolumab remained superior to ipilimumab (HR = 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.86; 5-year rates of 50% vs. 39%). Five-year distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) rates were 58% with nivolumab versus 51% with ipilimumab. Five-year overall survival (OS) rates were 76% with nivolumab and 72% with ipilimumab (75% data maturity: 228 of 302 planned events). Higher levels of tumor mutational burden (TMB), tumor PD-L1, intratumoral CD8+ T cells and IFNγ-associated gene expression signature, and lower levels of peripheral serum C-reactive protein were associated with improved RFS and OS with both nivolumab and ipilimumab, albeit with limited clinically meaningful predictive value.

CONCLUSIONS

Nivolumab is a proven adjuvant treatment for resected melanoma at high risk of recurrence, with sustained, long-term improvement in RFS and DMFS compared with ipilimumab and high OS rates. Identification of additional biomarkers is needed to better predict treatment outcome. See related commentary by Augustin and Luke, p. 3253.

COVID-19 severity and cardiovascular outcomes in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease

Background

Data regarding outcomes among patients with cancer and co-morbid cardiovascular disease (CVD)/cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) after SARS-CoV-2 infection are limited.

Objectives

To compare Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related complications among cancer patients with and without co-morbid CVD/CVRF.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2, reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from 03/17/2020 to 12/31/2021. CVD/CVRF was defined as established CVD or no established CVD, male ≥ 55 or female ≥ 60 years, and one additional CVRF. The primary endpoint was an ordinal COVID-19 severity outcome including need for hospitalization, supplemental oxygen, intensive care unit (ICU), mechanical ventilation, ICU or mechanical ventilation plus vasopressors, and death. Secondary endpoints included incident adverse CV events. Ordinal logistic regression models estimated associations of CVD/CVRF with COVID-19 severity. Effect modification by recent cancer therapy was evaluated.

Results

Among 10,876 SARS-CoV-2 infected patients with cancer (median age 65 [IQR 54-74] years, 53% female, 52% White), 6253 patients (57%) had co-morbid CVD/CVRF. Co-morbid CVD/CVRF was associated with higher COVID-19 severity (adjusted OR: 1.25 [95% CI 1.11-1.40]). Adverse CV events were significantly higher in patients with CVD/CVRF (all p<0.001). CVD/CVRF was associated with worse COVID-19 severity in patients who had not received recent cancer therapy, but not in those undergoing active cancer therapy (OR 1.51 [95% CI 1.31-1.74] vs. OR 1.04 [95% CI 0.90-1.20], pinteraction <0.001).

Conclusions

Co-morbid CVD/CVRF is associated with higher COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer, particularly those not receiving active cancer therapy. While infrequent, COVID-19 related CV complications were higher in patients with comorbid CVD/CVRF. (COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium Registry [CCC19]; NCT04354701).

A Brain, A Heart, and the Courage: Balancing Benefit and Toxicity of Immunotherapy in Melanoma

The overall survival of advanced melanoma has improved dramatically. Immunotherapies, specifically checkpoint inhibitors, have played a large role in this improvement. These agents have also shown benefit in the adjuvant setting, are approved for treatment of resected stage II, III, and IV melanoma, and play an evolving role in the neoadjuvant setting. Although generally well tolerated, immune-related adverse events occur and can be severe. Here we focus on some severe and potentially long term toxicities, including cardiovascular and neurologic toxicities. Our understanding of the acute and long-term toxicities of immune checkpoint inhibitors continues to evolve. Oncologists must continue to balance cancer risk and treatment-related toxicities.

Impact of COVID-19 in patients on active melanoma therapy and with history of melanoma

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 particularly impacted patients with co-morbid conditions, including cancer. Patients with melanoma have not been specifically studied in large numbers. Here, we sought to identify factors that associated with COVID-19 severity among patients with melanoma, particularly assessing outcomes of patients on active targeted or immune therapy.

METHODS

Using the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry, we identified 307 patients with melanoma diagnosed with COVID-19. We used multivariable models to assess demographic, cancer-related, and treatment-related factors associated with COVID-19 severity on a 6-level ordinal severity scale. We assessed whether treatment was associated with increased cardiac or pulmonary dysfunction among hospitalized patients and assessed mortality among patients with a history of melanoma compared with other cancer survivors.

RESULTS

Of 307 patients, 52 received immunotherapy (17%), and 32 targeted therapy (10%) in the previous 3 months. Using multivariable analyses, these treatments were not associated with COVID-19 severity (immunotherapy OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.19 - 1.39; targeted therapy OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.64 - 5.55). Among hospitalized patients, no signals of increased cardiac or pulmonary organ dysfunction, as measured by troponin, brain natriuretic peptide, and oxygenation were noted. Patients with a history of melanoma had similar 90-day mortality compared with other cancer survivors (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.62 - 2.35).

CONCLUSIONS

Melanoma therapies did not appear to be associated with increased severity of COVID-19 or worsening organ dysfunction. Patients with history of melanoma had similar 90-day survival following COVID-19 compared with other cancer survivors.

Neoadjuvant-Adjuvant or Adjuvant-Only Pembrolizumab in Advanced Melanoma

BACKGROUND

Whether pembrolizumab given both before surgery (neoadjuvant therapy) and after surgery (adjuvant therapy), as compared with pembrolizumab given as adjuvant therapy alone, would increase event-free survival among patients with resectable stage III or IV melanoma is unknown.

METHODS

In a phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with clinically detectable, measurable stage IIIB to IVC melanoma that was amenable to surgical resection to three doses of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab, surgery, and 15 doses of adjuvant pembrolizumab (neoadjuvant-adjuvant group) or to surgery followed by pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses) for approximately 1 year or until disease recurred or unacceptable toxic effects developed (adjuvant-only group). The primary end point was event-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Events were defined as disease progression or toxic effects that precluded surgery; the inability to resect all gross disease; disease progression, surgical complications, or toxic effects of treatment that precluded the initiation of adjuvant therapy within 84 days after surgery; recurrence of melanoma after surgery; or death from any cause. Safety was also evaluated.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 14.7 months, the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group (154 patients) had significantly longer event-free survival than the adjuvant-only group (159 patients) (P = 0.004 by the log-rank test). In a landmark analysis, event-free survival at 2 years was 72% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64 to 80) in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group and 49% (95% CI, 41 to 59) in the adjuvant-only group. The percentage of patients with treatment-related adverse events of grades 3 or higher during therapy was 12% in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group and 14% in the adjuvant-only group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with resectable stage III or IV melanoma, event-free survival was significantly longer among those who received pembrolizumab both before and after surgery than among those who received adjuvant pembrolizumab alone. No new toxic effects were identified. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and Merck Sharp and Dohme; S1801 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03698019.).

Intersection of immune and oncometabolic pathways drives cancer hyperprogression during immunotherapy

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) can produce durable responses against cancer. We and others have found that a subset of patients experiences paradoxical rapid cancer progression during immunotherapy. It is poorly understood how tumors can accelerate their progression during ICB. In some preclinical models, ICB causes hyperprogressive disease (HPD). While immune exclusion drives resistance to ICB, counterintuitively, patients with HPD and complete response (CR) following ICB manifest comparable levels of tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T cells and interferon γ (IFNγ) gene signature. Interestingly, patients with HPD but not CR exhibit elevated tumoral fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF2) and β-catenin signaling. In animal models, T cell-derived IFNγ promotes tumor FGF2 signaling, thereby suppressing PKM2 activity and decreasing NAD+, resulting in reduction of SIRT1-mediated β-catenin deacetylation and enhanced β-catenin acetylation, consequently reprograming tumor stemness. Targeting the IFNγ-PKM2-β-catenin axis prevents HPD in preclinical models. Thus, the crosstalk of core immunogenic, metabolic, and oncogenic pathways via the IFNγ-PKM2-β-catenin cascade underlies ICB-associated HPD.

Interplay of Immunosuppression and Immunotherapy Among Patients With Cancer and COVID-19

Importance

Cytokine storm due to COVID-19 can cause high morbidity and mortality and may be more common in patients with cancer treated with immunotherapy (IO) due to immune system activation.

Objective

To determine the association of baseline immunosuppression and/or IO-based therapies with COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm in patients with cancer.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This registry-based retrospective cohort study included 12 046 patients reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) registry from March 2020 to May 2022. The CCC19 registry is a centralized international multi-institutional registry of patients with COVID-19 with a current or past diagnosis of cancer. Records analyzed included patients with active or previous cancer who had a laboratory-confirmed infection with SARS-CoV-2 by polymerase chain reaction and/or serologic findings.

Exposures

Immunosuppression due to therapy; systemic anticancer therapy (IO or non-IO).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was a 5-level ordinal scale of COVID-19 severity: no complications; hospitalized without requiring oxygen; hospitalized and required oxygen; intensive care unit admission and/or mechanical ventilation; death. The secondary outcome was the occurrence of cytokine storm.

Results

The median age of the entire cohort was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-74) years and 6359 patients were female (52.8%) and 6598 (54.8%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 599 (5.0%) patients received IO, whereas 4327 (35.9%) received non-IO systemic anticancer therapies, and 7120 (59.1%) did not receive any antineoplastic regimen within 3 months prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Although no difference in COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm was found in the IO group compared with the untreated group in the total cohort (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.13, and aOR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.41-1.93, respectively), patients with baseline immunosuppression treated with IO (vs untreated) had worse COVID-19 severity and cytokine storm (aOR, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.38-8.01, and aOR, 4.41; 95% CI, 1.71-11.38, respectively). Patients with immunosuppression receiving non-IO therapies (vs untreated) also had worse COVID-19 severity (aOR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.36-2.35) and cytokine storm (aOR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.42-3.79).

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study found that in patients with cancer and COVID-19, administration of systemic anticancer therapies, especially IO, in the context of baseline immunosuppression was associated with severe clinical outcomes and the development of cytokine storm.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04354701.

Biomarker Trends, Incidence, and Outcomes of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Induced Myocarditis

Background

Myocarditis is a dreaded and unpredictable complication of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). We sought to determine whether routinely measured biomarkers could be helpful in monitoring for ICI myocarditis.

Objectives

The authors examined biomarker trends of patients on ICI and their association with the incidence of ICI myocarditis and outcomes.

Methods

We conducted an observational cohort study of adults who received at least one dose of ICI at Michigan Medicine between June 2014 and December 2021 and underwent systematic serial testing for aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT), creatine phosphokinase (CPK), and lactate dehydrogenase during ICI therapy.

Results

Among 2,606 patients (mean age 64 ± 13 years; 60.7% men), 27 (1.0%) were diagnosed with ICI myocarditis. At diagnosis, patients with myocarditis had an elevated high-sensitivity troponin T (100%), ALT (88.9%), AST (85.2%), CPK (88.9%), and lactate dehydrogenase (92.6%). Findings were confirmed in an independent cohort of 30 patients with biopsy-confirmed ICI myocarditis. A total of 95% of patients with ICI myocarditis had elevations in at least 3 biomarkers compared with 5% of patients without myocarditis. Among the noncardiac biomarkers, only CPK was associated (per 100% increase) with the development of myocarditis (HR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.59-2.10) and all-cause mortality (HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.01-1.20) in multivariable analysis. Elevations in CPK had a sensitivity of 99% and specificity of 23% for identifying myocarditis.

Conclusions

ICI myocarditis is associated with changes in AST, ALT, and CPK. An increase in noncardiac biomarkers during ICI treatment, notably CPK, should prompt further evaluation for ICI myocarditis.

Treatment related toxicities with combination BRAF and MEK inhibitor therapy in resected stage III melanoma

Combination dabrafenib (D) and trametinib (T) is an FDA approved adjuvant therapy for patients with resected stage III BRAF-mutant melanoma. We describe treatment-related toxicities with adjuvant D+T in a real-world population through a retrospective case series. The primary endpoint was development of toxicities.

Metastatic melanoma of the heart: Retrospective cohort study and systematic review of prevalence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Cardiac metastasis of melanoma is rare and typically diagnosed post-mortem. Here we perform a retrospective cohort study and systematic review of patients with metastatic melanoma to characterize prevalence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of cardiac metastasis.

METHODS

We reviewed the electronic medical records of all outpatients with metastatic melanoma who underwent evaluation at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor from January 2009 to January 2022, identifying patients with a clinical or histopathologic diagnosis of cardiac metastasis. We performed a systematic review of the literature to summarize the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with melanoma and cardiac metastasis.

RESULTS

Overall, 23 of 1254 (1.8%) patients with metastatic melanoma were diagnosed with cardiac metastasis. Cardiac metastasis was reported in the right ventricle (65%), left ventricle (35%), and right atrium (35%). A total of 11 (48%) patients experienced at least one cardiovascular complication after the diagnosis of cardiac metastasis, the most common being arrhythmia (30%), heart failure (22%), and pericardial effusion (17%). Immunotherapy was more commonly used in patients with cardiac metastasis (80% vs 65%; p = 0.005). Mortality at 2-years post-diagnosis was higher for patients with cardiac metastasis compared to those without (59% vs 37%; p = 0.034). Progression of malignancy was the underlying cause of death of all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiac metastasis occurs in <2% of patients with metastatic melanoma, can affect all cardiac structures, and is associated with various cardiovascular complications and high mortality.

Early Response Assessment in Advanced Stage Melanoma Treated with Combination Ipilimumab/Nivolumab

Background

Standard combination ipilimumab/nivolumab (I/N) is given as 4 induction doses for advanced stage melanoma followed by nivolumab single-agent maintenance therapy. While many patients receive less than 4 doses due to immune-related toxicities, it is unclear if fewer doses of I/N may still provide long term clinical benefit. Our aim is to determine if response assessment after 1 or 2 doses of I/N can predict long-term survival and assess if fewer doses of I/N can lead to similar survival outcomes.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis on a cohort of patients with advanced melanoma who w0ere treated with standard I/N. Cox regression of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) models were performed to assess the relationship between response after 1 or 2 doses of I/N and risk of progression and/or death. Clinical benefit response (CBR) was assessed, defined as SD (stable disease) + PR (partial response) + CR (complete response) by imaging. Among patients who achieved a CBR after 1 or 2 doses of I/N, a multivariable Cox regression of survival was used to compare 1 or 2 vs 3 or 4 doses of I/N adjusted by known prognostic variables in advanced melanoma.

Results

199 patients were evaluated. Patients with CBR after 1 dose of I/N had improved PFS (HR: 0.16, 95% CI 0.08-0.33; p<0.001) and OS (HR: 0.12, 0.05-0.32; p<0.001) compared to progressive disease (PD). Patients with CBR (vs PD) after 2 doses of I/N also had improved PFS (HR: 0.09, 0.05-0.16; p<0.001) and OS (HR: 0.07, 0.03-0.14; p<0.001). There was no survival risk difference comparing 1 or 2 vs 3 or 4 doses of I/N for PFS (HR: 0.95, 0.37-2.48; p=0.921) and OS (HR: 1.04, 0.22-4.78; p=0.965).

Conclusions

Early interval imaging with response during induction with I/N may be predictive of long-term survival in advanced stage melanoma. CBR after 1 or 2 doses of I/N is associated with favorable survival outcomes, even in the setting of fewer I/N doses received. Further studies are warranted to evaluate if electively administering fewer combination I/N doses despite tolerance in select patients may balance the benefits of therapy while decreasing toxicities.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY (AACE) DISEASE STATE CLINICAL REVIEW EVALUATION AND MANAGEMENT OF IMMUNE CHECKPOINT INHIBITOR-MEDIATED ENDOCRINOPATHIES: A PRACTICAL CASE-BASED CLINICAL APPROACH

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this case-based clinical review is to provide a practical approach for clinicians regarding the management of patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-mediated endocrinopathies.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase and Scopus, and appropriate keywords. The discussions and strategies for diagnosis and management of ICI-mediated endocrinopathies are based on evidence available from prospective randomized clinical studies, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, case-based studies, and expert consensus.

RESULTS

Immunotherapy with ICIs has transformed the treatment landscape of diverse cancer types, but frequently results in immune-mediated endocrinopathies that can cause acute and persistent morbidity, and rarely, death. The patterns of endocrinopathies differ between inhibitors of the CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 pathways, but most often involve the thyroid and pituitary glands. Less common but important presentations include insulin-deficient diabetes mellitus, primary adrenal insufficiency, primary hypoparathyroidism, central diabetes insipidus, primary hypogonadism, and pancreatitis with or without subsequent progression to diabetes or exocrine insufficiency.

CONCLUSION

In recent years, with increasing numbers of cancer patients being treated with ICIs, more clinicians in a variety of specialties are called upon to diagnose and treat ICI-mediated endocrinopathies. Herein, we review case scenarios of various clinical manifestations, and emphasize the need for a high index of clinical suspicion by all clinicians caring for these patients including endocrinologists, oncologists, primary care providers, and emergency department physicians. We also provide diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for ICI-induced endocrinopathies, and we propose that patients on ICI-therapy be evaluated and treated in a multidisciplinary team in collaboration with endocrinologists.

Successful use of secukinumab in two melanoma patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced inflammatory arthropathy

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are a major concern when treating cancer patients with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Selecting the most appropriate management of irAEs remains an ongoing challenge because prolonged use of glucocorticoids come with their own side effects and may counteract the antineoplastic effects from immunotherapy. In this case report, we present two patients with metastatic melanoma who developed symptoms of inflammatory arthritis attributed to ICI therapy. We found that treatment with secukinumab, an anti-IL-17A inhibitor, effectively managed their symptoms and did not lead to tumor progression. Our study suggests that secukinumab can be a safe and effective treatment option for ICI-induced inflammatory arthropathy.

The Role of Tissue Biopsy in the Management of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Toxicity

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment of cancer and are now omnipresent. However, immune-related adverse events can present with varying phenotypes and timing, which can pose diagnostic and therapeutic challenges for the treating oncologist as well as subspecialty consultants. Biopsies of affected organs may provide insight into biologic mechanisms as well as potentially guide management in certain circumstances.

Racial Disparities in COVID-19 Outcomes Among Black and White Patients With Cancer

IMPORTANCE

Non-Hispanic Black individuals experience a higher burden of COVID-19 than the general population; hence, there is an urgent need to characterize the unique clinical course and outcomes of COVID-19 in Black patients with cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate racial disparities in severity of COVID-19 presentation, clinical complications, and outcomes between Black patients and non-Hispanic White patients with cancer and COVID-19.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study used data from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium registry from March 17, 2020, to November 18, 2020, to examine the clinical characteristics and outcomes of COVID-19 in Black patients with cancer. Data analysis was performed from December 2020 to February 2021.

EXPOSURES

Black and White race recorded in patient's electronic health record.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

An a priori 5-level ordinal scale including hospitalization intensive care unit admission, mechanical ventilation, and all-cause death.

RESULTS

Among 3506 included patients (1768 women [50%]; median [IQR] age, 67 [58-77] years), 1068 (30%) were Black and 2438 (70%) were White. Black patients had higher rates of preexisting comorbidities compared with White patients, including obesity (480 Black patients [45%] vs 925 White patients [38%]), diabetes (411 Black patients [38%] vs 574 White patients [24%]), and kidney disease (248 Black patients [23%] vs 392 White patients [16%]). Despite the similar distribution of cancer type, cancer status, and anticancer therapy at the time of COVID-19 diagnosis, Black patients presented with worse illness and had significantly worse COVID-19 severity (unweighted odds ratio, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.15-1.58]; weighted odds ratio, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.11-1.33]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that Black patients with cancer experience worse COVID-19 outcomes compared with White patients. Understanding and addressing racial inequities within the causal framework of structural racism is essential to reduce the disproportionate burden of diseases, such as COVID-19 and cancer, in Black patients.

Assessment of Regional Variability in COVID-19 Outcomes Among Patients With Cancer in the United States

IMPORTANCE

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a distinct spatiotemporal pattern in the United States. Patients with cancer are at higher risk of severe complications from COVID-19, but it is not well known whether COVID-19 outcomes in this patient population were associated with geography.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify spatiotemporal variation in COVID-19 outcomes among patients with cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This registry-based retrospective cohort study included patients with a historical diagnosis of invasive malignant neoplasm and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection between March and November 2020. Data were collected from cancer care delivery centers in the United States.

EXPOSURES

Patient residence was categorized into 9 US census divisions. Cancer center characteristics included academic or community classification, rural-urban continuum code (RUCC), and social vulnerability index.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. The secondary composite outcome consisted of receipt of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit admission, and all-cause death. Multilevel mixed-effects models estimated associations of center-level and census division-level exposures with outcomes after adjustment for patient-level risk factors and quantified variation in adjusted outcomes across centers, census divisions, and calendar time.

RESULTS

Data for 4749 patients (median [IQR] age, 66 [56-76] years; 2439 [51.4%] female individuals, 1079 [22.7%] non-Hispanic Black individuals, and 690 [14.5%] Hispanic individuals) were reported from 83 centers in the Northeast (1564 patients [32.9%]), Midwest (1638 [34.5%]), South (894 [18.8%]), and West (653 [13.8%]). After adjustment for patient characteristics, including month of COVID-19 diagnosis, estimated 30-day mortality rates ranged from 5.2% to 26.6% across centers. Patients from centers located in metropolitan areas with population less than 250 000 (RUCC 3) had lower odds of 30-day mortality compared with patients from centers in metropolitan areas with population at least 1 million (RUCC 1) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.84). The type of center was not significantly associated with primary or secondary outcomes. There were no statistically significant differences in outcome rates across the 9 census divisions, but adjusted mortality rates significantly improved over time (eg, September to November vs March to May: aOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.17-0.58).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this registry-based cohort study, significant differences in COVID-19 outcomes across US census divisions were not observed. However, substantial heterogeneity in COVID-19 outcomes across cancer care delivery centers was found. Attention to implementing standardized guidelines for the care of patients with cancer and COVID-19 could improve outcomes for these vulnerable patients.

Association of clinical factors and recent anticancer therapy with COVID-19 severity among patients with cancer: a report from the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer may be at high risk of adverse outcomes from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. We analyzed a cohort of patients with cancer and coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) reported to the COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) to identify prognostic clinical factors, including laboratory measurements and anticancer therapies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with active or historical cancer and a laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis recorded between 17 March and 18 November 2020 were included. The primary outcome was COVID-19 severity measured on an ordinal scale (uncomplicated, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care unit, mechanically ventilated, died within 30 days). Multivariable regression models included demographics, cancer status, anticancer therapy and timing, COVID-19-directed therapies, and laboratory measurements (among hospitalized patients).

RESULTS

A total of 4966 patients were included (median age 66 years, 51% female, 50% non-Hispanic white); 2872 (58%) were hospitalized and 695 (14%) died; 61% had cancer that was present, diagnosed, or treated within the year prior to COVID-19 diagnosis. Older age, male sex, obesity, cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities, renal disease, diabetes mellitus, non-Hispanic black race, Hispanic ethnicity, worse Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, recent cytotoxic chemotherapy, and hematologic malignancy were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Among hospitalized patients, low or high absolute lymphocyte count; high absolute neutrophil count; low platelet count; abnormal creatinine; troponin; lactate dehydrogenase; and C-reactive protein were associated with higher COVID-19 severity. Patients diagnosed early in the COVID-19 pandemic (January-April 2020) had worse outcomes than those diagnosed later. Specific anticancer therapies (e.g. R-CHOP, platinum combined with etoposide, and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors) were associated with high 30-day all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical factors (e.g. older age, hematological malignancy, recent chemotherapy) and laboratory measurements were associated with poor outcomes among patients with cancer and COVID-19. Although further studies are needed, caution may be required in utilizing particular anticancer therapies.

CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER

NCT04354701.

The Role of Systemic Therapy in Advanced Cutaneous Melanoma of the Head and Neck

The treatment of advanced melanoma has changed dramatically over the last decade. With the discovery of activating BRAF mutations and the development of targeted therapies and checkpoint inhibitors, the overall survival of patients with advanced melanoma has improved. This article provides an overview of systemic therapies, including the pivotal agents that have led to these advances.

The impact of BRAF mutation status on clinical outcomes with anti-PD-1 monotherapy versus combination ipilimumab/nivolumab in treatment-naïve advanced stage melanoma

Nearly half of all metastatic melanoma patients possess the BRAF V600 mutation. Several therapies are approved for advanced stage melanoma, but it is unclear if there is a differential outcome to various immunotherapy regimens based on BRAF mutation status. We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of metastatic or unresectable melanoma patients who were treated with combination ipilimumab/nivolumab (ipi/nivo) or anti-PD-1 monotherapy, nivolumab, or pembrolizumab, as first-line treatment. 235 previously untreated patients were identified in our study. Our univariate analysis showed no statistical difference in progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) with ipi/nivo versus anti-PD-1 monotherapy in the BRAF V600 mutant cohort, but there was improved PFS [HR: 0.48, 95% CI, 0.28-0.80] and OS [HR: 0.50, 95% CI, 0.26-0.96] with ipi/nivo compared to anti-PD-1 monotherapy in the BRAF WT group. After adjusting for known prognostic variables in our multivariable analysis, the BRAF WT cohort continued to show PFS and OS benefit with ipi/nivo compared to anti-PD-1 monotherapy. Our single-institution analysis suggests ipi/nivo should be considered over anti-PD-1 monotherapy as the initial immunotherapy regimen for metastatic melanoma patients regardless of BRAF mutation status, but possibly with greater benefit in BRAF WT.

Utilization of COVID-19 Treatments and Clinical Outcomes among Patients with Cancer: A COVID-19 and Cancer Consortium (CCC19) Cohort Study

Among 2,186 U.S. adults with invasive cancer and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, we examined the association of COVID-19 treatments with 30-day all-cause mortality and factors associated with treatment. Logistic regression with multiple adjustments (e.g., comorbidities, cancer status, baseline COVID-19 severity) was performed. Hydroxychloroquine with any other drug was associated with increased mortality versus treatment with any COVID-19 treatment other than hydroxychloroquine or untreated controls; this association was not present with hydroxychloroquine alone. Remdesivir had numerically reduced mortality versus untreated controls that did not reach statistical significance. Baseline COVID-19 severity was strongly associated with receipt of any treatment. Black patients were approximately half as likely to receive remdesivir as white patients. Although observational studies can be limited by potential unmeasured confounding, our findings add to the emerging understanding of patterns of care for patients with cancer and COVID-19 and support evaluation of emerging treatments through inclusive prospective controlled trials. SIGNIFICANCE: Evaluating the potential role of COVID-19 treatments in patients with cancer in a large observational study, there was no statistically significant 30-day all-cause mortality benefit with hydroxychloroquine or high-dose corticosteroids alone or in combination; remdesivir showed potential benefit. Treatment receipt reflects clinical decision-making and suggests disparities in medication access.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1426.

Adjuvant nivolumab versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C and stage IV melanoma (CheckMate 238): 4-year results from a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Previously, findings from CheckMate 238, a double-blind, phase 3 adjuvant trial in patients with resected stage IIIB-C or stage IV melanoma, showed significant improvements in recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival with nivolumab versus ipilimumab. This report provides updated 4-year efficacy, initial overall survival, and late-emergent safety results.

METHODS

This multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was done in 130 academic centres, community hospitals, and cancer centres across 25 countries. Patients aged 15 years or older with resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive nivolumab or ipilimumab via an interactive voice response system and stratified according to disease stage and baseline PD-L1 status of tumour cells. Patients received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or intravenous ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses, and then every 12 weeks until 1 year of treatment, disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival by investigator assessment, and overall survival was a key secondary endpoint. Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned patients). All patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety analysis. The results presented in this report reflect the 4-year update of the ongoing study with a database lock date of Jan 30, 2020. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02388906.

FINDINGS

Between March 30 and Nov 30, 2015, 906 patients were assigned to nivolumab (n=453) or ipilimumab (n=453). Median follow-up was 51·1 months (IQR 41·6-52·7) with nivolumab and 50·9 months (36·2-52·3) with ipilimumab; 4-year recurrence-free survival was 51·7% (95% CI 46·8-56·3) in the nivolumab group and 41·2% (36·4-45·9) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71 [95% CI 0·60-0·86]; p=0·0003). With 211 (100 [22%] of 453 patients in the nivolumab group and 111 [25%] of 453 patients in the ipilimumab group) of 302 anticipated deaths observed (about 73% of the originally planned 88% power needed for significance), 4-year overall survival was 77·9% (95% CI 73·7-81·5) with nivolumab and 76·6% (72·2-80·3) with ipilimumab (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·66-1·14]; p=0·31). Late-emergent grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in three (1%) of 452 and seven (2%) of 453 patients. The most common late-emergent treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported were diarrhoea, diabetic ketoacidosis, and pneumonitis (one patient each) in the nivolumab group, and colitis (two patients) in the ipilimumab group. Two previously reported treatment-related deaths in the ipilimumab group were attributed to study drug toxicity (marrow aplasia in one patient and colitis in one patient); no further treatment-related deaths were reported.

INTERPRETATION

At a minimum of 4 years' follow-up, nivolumab demonstrated sustained recurrence-free survival benefit versus ipilimumab in resected stage IIIB-C or IV melanoma indicating a long-term treatment benefit with nivolumab. With fewer deaths than anticipated, overall survival was similar in both groups. Nivolumab remains an efficacious adjuvant treatment for patients with resected high-risk melanoma, with a safety profile that is more tolerable than that of ipilimumab.

FUNDING

Bristol Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical.

Liver Toxicity with Cancer Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy

Immune checkpoint inhibition targeted against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) has shown clinically significant survival benefit when used to treat multiple types of advanced cancer. These drugs have gained approval by the US Food and Drug Administration and their indications continue to increase. Checkpoint inhibitor therapy is associated with a unique side-effect profile characterized as immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which can result in significant morbidity and rarely mortality. Hepatotoxicity from checkpoint inhibitors is a less common irAE and often mild, while its incidence and severity vary based on the class and dose of checkpoint inhibitor, monotherapy versus combination therapy, and the type of cancer. Histological assessment of suspected irAEs is nonspecific and can show a variety of features. Hepatic irAEs can require discontinuation of checkpoint inhibitor therapy and treatment with immunosuppressive agents.

Host expression of PD-L1 determines efficacy of PD-L1 pathway blockade-mediated tumor regression

Programmed death-1 receptor (PD-L1, B7-H1) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) pathway blockade is a promising therapy for treating cancer. However, the mechanistic contribution of host and tumor PD-L1 and PD-1 signaling to the therapeutic efficacy of PD-L1 and PD-1 blockade remains elusive. Here, we evaluated 3 tumor-bearing mouse models that differ in their sensitivity to PD-L1 blockade and demonstrated a loss of therapeutic efficacy of PD-L1 blockade in immunodeficient mice and in PD-L1- and PD-1-deficient mice. In contrast, neither knockout nor overexpression of PD-L1 in tumor cells had an effect on PD-L1 blockade efficacy. Human and murine studies showed high levels of functional PD-L1 expression in dendritic cells and macrophages in the tumor microenvironments and draining lymph nodes. Additionally, expression of PD-L1 on dendritic cells and macrophages in ovarian cancer and melanoma patients correlated with the efficacy of treatment with either anti-PD-1 alone or in combination with anti-CTLA-4. Thus, PD-L1-expressing dendritic cells and macrophages may mechanistically shape and therapeutically predict clinical efficacy of PD-L1/PD-1 blockade.

Host expression of PD-L1 determines efficacy of PD-L1 pathway blockade-mediated tumor regression

Programmed death-1 receptor (PD-L1, B7-H1) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) pathway blockade is a promising therapy for treating cancer. However, the mechanistic contribution of host and tumor PD-L1 and PD-1 signaling to the therapeutic efficacy of PD-L1 and PD-1 blockade remains elusive. Here, we evaluated 3 tumor-bearing mouse models that differ in their sensitivity to PD-L1 blockade and demonstrated a loss of therapeutic efficacy of PD-L1 blockade in immunodeficient mice and in PD-L1- and PD-1-deficient mice. In contrast, neither knockout nor overexpression of PD-L1 in tumor cells had an effect on PD-L1 blockade efficacy. Human and murine studies showed high levels of functional PD-L1 expression in dendritic cells and macrophages in the tumor microenvironments and draining lymph nodes. Additionally, expression of PD-L1 on dendritic cells and macrophages in ovarian cancer and melanoma patients correlated with the efficacy of treatment with either anti-PD-1 alone or in combination with anti-CTLA-4. Thus, PD-L1-expressing dendritic cells and macrophages may mechanistically shape and therapeutically predict clinical efficacy of PD-L1/PD-1 blockade.

Erratum to: Metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma response to nivolumab

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s40425-016-0186-1.].

Metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma response to nivolumab

Background

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is an aggressive cutaneous neuroendocrine malignancy with limited treatment options. Several lines of evidence support the programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) axis as a likely contributor to immune evasion in MCC.

Case presentation

We report a case of a patient with metastatic MCC with a significant and durable response to nivolumab, a humanized IgG4 monoclonal anti-PD-1 antibody.

Conclusion

Immunotherapy with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors has become a rational and promising treatment option for MCC in the advanced or metastatic disease. Clinical trials are currently in progress to further evaluate these novel therapeutic agents.

Acute visual loss after ipilimumab treatment for metastatic melanoma

BACKGROUND

Ipilimumab, a humanized CLTA-4 antibody is a standard therapy in the treatment of advanced melanoma. While ipilimumab provides an overall survival benefit to patients, it can be associated with immune related adverse events (IrAEs).

CASE PRESENTATION

Here we describe a patient treated with ipilimumab who experienced known IrAEs, including hypophysitis, as well as a profound vision loss due to optic neuritis. There are rare reports of optic neuritis occurring as an adverse event associated with ipilimumab treatment. Furthermore, the patient experienced multiple complications from high dose steroids used to manage his IrAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

This case highlights the need for recognition of atypical immune mediated processes associated with newer checkpoint inhibitor therapies including ipilimumab.

Advanced basal cell carcinoma, the hedgehog pathway, and treatment options - role of smoothened inhibitors

Cutaneous basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common human cancer and its incidence is rising worldwide. Ultraviolet radiation exposure, including tanning bed use, as well as host factors play a role in its development. The majority of cases are treated and cured with local therapies including surgery. Yet, the health care costs of diagnosis and treatment of BCCs in the US is substantial. In the United States, the cost of nonmelanoma skin cancer care in the Medicare population is estimated to be US$426 million per year. While rare, locally advanced BCCs that can no longer be controlled with surgery and/or radiation, and metastatic BCCs do occur and can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Vismodegib (GDC-0449), a smoothened inhibitor targeted at the hedgehog pathway, is the first US Food and Drug Association (FDA)-approved agent in the treatment of locally advanced, unresectable, and metastatic BCCs. This class of agents appears to be changing the survival rates in advanced BCC patients, but appropriate patient selection and monitoring are important. Multidisciplinary assessments are essential for the optimal care and management of these patients. For some patients with locally advanced BCC, treatment with a hedgehog inhibitor may eliminate the need for an excessively disfiguring or morbid surgery.

Detection of circulating tumor DNA in early- and late-stage human malignancies

The development of noninvasive methods to detect and monitor tumors continues to be a major challenge in oncology. We used digital polymerase chain reaction-based technologies to evaluate the ability of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) to detect tumors in 640 patients with various cancer types. We found that ctDNA was detectable in >75% of patients with advanced pancreatic, ovarian, colorectal, bladder, gastroesophageal, breast, melanoma, hepatocellular, and head and neck cancers, but in less than 50% of primary brain, renal, prostate, or thyroid cancers. In patients with localized tumors, ctDNA was detected in 73, 57, 48, and 50% of patients with colorectal cancer, gastroesophageal cancer, pancreatic cancer, and breast adenocarcinoma, respectively. ctDNA was often present in patients without detectable circulating tumor cells, suggesting that these two biomarkers are distinct entities. In a separate panel of 206 patients with metastatic colorectal cancers, we showed that the sensitivity of ctDNA for detection of clinically relevant KRAS gene mutations was 87.2% and its specificity was 99.2%. Finally, we assessed whether ctDNA could provide clues into the mechanisms underlying resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor blockade in 24 patients who objectively responded to therapy but subsequently relapsed. Twenty-three (96%) of these patients developed one or more mutations in genes involved in the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. Together, these data suggest that ctDNA is a broadly applicable, sensitive, and specific biomarker that can be used for a variety of clinical and research purposes in patients with multiple different types of cancer.

Phase I trial of hydroxychloroquine with dose-intense temozolomide in patients with advanced solid tumors and melanoma

Blocking autophagy with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) augments cell death associated with alkylating chemotherapy in preclinical models. This phase I study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, preliminary activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of HCQ in combination with dose-intense temozolomide (TMZ) in patients with advanced solid malignancies. Forty patients (73% metastatic melanoma) were treated with oral HCQ 200 to 1200 mg daily with dose-intense oral TMZ 150 mg/m² daily for 7/14 d. This combination was well tolerated with no recurrent dose-limiting toxicities observed. An MTD was not reached for HCQ and the recommended phase II dose was HCQ 600 mg twice daily combined with dose-intense TMZ. Common toxicities included grade 2 fatigue (55%), anorexia (28%), nausea (48%), constipation (20%), and diarrhea (20%). Partial responses and stable disease were observed in 3/22 (14%) and 6/22 (27%) patients with metastatic melanoma. In the final dose cohort 2/6 patients with refractory BRAF wild-type melanoma had a near complete response, and prolonged stable disease, respectively. A significant accumulation in autophagic vacuoles (AV) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells was observed in response to combined therapy. Population pharmacokinetics (PK) modeling, individual PK simulations, and PK-pharmacodynamics (PD) analysis identified a threshold HCQ peak concentration that predicts therapy-associated AV accumulation. This study indicates that the combination of high-dose HCQ and dose-intense TMZ is safe and tolerable, and is associated with autophagy modulation in patients. Prolonged stable disease and responses suggest antitumor activity in melanoma patients, warranting further studies of this combination, or combinations of more potent autophagy inhibitors and chemotherapy in melanoma.

Combined MTOR and autophagy inhibition: phase I trial of hydroxychloroquine and temsirolimus in patients with advanced solid tumors and melanoma

The combination of temsirolimus (TEM), an MTOR inhibitor, and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), an autophagy inhibitor, augments cell death in preclinical models. This phase 1 dose-escalation study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, preliminary activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of HCQ in combination with TEM in cancer patients. In the dose escalation portion, 27 patients with advanced solid malignancies were enrolled, followed by a cohort expansion at the top dose level in 12 patients with metastatic melanoma. The combination of HCQ and TEM was well tolerated, and grade 3 or 4 toxicity was limited to anorexia (7%), fatigue (7%), and nausea (7%). An MTD was not reached for HCQ, and the recommended phase II dose was HCQ 600 mg twice daily in combination with TEM 25 mg weekly. Other common grade 1 or 2 toxicities included fatigue, anorexia, nausea, stomatitis, rash, and weight loss. No responses were observed; however, 14/21 (67%) patients in the dose escalation and 14/19 (74%) patients with melanoma achieved stable disease. The median progression-free survival in 13 melanoma patients treated with HCQ 1200mg/d in combination with TEM was 3.5 mo. Novel 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) measurements predicted clinical outcome and provided further evidence that the addition of HCQ to TEM produced metabolic stress on tumors in patients that experienced clinical benefit. Pharmacodynamic evidence of autophagy inhibition was evident in serial PBMC and tumor biopsies only in patients treated with 1200 mg daily HCQ. This study indicates that TEM and HCQ is safe and tolerable, modulates autophagy in patients, and has significant antitumor activity. Further studies combining MTOR and autophagy inhibitors in cancer patients are warranted.

Ipilimumab and its toxicities: a multidisciplinary approach

The treatment for metastatic melanoma has evolved significantly in the past few years. Ipilimumab, an immunotherapy, is now in mainstream oncology practice given that it has shown improved overall survival in randomized clinical trials. Other immune modulating agents, such as programmed death receptor-1 and programmed death receptor ligand-1 antibodies, are showing promise in early clinical trials. This manuscript will review ipilimumab and its most common side effects. Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are important to recognize early, and their presentation, timing of onset, and general recommendations for workup and management will be reviewed. Assembling a multidisciplinary team, as well as thorough education of the patient, is recommended to optimize patient care.

Phase II study of the MEK1/MEK2 inhibitor Trametinib in patients with metastatic BRAF-mutant cutaneous melanoma previously treated with or without a BRAF inhibitor

PURPOSE

BRAF mutations promote melanoma cell proliferation and survival primarily through activation of MEK. The purpose of this study was to determine the response rate (RR) for the selective, allosteric MEK1/MEK2 inhibitor trametinib (GSK1120212), in patients with metastatic BRAF-mutant melanoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was an open-label, two-stage, phase II study with two cohorts. Patients with metastatic BRAF-mutant melanoma previously treated with a BRAF inhibitor (cohort A) or treated with chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy (BRAF-inhibitor naive; cohort B) were enrolled. Patients received 2 mg of trametinib orally once daily.

RESULTS

In cohort A (n = 40), there were no confirmed objective responses and 11 patients (28%) with stable disease (SD); the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.8 months. In cohort B (n = 57), there was one (2%) complete response, 13 (23%) partial responses (PRs), and 29 patients (51%) with SD (confirmed RR, 25%); the median PFS was 4.0 months. One patient each with BRAF K601E and BRAF V600R had prolonged PR. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events for all patients were skin-related toxicity, nausea, peripheral edema, diarrhea, pruritis, and fatigue. No cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma was observed.

CONCLUSION

Trametinib was well tolerated. Significant clinical activity was observed in BRAF-inhibitor-naive patients previously treated with chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy. Minimal clinical activity was observed as sequential therapy in patients previously treated with a BRAF inhibitor. Together, these data suggest that BRAF-inhibitor resistance mechanisms likely confer resistance to MEK-inhibitor monotherapy. These data support further evaluation of trametinib in BRAF-inhibitor-naive BRAF-mutant melanoma, including rarer forms of BRAF-mutant melanoma.

Activity of the oral MEK inhibitor trametinib in patients with advanced melanoma: a phase 1 dose-escalation trial

BACKGROUND

MEK is a member of the MAPK signalling cascade that is commonly activated in melanoma. Direct inhibition of MEK blocks cell proliferation and induces apoptosis. We aimed to analyse safety, efficacy, and genotyping data for the oral, small-molecule MEK inhibitor trametinib in patients with melanoma.

METHODS

We undertook a multicentre, phase 1 three-part study (dose escalation, cohort expansion, and pharmacodynamic assessment). The main results of this study are reported elsewhere; here we present data relating to patients with melanoma. We obtained tumour samples to assess BRAF mutational status, and available tissues underwent exploratory genotyping analysis. Disease response was measured by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and adverse events were defined by common toxicity criteria. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00687622.

FINDINGS

97 patients with melanoma were enrolled, including 81 with cutaneous or unknown primary melanoma (36 BRAF mutant, 39 BRAF wild-type, six BRAF status unknown), and 16 with uveal melanoma. The most common treatment-related adverse events were rash or dermatitis acneiform (n=80; 82%) and diarrhoea (44; 45%), most of which were grade 2 or lower. No cutaneous squamous-cell carcinomas were recorded. Of 36 patients with BRAF mutations, 30 had not received a BRAF inhibitor before; two complete responses (both confirmed) and ten partial responses (eight confirmed) were noted in this subgroup (confirmed response rate, 33%). Median progression-free survival of this subgroup was 5·7 months (95% CI 4·0-7·4). Of the six patients who had received previous BRAF inhibition, one unconfirmed partial response was recorded. Of 39 patients with BRAF wild-type melanoma, four partial responses were confirmed (confirmed response rate, 10%).

INTERPRETATION

Our data show substantial clinical activity of trametinib in melanoma and suggest that MEK is a valid therapeutic target. Differences in response rates according to mutations indicate the importance of mutational analyses in the future.

FUNDING

GlaxoSmithKline.

Diverse cutaneous side effects associated with BRAF inhibitor therapy: a clinicopathologic study

BACKGROUND

Vemurafenib, a novel selective small molecule inhibitor of BRAF, has recently been shown to be effective in the treatment of melanomas harboring the BRAF V600E mutation. Similar to the broad-spectrum RAF inhibitor sorafenib, vemurafenib induces development of squamous cell carcinomas and keratoacanthomas as a side effect of therapy.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to detail additional cutaneous adverse effects of vemurafenib and a similar BRAF inhibitor, dabrafenib.

METHODS

We evaluated the clinical and histologic feature of skin side effects developing on vemurafenib or dabrafenib therapy in 14 patients.

RESULTS

Eight patients developed one or more squamous cell carcinomas, and 11 patients formed benign verrucous keratoses. Eight patients developed single lesions and/or widespread eruptions with histopathologic findings of acantholytic dyskeratosis, consistent with warty dyskeratomas and Darier- or Grover-like rashes, respectively. One patient developed palmoplantar hyperkeratosis, and darkening of existing nevi and new nevi within 2 months of starting vemurafenib. Side effects presented as early as 1 week after beginning therapy, with a mean time of onset of 12.6 weeks in our cohort.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the small number of cases, all from a single institution.

CONCLUSION

Selective BRAF inhibitor therapy is associated with the development of malignant and benign growths, including keratoacanthoma-like squamous cell carcinomas, warty dyskeratomas, and verrucous keratoses, along with widespread eruptions with histologic features of acantholytic dyskeratosis. Given the potential for malignant lesions to develop on treatment, awareness of potential adverse effects of these agents is necessary, and a low threshold for biopsy of new growths is recommended.

Abstract 1289: Population pharmacokinetics (PK) of the MEK inhibitor GSK1120212 from the first-time-in-human study in patients with solid tumors or lymphoma

Background: GSK1120212 is a reversible, highly selective allosteric inhibitor of MEK1/MEK2. MEK111054, a first-time-in human study (FTIH) is an open-label, multiple-dose, dose escalation trial designed to investigate the safety, PK and pharmacodynamics (PD) of GSK1120212 in patients with solid tumors or lymphoma. A population PK model of GSK1120212 was developed and validated from the dose-escalation part of the FTIH trial.

Materials and Methods: GSK1120212 single (0.125-10 mg) and repeat (0.125-4 mg) dose plasma concentrations were obtained from MEK111054 that utilized both continuous and loading dose regimens with daily administration of GSK1120212. Plasma GSK1120212 concentrations were determined using a validated analytical method based on liquid-liquid extraction, followed by HPLC-MS/MS analysis. Population PK analysis was performed on 1373 plasma samples from 55 patients ranging in ages from 35 to 77 years. Population PK analysis was performed using a nonlinear mixed effects modeling method (NONMEM, v. 7.1.0). Concentrations were transformed into the log domain and the residual variability was described by an additive error model. The influence of covariates such as gender, age, weight and BMI on PK parameter estimates was assessed. The final model was validated using a visual predictive check (VPC) of the simulated (n=1000) and observed data.

Results: Plasma concentration-time data for GSK1120212 were best described by a two-compartment model with first-order absorption and elimination. The final model also incorporated two sequential absorption rates (KA1 and KA2) with a change point (MTIME) estimated at 0.41 hours post-dose. Final model population mean (%CV) parameter estimates for clearance (CL/F), volume of the central compartment (V2/F), volume of the peripheral compartment (V3/F), and intercompartmental clearance (Q/F) were 6.76 L/hr (7%), 125 L (18%), 746 L (11%), and 114 L, respectively. Interindividual variability ranged from 43 to 88%, interoccassion variability ranged from 8-74%, and the residual variability was 13 ng/mL. Covariates did not influence the pharmacokinetics of GSK1120212. VPC supported the validity of the model and was a good predictor of observed single and repeat dose data in the current study.

Conclusion: The population PK model of GSK1120212 in patients with solid tumors or lymphoma provided a description of PK and an understanding of its variability which aided dose selection decisions. Once daily dosing without a loading dose was selected for future studies in order to maintain concentrations above the preclinical antiproliferation IC90. The established population PK model will aid in the development of future population PK/PD assessments with both tumor response and adverse event data.

Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 1289. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-1289

Abstract 2521: Combining chemotherapy with autophagy inhibition: Phase I trial of dose-intense temozolomide and hydroxchloroquine in patients with advanced solid tumors

Background: Therapy-induced autophagy is a key resistance mechanism to alkylating chemotherapy. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is an autophagy inhibitor that augments the antitumor efficacy of chemotherapy in preclinical models. To determine the safety and pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of combining an alkylating chemotherapy with an autophagy inhibitor, we conducted a phase I clinical trial of temozolomide (TMZ) and HCQ in patients with advanced solid tumors. Methods: This was a traditional 3+3 dose escalation study in which patients were treated with 2 weeks daily HCQ followed by combined treatment with TMZ 150 mg/m2 po qd for 7/ 14 days and continuous HCQ. Patients with solid tumors with any number of prior therapies were eligible. Because both drugs cross the blood brain barrier, patients with brain metastases were included. The primary objective was to determine the maximal tolerated dose (MTD) of HCQ in this combination. Secondary objectives included toxicity rate, response rate, and measurement of therapy-induced accumulation of autophagic vesicles (AV) in serial peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) and tumor tissue. Results: 27 patients including 10 with brain metastases were enrolled with 19 evaluable for toxicity and response. HCQ was successfully dose escalated from 200 mg daily to 600 mg bid in 5 cohorts. There was one dose limiting toxicity at 400 mg bid HCQ of grade 4 neutropenia &gt;7 days which lead to dose expansion. The 400 mg bid cohort was further expanded due to complete heart block in one patient that was thought to be unrelated to study drug. A grade 3 rash lead to dose expansion at 1000 mg daily. Anorexia, nausea, and fatigue were common grade 2 toxicities. In 12 patients with melanoma, partial response and stable disease was achieved in 2, and 3 patients respectively, including complete regression of multiple large extra-cranial tumors in a patient with brain metastases. One patient with 7 prior treatments for metastatic breast cancer with brain metastases had stable disease for 8 months. PD evidence of autophagy inhibition was observed by electron microscopy (EM) in PBMCs in individual patients but not across cohorts. In one patient with advanced melanoma, a post-progression FDG-PET scan demonstrated metabolic compromise and necrosis in the center of tumors, recapitulating preclinical models of autophagy inhibition. Conclusions: Dose- intense TMZ and HCQ demonstrated clinical activity, and a manageable safety profile in a population of patients enriched for brain metastases. Inconsistent evidence of autophagy inhibition in PBMC may reflect limited induction of autophagy by single agent temozolomide in surrogate tissues. Central metabolic compromise of tumor suggests FDG-PET can capture on-target effects of HCQ. The recommended phase II dose, final response rate and EM analysis of serial tumor biopsies will be presented.

Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 2521. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-2521

Drug targeting of oncogenic pathways in melanoma

Melanoma continues to be one of the most aggressive and morbid malignancies once metastatic. Overall survival for advanced unresectable melanoma has not changed over the past several decades. However, the presence of some long-term survivors of metastatic melanoma highlights the heterogeneity of this disease and the potential for improved outcomes. Current research is uncovering the molecular and genetic scaffolding of normal and aberrant cell function. The known oncogenic pathways in melanoma and the attempts to develop therapy for them are discussed. The targeting of certain cellular processes, downstream of the common genetic alterations, for which the issues of target and drug validation are somewhat distinct, are also highlighted.

Collapse of the CD27+ B-cell compartment associated with systemic plasmacytosis in patients with advanced melanoma and other cancers

PURPOSE

Disturbed peripheral blood B-cell homeostasis complicates certain infections and autoimmune diseases, such as HIV and systemic lupus erythematosus, but has not been reported in cancer. This study aimed to investigate whether B-cell physiology was altered in the presence of melanoma and other cancers.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Flow cytometry was used to identify phenotypic differences in B cells from patients with melanoma and normal donors. In vitro stimulated B cells were assessed for responsiveness and also used as stimulators of allogeneic T cells in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

RESULTS

We show B-cell dysregulation in patients with advanced melanoma (n = 26) and other solid tumors (n = 13), marked by a relative and absolute loss of CD27+ (memory) B cells and associated with an aberrant systemic plasmacytosis. Functionally, B cells from patients with melanoma inefficiently up-regulated immunoregulatory molecules and weakly secreted cytokines in response to CD40 and toll-like receptor 9 agonists. Stimulated B cells from patients induced proliferation of alloreactive CD4+ T cells, but these T cells poorly secreted IFNgamma and interleukin-2. These effects were recapitulated by using purified normal donor CD27(neg) B cells in these same assays, linking the predominance of CD27(neg) B cells in patients with the observed functional hyporesponsiveness. Indeed, B-cell dysfunction in patients strongly correlated with the extent of loss of CD27+ B cells in peripheral blood.

CONCLUSIONS

Disturbed B-cell homeostasis is a previously unrecognized feature of patients with advanced melanoma and other cancers and may represent an unanticipated mechanism of immune incompetence in cancer.

Where are we with adjuvant therapy of stage III and IV melanoma in 2009?

Adjuvant therapy options for advanced melanoma in 2009 remain active observation, high-dose interferon, or clinical trial participation. Close observation is currently the only required adjuvant management, with the purpose of detecting the emergence of regional or metastatic disease early, when surgical management may still be possible. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for the workup and follow-up of all stages of melanoma must be tailored to specific patients by the treating physician. This article explores the factors to consider when individualizing care within the scope of these guidelines.

Toward a Molecular Classification of Melanoma

The incidence of melanoma is increasing at one of the highest rates of any form of cancer in the United States, with the current lifetime risk being one in 68. At present, there are limited systemic therapies to treat advanced stages of melanoma, and the key to improved survival remains early detection. Recent discoveries have allowed for a clearer picture of the molecular events leading to melanoma development and progression. Since identifying prevalent activating mutations of the BRAF kinase in melanomas, there has been a flood of additional molecular studies to further clarify the role of this pathway and others in melanomagenesis. In particular, recent genetic studies have demonstrated specific genotype-phenotype correlations that provide the first major insights into the molecular subclassification of melanoma and the heterogeneous nature of this malignancy. In this article, we review the most up-to-date molecular discoveries in melanoma biology and provide a framework for understanding their significance in melanoma development and progression. We also provide details on the development of novel therapies based on these recent molecular discoveries and insight into current and planned clinical trials. It is expected that these latest studies in melanoma will help define the critical molecular events involved in disease onset and progression and allow us to move rapidly toward a true molecular classification. We eagerly anticipate rationally designed melanoma therapies based on such a classification scheme and the associated improvements in patient outcomes.