Meaningful Symptomatic Change in Patients With Myelofibrosis From the SIMPLIFY Studies

OBJECTIVES

Patients with myelofibrosis develop symptoms due to bone marrow fibrosis, systemic inflammation, and/or organomegaly. Alleviating symptoms improves overall quality of life. Clinical trials have historically defined symptom response as a reduction of at least 50% in Total Symptom Score at week 24 compared with baseline. Whether 50% constitutes a meaningful benefit has not been established. This study determined the meaningful change threshold (MCT) for 2 momelotinib phase III trials, SIMPLIFY-1 and SIMPLIFY-2.

METHODS

The absolute and percentage MCT was determined using anchor-based methods applied to the modified Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form v2.0 and Patient Global Impression of Change. MCTs were applied retrospectively to determine responder rates. Generalized estimating equations estimated the treatment-related difference in likelihood of improvement.

RESULTS

In SIMPLIFY-1, a Janus kinase inhibitor-naive population, the MCT was 8 points. In SIMPLIFY-2, a previously Janus kinase inhibitor-treated population, the MCT was 6 points. A 32% MCT was determined in both studies, showing that the historic 50% reduction threshold may be a conservative choice. In SIMPLIFY-1, a similar proportion of patients achieved responder status with 24 weeks of momelotinib or ruxolitinib therapy based on the absolute MCT (39% vs 41%, respectively). In SIMPLIFY-2, a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with momelotinib achieved responder states compared with best available therapy based on absolute and percent change MCTs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that momelotinib provided clinically meaningful symptom benefit for patients with myelofibrosis and provides insight into the appropriateness of the symptom change threshold used in historical studies.

Anemia-related response end points in myelofibrosis clinical trials: current trends and need for renewed consensus

JAK inhibitors are the current standard of care in myelofibrosis, but many do not address and may worsen anemia; thus, anemia-related responses have traditionally been overlooked as efficacy end points in pivotal clinical trials, leading to a lack of consistency and analytic detail in their reporting. Here we apply our experiences in the phase III trials of momelotinib, a JAK1/JAK2/ACVR1 inhibitor and the first therapy indicated by the US FDA for myelofibrosis patients with anemia, to highlight how application of different criteria impacts the anemia-related benefits reported for any potential treatment in myelofibrosis. We advocate for a convention of a new expert consensus panel to bring consistency and transparency to the definition of anemia-related response in myelofibrosis.

Momelotinib versus danazol in symptomatic patients with anaemia and myelofibrosis previously treated with a JAK inhibitor (MOMENTUM): an updated analysis of an international, double-blind, randomised phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

The MOMENTUM study met all key endpoints at week 24, demonstrating symptom, spleen, and anaemia benefits with momelotinib versus danazol in patients with myelofibrosis. In this updated analysis, we report duration of week 24 responses and new responses with momelotinib through week 48.

METHODS

MOMENTUM is an international, double-blind, randomised, phase 3 study done at 107 sites across 21 countries. Patients were 18 years or older with primary, post-polycythaemia vera, or post-essential thrombocythaemia myelofibrosis, previously treated with an approved Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor for 90 days or more (≥28 days with haematological complications), and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to either the momelotinib group (200 mg orally once per day) or danazol group (300 mg orally twice per day) through week 24 via non-deterministic biased coin minimisation and an interactive response system. Stratification factors were Total Symptom Score (TSS; <22 vs ≥22), spleen size (<12 cm vs ≥12 cm), transfusion burden (0 units vs 1-4 units vs ≥5 units), and study site. After week 24, all patients initially randomly assigned to either group who remained on the study received open-label momelotinib. The primary endpoint, which has already been reported, was Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form TSS response rate at week 24. Predefined secondary endpoints were duration of week 24 TSS and transfusion independence responses, safety, and survival, which are summarised post hoc at the week 48 data cutoff (May 17, 2022). TSS, transfusion independence, and splenic responses at week 48 were defined post hoc and assessed in all evaluable patients who entered the open-label period and provided sufficient data. The timing of this updated analysis was defined post hoc after all patients had the opportunity to complete their week 48 assessments, as most patients entered an extended access study (NCT03441113) after week 48. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04173494, and is now complete.

FINDINGS

Between April 24, 2020, and Dec 3, 2021, a total of 195 patients were randomised (130 [67%] in the momelotinib group and 65 [33%] in the danazol group). 93 (72%) of 130 patients in the momelotinib group and 41 (63%) of 65 in the danazol group entered the momelotinib open-label extension period. Median follow-up was 48·4 weeks (IQR 40·6-55·7). Among TSS-evaluable patients at week 48, 30 (45%) of 67 patients in the momelotinib group who continued treatment and 15 (50%) of 30 in the danazol group who crossed over were responders. TSS responders at any time during the open-label period by week 48 were 46 (61%) of 75 evaluable patients in the momelotinib group who continued and 19 (59%) of 32 in the danazol group who crossed over, including most week 24 responders plus new responders after week 24. No new safety signals emerged with long-term follow-up. The most common non-haematological treatment-emergent adverse events in momelotinib-treated patients over the entire study period as of the data cutoff were diarrhoea (45 [26%] of 171) and asthenia (28 [16%]); the most common grades 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia (33 [19%]) and anaemia (19 [11%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 79 (46%) of 171 patients, and fatal treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 30 (18%); two fatal treatment-emergent adverse events were considered possibly related to momelotinib (rotaviral enteritis and Staphylococcus pneumonia).

INTERPRETATION

Momelotinib was associated with durable symptom, spleen, and anaemia benefits, late responses after week 24, and favourable safety through week 48. These results highlight the potential benefits of treatment with momelotinib in patients with myelofibrosis, particularly those with anaemia.

FUNDING

Sierra Oncology, a GSK company.

A Phase 1/2 trial of SRA737 (a Chk1 inhibitor) administered orally in patients with advanced cancer

BACKGROUND

This was a first-in-human Phase 1/2 open-label dose-escalation study of the novel checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) inhibitor SRA737.

METHODS

Patients with advanced solid tumours enrolled in dose-escalation cohorts and received SRA737 monotherapy orally on a continuous daily (QD) dosing schedule in 28-day cycles. Expansion cohorts included up to 20 patients with prospectively selected, pre-specified response predictive biomarkers.

RESULTS

In total, 107 patients were treated at dose levels from 20-1300 mg. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of SRA737 was 1000 mg QD, the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) was 800 mg QD. Common toxicities of diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting were generally mild to moderate. Dose-limiting toxicity at daily doses of 1000 and 1300 mg QD SRA737 included gastrointestinal events, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Pharmacokinetic analysis at the 800 mg QD dose showed a mean Cmin of 312 ng/mL (546 nM), exceeding levels required to cause growth delay in xenograft models. No partial or complete responses were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

SRA737 was well tolerated at doses that achieved preclinically relevant drug concentrations but single agent activity did not warrant further development as monotherapy. Given its mechanism of action resulting in abrogating DNA damage repair, further clinical development of SRA737 should be as combination therapy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02797964.

Symptomatic benefit of momelotinib in patients with myelofibrosis: Results from the SIMPLIFY phase III studies

BACKGROUND

Myelofibrosis (MF)-associated constitutional symptoms can severely impact health-related quality of life. Clinical trials in MF traditionally measure symptom response to treatment as a landmark endpoint of total symptom score (TSS) reduction ≥50% from baseline. However, this dichotomous assessment provides a limited view of clinically relevant symptomatic changes. Herein we evaluated longitudinal change from baseline in TSS over the continuous 24-week period and individual symptom scores to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of symptom benefits experienced by patients with MF receiving therapy.

METHODS

Longitudinal symptom change was evaluated using mixed-effect model repeated measure (MMRM) methodology with individual item-level analyses to complement the interpretation of the landmark symptom results in the completed phase III SIMPLIFY studies of momelotinib in MF. MMRM compared mean change in TSS from baseline with Week 24 using data from all patient visits. Generalized estimating equations were used to estimate item-level odds ratios using multiple predictive imputations for missing data.

RESULTS

Momelotinib and ruxolitinib groups reported similar overall symptom improvements, with a TSS difference of <1.5 points between groups for each post-baseline visit in SIMPLIFY-1. In SIMPLIFY-2, the improvement in TSS observed in momelotinib-treated patients was consistent with that observed in SIMPLIFY-1, whereas progressive TSS deterioration was observed with control. Item-level scores were heterogeneous in both studies. A similar and greater proportion of momelotinib-treated patients were categorized as "improved" or "stable" compared with control in SIMPLIFY-1 and SIMPLIFY-2, respectively. Odds ratios for between-group comparison ranged from 0.75 to 1.21 in SIMPLIFY-1, demonstrating similarity in likelihood of symptom improvement. In SIMPLIFY-2, the likelihood of symptom improvement in each item was higher in the momelotinib arm.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that momelotinib provides clinically relevant symptom benefits in the JAK inhibitor-naïve and JAK inhibitor-exposed settings.

Momelotinib versus danazol in symptomatic patients with anaemia and myelofibrosis (MOMENTUM): results from an international, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors approved for myelofibrosis provide spleen and symptom improvements but do not meaningfully improve anaemia. Momelotinib, a first-in-class inhibitor of activin A receptor type 1 as well as JAK1 and JAK2, has shown symptom, spleen, and anaemia benefits in myelofibrosis. We aimed to confirm the differentiated clinical benefits of momelotinib versus the active comparator danazol in JAK-inhibitor-exposed, symptomatic patients with anaemia and intermediate-risk or high-risk myelofibrosis.

METHODS

MOMENTUM is an international, double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study that enrolled patients at 107 sites across 21 countries worldwide. Eligible patients were 18 years or older with a confirmed diagnosis of primary myelofibrosis or post-polycythaemia vera or post-essential thrombocythaemia myelofibrosis. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive momelotinib (200 mg orally once per day) plus danazol placebo (ie, the momelotinib group) or danazol (300 mg orally twice per day) plus momelotinib placebo (ie, the danazol group), stratified by total symptom score (TSS; <22 vs ≥22), spleen size (<12 cm vs ≥12 cm), red blood cell or whole blood units transfused in the 8 weeks before randomisation (0 units vs 1-4 units vs ≥5 units), and study site. The primary endpoint was the Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form (MFSAF) TSS response rate at week 24 (defined as ≥50% reduction in mean MFSAF TSS over the 28 days immediately before the end of week 24 compared with baseline). MOMENTUM is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04173494, and is active but not recruiting.

FINDINGS

195 patients were randomly assigned to either the momelotinib group (130 [67%]) or danazol group (65 [33%]) and received study treatment in the 24-week randomised treatment period between April 24, 2020, and Dec 3, 2021. A significantly greater proportion of patients in the momelotinib group reported a 50% or more reduction in TSS than in the danazol group (32 [25%] of 130 vs six [9%] of 65; proportion difference 16% [95% CI 6-26], p=0·0095). The most frequent grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events with momelotinib and danazol were haematological abnormalities by laboratory values: anaemia (79 [61%] of 130 vs 49 [75%] of 65) and thrombocytopenia (36 [28%] vs 17 [26%]). The most frequent non-haematological grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events with momelotinib and danazol were acute kidney injury (four [3%] of 130 vs six [9%] of 65) and pneumonia (three [2%] vs six [9%]).

INTERPRETATION

Treatment with momelotinib, compared with danazol, resulted in clinically significant improvements in myelofibrosis-associated symptoms, anaemia measures, and spleen response, with favourable safety. These findings support the future use of momelotinib as an effective treatment in patients with myelofibrosis, especially in those with anaemia.

FUNDING

Sierra Oncology.

A Phase I/II Trial of Oral SRA737 (a Chk1 Inhibitor) Given in Combination with Low-Dose Gemcitabine in Patients with Advanced Cancer

PURPOSE

This was a Phase I/II trial of the novel checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) inhibitor SRA737 given in combination with gemcitabine. Its objectives were to establish the safety profile, recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), pharmacokinetics profile, and clinical activity of SRA737.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled into dose-escalation cohorts and treated in 28-day cycles with oral SRA737 on days 2, 3, 9, 10, 16, and 17, and intravenous gemcitabine on days 1, 8, and 15. Treatment was continued until progression. Each expansion cohort included up to 20 patients with specific genetically defined tumors.

RESULTS

The RP2D was determined to be 500 mg SRA737 combined with low-dose (250 mg/m2) gemcitabine. Of 143 enrolled patients, 77 were treated at doses of at least 500 mg SRA737 combined with 250 mg/m2 gemcitabine. Common toxicities of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and diarrhea were primarily mild to moderate, and rarely led to treatment discontinuation. Anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia were grade ≥3 in 11.7%, 16.7%, and 10% of patients treated at the RP2D, respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) was 10.8% overall and notably the ORR in anogenital cancer was 25%. Partial tumor responses were observed in anogenital cancer, cervical cancer, high-grade serous ovarian cancer, rectal cancer, and small cell lung cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

SRA737 in combination with low-dose gemcitabine was well tolerated with lower myelotoxicity than has been seen at standard doses of gemcitabine or with other combinations of Chk1 inhibitors with gemcitabine. Tumor responses were observed in anogenital and other solid tumors.

Improved transfusion independence rates for momelotinib versus ruxolitinib in anemic JAKi naïve myelofibrosis patients independent of baseline platelet or transfusion status

e19039

Background: Momelotinib (MMB) is a potent JAK1, JAK2 and ACVR1 inhibitor with clinical activity against the hallmark features of myelofibrosis (MF), namely anemia, constitutional symptoms and splenomegaly, across the continuum of JAKi naïve or previously JAKi treated intermediate/high risk MF patients as demonstrated in the previously conducted Phase 3 SIMPLIFY-1 & -2 clinical trials (S1, S2). S1 was conducted in JAKi-naïve patients with MF (n = 432) double-blind randomized 1:1 to MMB or ruxolitinib (RUX). MMB demonstrated a statistically non-inferior splenic response rate (SRR) to RUX at the W24 landmark analysis in S1 but did not meet significance for total symptom score (TSS) response. Low SRR and TSS response was observed for RUX in patients with low platelets, while MMB elicited consistent SRR and TSS response across the platelet subsets, comparable to the response in the ITT. Transfusion independence (TI) at W24 was higher for MMB vs RUX patients across all PLT strata. Methods: Progressive anemia is a common occurrence in MF with nearly all MF patients requiring transfusions as their disease advances. Given the prognostic importance of Hgb and transfusion status in MF patients including evidence that achieving or maintaining transfusion independence by Week 24 with momelotinib is associated with improved OS in S1 and S2, we expanded the previously reported retrospective platelet subset analysis to explore the W24 TI response rates for MMB and RUX randomized patients in S1 by baseline Hgb and PLT levels and transfusion status. Results: The data presented here suggest that the prognostically-important W24 TI rate was substantively higher in anemic patients receiving MMB versus RUX, irrespective of the degree of anemia. MMB is also more effective relative to RUX in achieving or maintaining TI in JAKi naïve patients irrespective of baseline PLT count or baseline transfusion status. Conclusions: Together with data suggesting that TI response at W24 with momelotinib is associated with a survival advantage, these data further support the potential TI benefits of inhibiting ACVR1 in addition to JAK1 and JAK2 with MMB in MF patients. Clinical trial information: NCT01969838, NCT02101268. [Table: see text]

Longitudinal and individual symptom analyses of momelotinib and ruxolitinib treated myelofibrosis patients from SIMPLIFY-1

e19040

Background: Clinical trials investigating JAK1/JAK2 inhibitors for myelofibrosis (MF) subjects have measured symptom improvement as a minimum 50% reduction in total symptom score (TSS) at the end of a 24-week treatment period. This landmark analysis is based on post-baseline score changes from Weeks 21 (W21) to 24 and requires vastly different absolute TSS improvements for patients with very high or low baseline (BL) TSS to reach responder status. A phase 3 clinical study, SIMPLIFY-1, randomized 432 intermediate and high risk JAK inhibitor (JAKi) naive MF patients 1:1 to momelotinib (MMB) or ruxolitinib (RUX). Non-inferiority on the MPN-SAF TSS response rate endpoint at W24 was not met (MMB: 28% vs RUX: 42%); however, improvement in each of the 7 TSS items was similar for MMB vs RUX. To understand the discrepancy, we applied item analysis and mixed effect models for repeated measures (MMRM) to SIMPLIFY-1. Methods: Analyses were conducted in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and in a symptomatic subset (selected as subjects with BL TSS ≥ 10). The distributions of TSS items were examined at BL and shift in scores at W24 (health state shifts) were assessed. GEE models were used to estimate item-level odds ratios using multiple predictive imputations for missing data. MMRM compared mean change in TSS from BL to W24 using data from all visits. The meaningful change threshold (MCT) was determined using Patient Global Impression of Change. Results: BL scores across items were heterogenous in the MMB and RUX groups; the proportion of subjects with no or mild symptoms (0–3 on a 0-10 point scale) ranged from 44% (tiredness) to 81% (itching). Distributions of BL scores were different across arms with 6 out of 7 items in the MMB arm reporting more severe or very severe symptoms (scores of 7-10) at BL. Despite the imbalance in BL scores, item-level health state shifts showed similar improvements for MMB and RUX. Categorical responder analysis showed no significant differences on any items. Odds ratios for each between-group comparison ranged from 0.74 to 1.20. MMRM mean TSS change at W24 was 6.35 (MMB) vs 7.87 (RUX) in the ITT and 8.80 (MMB) vs 10.46 (RUX) in the symptomatic subset. Mean TSS were near the within-subject MCT of 8 points in the ITT and exceeded the MCT in the symptomatic subset. The between-group difference was 1.52 (95% CI: (0.196, 2.847)) in the ITT and 1.67 (95% CI: -0.134, 3.468) in the symptomatic subset. Conclusions: Comparable item health state shifts at W24 and similar improvements in mean TSS as shown by MMRM, with a minimal between-group difference of 1.52 on the 70 point scale in context of an 8-point MCT suggest MMB provides clinically relevant and comparable symptom improvements to RUX; these analyses require further validation in independent data sets. Imbalance in BL symptom scores in MMB subjects may have contributed to the inability to demonstrate non-inferiority in TSS response rate at W24. Clinical trial information: NCT01969838.

A phase I study of oral SRA737 (formerly CCT245737) given in combination with gemcitabine plus cisplatin or gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced cancer

TPS2613

Background: SRA737 is a highly selective, orally bioavailable small molecule inhibitor of Checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1), a key cell cycle checkpoint and central regulator of the DNA Damage Response (DDR) network. In cancer cells, replication stress induced by genomic alterations in oncogenes (eg, MYC and RAS) combined with loss of function in tumor suppressors (eg, TP53 and ATM) results in persistent DNA damage and genomic instability. Targeted inhibition of components of the DDR network such as Chk1 by SRA737 may be synthetically lethal to cancer cells. Chk1 is also believed to facilitate tumor cell resistance to chemotherapy or radiation-induced DNA damage and the combination of SRA737 with these standards-of-care may provide synergistic antitumor activity. SRA737 is being investigated in two Phase 1 trials in patients with advanced cancer. We now describe the Phase 1 multicenter, dose-escalation study of SRA737 in combination with gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) or gemcitabine (G) alone (NCT02797977). Methods: Up to 70 patients will receive escalating doses of SRA737+GC in Stage 1 or SRA737+G in Stage 2 until a recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) is established, followed by expansion cohorts. Patients will receive a single SRA737 PK run-in dose followed by Gem on D1 and 8, Cis on D1, SRA737 on D2, 3, 9 and 10 of each 21-d cycle or Gem on D1, 8 and 15, SRA737 on D2, 3, 9, 10, 16, 17 of each 28-d cycle. Eligibility criteria include WHO performance status of 0-1 and ≤ 3 prior lines of cytotoxic chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Primary objectives are to assess the safety profile of SRA737 combination therapy and to establish a RP2D. The PK profile and PD biomarkers (eg, phosphorylation of Chk1 at Ser296, Ser345 and γH2AX foci in PBMCs and tumor tissue) will be explored. The study was opened to enrollment in mid-2016. An amendment, which includes the addition of an indication specific expansion cohort of subjects with genetically-defined tumors known to have Chk1-sensitizing aberrations (eg, gene mutations and amplifications/deletions), has been submitted and is pending regulatory review while enrollment continues. At the Annual Meeting, the amended design will be described. Clinical trial information: NCT02797977.

A phase I study of SRA737 (formerly known as CCT245737) administered orally in patients with advanced cancer

TPS2607

Background: SRA737 is a highly selective, orally bioavailable small molecule inhibitor of Checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1), a key cell cycle checkpoint and central regulator of the DNA Damage Response (DDR) network. In cancer cells, replication stress induced by genomic alterations in oncogenes (eg, MYC and RAS) combined with loss of function in tumor suppressors (eg, TP53 and ATM) results in persistent DNA damage and genomic instability. Targeted inhibition of components of the DDR network such as Chk1 by SRA737 may be synthetically lethal to cancer cells and have utility as a monotherapy in a range of tumor indications. SRA737 is currently being investigated in two Phase 1 trials in patients with advanced cancer. We now describe the Phase 1 multicenter, dose-escalation, monotherapy study of SRA737 (NCT02797964). Methods: Up to 40 patients with advanced cancer will receive oral SRA737 administered daily on a 28-day schedule. For dose-escalation, an accelerated titration design with 100% dose escalation and single patient cohorts is allowed until Grade 2 related toxicity is observed, followed by a rolling-6 design. Dose expansion will include 6 patients with any solid tumor treated at the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D). Eligibility criteria include WHO performance status of 0-1 and ≤ 3 prior lines of cytotoxic chemotherapy for metastatic disease. Primary objectives are to assess the safety profile of monotherapy SRA737 and to establish a RP2D. The PK profile and PD biomarkers will be investigated. The study was opened to enrollment in mid-2016. An amendment, which includes the addition of indication specific expansion cohorts of subjects with genetically-defined tumors known to have Chk1-sensitizing aberrations such as gene mutations and amplifications/deletions, has been submitted and is pending regulatory review while enrollment continues. At the Annual Meeting, the amended design will be described. The dose and schedule identified in this trial will inform the design and conduct of Phase 2 studies of SRA737 as a single agent and in combination with other targeted or immunomodulatory agents. Clinical trial information: NCT02797964.

Anal cancer: an HIV-associated cancer

Although not yet included in the Centers for Disease Control definition of AIDS, anal cancer clearly occurs more commonly in HIV-infected patients. An effective screening program for those groups who are at highest risk might be expected to impact rates of anal cancer just as significantly as did cervical Pap screening programs for the incidence of cervical cancer. Despite a relatively low rate of progression from AIN to invasive cancer, the scope of the problem is enormous based on the prevalence of anal HPV infection and the size of the HIV-infected, at-risk population. Thus, the potential benefits of screening, detection, and the development of more effective therapy also are enormous. Currently, therapeutic HPV vaccines for AIN represent an exciting avenue of research in HPV-related anogenital disease. Invasive anal cancer and HSIL (which is believed to be the precursor lesion) are expected to become increasingly important health problems for both HIV-infected men and women as their life expectancy lengthens. Although HAART may have improved the ability of many to tolerate CMT, it appears that toxicity of this therapy continues to be a problem for a proportion of HIV-infected subjects. The acute side effects present specific challenges to the clinician and patient, have an immediate impact on the patient's plan of care and dose intensity of the treatment, and ultimately may impact the outcome of the planned treatment. Late toxicity may influence the long-term quality of life. Small patient numbers, variable radiation therapy doses, limited information about viral load, and a potential confounding effect of higher CD4+ levels make it difficult to draw any conclusions about the effect of HAART on anal cancer outcome. Large, prospective studies will be required before solid conclusions about the impact of various factors on anal cancer prognosis and outcome can be drawn.

Altered clinical course of malignant melanoma in HIV-positive patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the natural history of melanoma is different in patients who test positive for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) compared with matched control subjects.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort analysis.

SETTING

Ambulatory care at 2 university-affiliated medical centers.

PATIENTS

Each HIV-positive melanoma patient (n = 17) was randomly matched with 2 HIV-negative patients (HIV status unknown, but without risk factors for HIV) based on the melanoma subtype, tumor thickness, Clark level, tumor location, and sex and age of the patient.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Disease-free survival and overall survival of HIV-positive and HIV-negative melanoma patients were compared using a matched-pairs analysis. CD4 cell counts were recorded at the time of melanoma diagnosis and disease recurrence.

RESULTS

Melanoma patients who were HIV positive had a significantly shorter disease-free survival (P =.03) and overall survival (P =.045) compared with HIV-negative melanoma patients by matched-pairs analysis. There was an inverse relationship between CD4 cell counts and time to first melanoma recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

The natural history of malignant melanoma in HIV-positive patients is more aggressive compared with matched HIV-negative melanoma patients. Altered immune response and comorbid disease may play a role in the poor clinical outcome of HIV-positive patients. These findings have important implications in the management of melanoma in the setting of HIV disease.