First-line avelumab treatment in patients with metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma: 4-year follow-up from part B of the JAVELIN Merkel 200 study.

BACKGROUND: Results from the JAVELIN Merkel 200 study led to the approval of avelumab [an anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) antibody] for the treatment of metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma (mMCC) in multiple countries and its inclusion in the treatment guidelines as a preferred or recommended therapy in this setting. Here, we report 4-year follow-up results from the cohort of patients with mMCC who received avelumab as first-line treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In part B of JAVELIN Merkel 200, a single-arm, open-label, phase II study, patients with mMCC who had not received prior systemic therapy for metastatic disease received avelumab 10 mg/kg via intravenous infusion every 2 weeks until confirmed disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal. In this analysis, long-term overall survival (OS), patient disposition, and subsequent treatment were analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 116 patients received first-line avelumab. At the data cutoff (2 February 2022), the median follow-up was 54.3 months (range 48.0-69.7 months). Seven patients (6.0%) remained on treatment and an additional 21 patients remained in follow-up (18.1%); 72 patients (62.1%) had died. The median OS was 20.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 12.4-42.0 months], with a 4-year OS rate of 38% (95% CI 29% to 47%). In patients with PD-L1+ or PD-L1- tumors, the 4-year OS rate was 48% (95% CI 26% to 67%) and 35% (95% CI 25% to 45%), respectively. In total, 48 patients (41.4%) received poststudy anticancer drug therapy, most commonly etoposide (20.7%), carboplatin (19.0%), and avelumab (12.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Avelumab first-line monotherapy in patients with mMCC resulted in meaningful long-term OS, which compared favorably with historical studies of first-line chemotherapy. These results further support the role of avelumab as a standard of care for patients with mMCC.

Overall survival from tebentafusp versus nivolumab plus ipilimumab in first-line metastatic uveal melanoma: a propensity score-weighted analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tebentafusp demonstrated a superior overall survival (OS) benefit [hazard ratio (HR) 0.51] compared to investigator's choice (82% pembrolizumab) in a randomized, phase III trial (IMCgp100-202; N = 378) in untreated metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM). The 1-year OS rates for tebentafusp and pembrolizumab were 73% and 59%, respectively. In the single-arm GEM1402 (N = 52), the 1-year OS rate for nivolumab plus ipilimumab (N+I) in mUM was 52%. Due to limitations in conducting randomized trials in mUM, we compared OS on tebentafusp or pembrolizumab (IMCgp100-202) to N+I (GEM1402) in untreated mUM using propensity scoring methods. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Analyses were adjusted using propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), balancing age, sex, baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), baseline alkaline phosphatase, disease location, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, and time from primary diagnosis to metastasis. OS was assessed using IPT-weighted Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models. Sensitivity analyses using alternative missing data and weights methods were conducted. RESULTS: The primary IPTW analysis included 240 of 252 patients randomized to tebentafusp from IMCgp100-202 and 45 of 52 N+I-treated patients from GEM-1402. Key baseline covariates, including LDH, were generally well balanced before weighting. The IPTW-adjusted OS favored tebentafusp, HR 0.52 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.78]; 1-year OS was 73% for tebentafusp versus 50% for N+I. Sensitivity analyses showed consistent superior OS for tebentafusp with all IPTW HRs ≤0.61. IPTW analysis of pembrolizumab versus N+I showed no significant difference in OS (HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.50-1.06). CONCLUSIONS: Tebentafusp was previously shown to provide an OS benefit compared to checkpoint inhibitors or chemotherapy in untreated mUM. Propensity score analysis demonstrated a similar OS benefit for tebentafusp compared with N+I. These data further support tebentafusp as the standard of care in previously untreated human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-A∗02:01+ adult patients with mUM.

Preferences of German and Swiss melanoma patients for toxicities versus melanoma recurrence during adjuvant treatment (GERMELATOX-A-trial).

PURPOSE: Adjuvant treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors like PD1-antibodies (ICI) ± CTLA4-antibodies (cICI) or targeted therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors (TT) in high-risk melanoma patients demonstrate a significant improvement in disease-free survival (DFS). Due to specific side effects, the choice of treatment is very often driven by the risk for toxicity. This study addressed for the first time in a multicenter setting the attitudes and preferences of melanoma patients for adjuvant treatment with (c)ICI and TT. METHODS: In this study ("GERMELATOX-A"), 136 low-risk melanoma patients from 11 skin cancer centers were asked to rate side effect scenarios typical for each (c)ICI and TT with mild-to-moderate or severe toxicity and melanoma recurrence leading to cancer death. We asked patients about the reduction in melanoma relapse and the survival increase at 5 years they would require to tolerate defined side-effects. RESULTS: By VAS, patients on average valued melanoma relapse worse than all scenarios of side-effects during treatment with (c)ICI or TT. In case of severe side effects, patients required a 15% higher rate of DFS at 5 years for (c)ICI (80%) compared to TT (65%). For survival, patients required an increase of 5-10% for melanoma survival during (c)ICI (85%/80%) compared to TT (75%). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated a pronounced variation of patient preferences for toxicity and outcomes and a clear preference for TT. As adjuvant melanoma treatment with (c)ICI and TT will be increasingly implemented in earlier stages, precise knowledge of the patient perspective can be helpful for decision making.

How we identify and treat neuromuscular toxicity induced by immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Immune-related neuromuscular adverse events are rare, but potentially life-threatening side-effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). They usually arise within the first 3 months after initiation of ICIs. Subacute symptom onset with more rapid progression than in idiopathic autoimmune neuromuscular diseases is typical. Prompt clinical diagnosis and treatment is essential for a favourable outcome. The importance of careful medical history and a well-established clinical diagnosis is emphasised rather than antibody detection or radiologic visualisation. Muscle weakness as a leading symptom can give rise to the suspicion of either neuropathy or myositis-myasthenia complex and differentiation may be complicated by their overlap. It is of utmost importance to recognise immune-related myositis and monitor for myocardial as well as bulbar involvement that may rapidly lead to cardiac or respiratory failure, persisting disability or even a fatal outcome. Symptoms typically improve with ICI discontinuation and early administration of glucocorticoids (prednisolone 1-2 mg/kg/day) in patients markedly affected. Severe and persisting symptoms including myocardial or bulbar affection can require therapy escalation to steroid-sparing agents. In patients with mild symptoms, not influencing functional abilities, careful clinical monitoring while staying on ICI therapy may be sufficient. Re-challenging with ICIs may be considered in selected cases, based on the initial severity of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and clinical disease course. Depending on the individual irAE characteristics, the decision should be preferably discussed in an interdisciplinary irAE expert team with an experienced neurologist, rheumatologist and/or cardiologist and take the patient's preferences into account. The yet unmet need of systematic data on treatment, follow-up results and options of re-challenge of ICI treatment in neuromuscular toxicity has to be particularly considered in the shared decision-making process.

Fertility preservation and management of pregnancy in melanoma patients requiring systemic therapy.

Melanoma is one of the most common cancers in adolescents and adults at fertile age, especially in women. With novel and more effective systemic therapies that began to profoundly change the dismal outcome of melanoma by prolonging overall survival, the wish for fertility preservation or even parenthood has to be considered for a growing portion of melanoma patients-from the patients' as well as from the physicians' perspective. The dual blockade of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway by B-Raf proto-oncogene serine/threonine kinase and mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitors and the immune checkpoint inhibition by anti-programmed cell death protein 1 and anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein-4 monoclonal antibodies constitute the current standard systemic approaches to combat locally advanced or metastatic melanoma. Here, the preclinical data and clinical evidence of these systemic therapies are reviewed in terms of their potential gonadotoxicity, teratogenicity, embryotoxicity and fetotoxicity. Recommendations for routine fertility and contraception counseling of melanoma patients at fertile age are provided in line with interdisciplinary recommendations for the diagnostic work-up of these patients and for fertility-protective measures. Differentiated recommendations for the systemic therapy in both the adjuvant and the advanced, metastatic treatment situation are given. In addition, the challenges of pregnancy during systemic melanoma therapy are discussed.

GNAQ and GNA11 mutant nonuveal melanoma: a subtype distinct from both cutaneous and uveal melanoma.

BACKGROUND: GNAQ and GNA11 mutant nonuveal melanoma represent a poorly characterized rare subgroup of melanoma with a gene mutation profile similar to uveal melanoma. OBJECTIVES: To characterize these tumours in terms of clinical behaviour and genetic characteristics. METHODS: Patients with nonuveal GNAQ/11 mutated melanoma were identified from the prospective multicentre tumour tissue registry ADOREG, Tissue Registry in Melanoma (TRIM) and additional cooperating skin cancer centres. Extensive data on patient, tumour and treatment characteristics were collected retrospectively. Targeted sequencing was used to determine tumour mutational burden. Immunohistochemistry staining was performed for programmed death-ligand 1 and BRCA1-associated protein (BAP)1. Existing whole-exome cutaneous and uveal melanoma data were analysed for mutation type and burden. RESULTS: We identified 18 patients with metastatic GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanoma. Tumours had a lower tumour mutational burden and fewer ultraviolet signature mutations than cutaneous melanomas. In addition to GNAQ and GNA11 mutations (nine each), six splicing factor 3b subunit 1 (SF3B1), three eukaryotic translation initiation factor 1A X-linked (EIF1AX) and four BAP1 mutations were detected. In contrast to uveal melanoma, GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas frequently metastasized lymphatically and concurrent EIF1AX, SF3B1 and BAP1 mutations showed no apparent association with patient prognosis. Objective response to immunotherapy was poor with only one partial response observed in 10 treated patients (10%). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas are a subtype of melanoma that is both clinically and genetically distinct from cutaneous and uveal melanoma. As they respond poorly to available treatment regimens, novel effective therapeutic approaches for affected patients are urgently needed. What is already known about this topic? The rare occurrence of GNAQ/11 mutations in nonuveal melanoma has been documented. GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas also harbour genetic alterations in EIF1AX, SF3B1 and BAP1 that are of prognostic relevance in uveal melanoma. What does this study add? GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas show metastatic spread reminiscent of cutaneous melanoma, but not uveal melanoma. GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas have a low tumour mutational burden that is higher than uveal melanoma, but lower than cutaneous melanoma. What is the translational message? Primary GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas are a subtype of melanoma that is clinically and genetically distinct from both cutaneous and uveal melanoma. As metastatic GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas respond poorly to available systemic therapies, including immune checkpoint inhibition, novel therapeutic approaches for these tumours are urgently needed. Linked Comment: Rafei-Shamsabadi. Br J Dermatol 2020; 183:806-807.

Phase II trial of ipilimumab in melanoma patients with preexisting humoural immune response to NY-ESO-1.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint therapy has dramatically changed treatment options in patients with metastatic melanoma. However, a relevant part of patients still does not respond to treatment. Data regarding the prognostic or predictive significance of preexisting immune responses against tumour antigens are conflicting. Retrospective data suggested a higher clinical benefit of ipilimumab in melanoma patients with preexisting NY-ESO-1-specific immunity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients with previously untreated or treated metastatic melanoma and preexisting humoural immune response against NY-ESO-1 received ipilimumab at a dose of 10 mg/kg in week 1, 4, 7, 10 followed by 3-month maintenance treatment for a maximum of 48 weeks. Primary endpoint was the disease control rate (irCR, irPR or irSD) according to immune-related response criteria (irRC). Secondary endpoints included the disease control rate according to RECIST criteria, progression-free survival and overall survival (OS). Humoural and cellular immune responses against NY-ESO-1 were analysed from blood samples. RESULTS: Disease control rate according to irRC was 52%, irPR was observed in 36% of patients. Progression-free survival according to irRC was 7.8 months, according to RECIST criteria it was 2.9 months. Median OS was 22.7 months; the corresponding 1-year survival rate was 66.8%. Treatment-related grade 3 AEs occurred in 36% with no grade 4-5 AEs. No clear association was found between the presence of NY-ESO-1-specific cellular or humoural immune responses and clinical activity. CONCLUSION: Ipilimumab demonstrated clinically relevant activity within this biomarker-defined population. NY-ESO-1 positivity, as a surrogate for a preexisting immune response against tumour antigens, might help identifying patients with a superior outcome from immune checkpoint blockade. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: NCT01216696.

Acral lentiginous melanoma: a skin cancer with unfavourable prognostic features. A study of the German central malignant melanoma registry (CMMR) in 2050 patients.

BACKGROUND: Acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM) is one of the four major subtypes in cutaneous melanoma (CM). Although ALM has a poorer prognosis than other CM subtypes, the prognostic factors associated with ALM have only been verified in small-sized cohorts because of the low incidence of ALM worldwide. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the clinical characteristics of ALM and to evaluate their prognostic values based on a large dataset from the Central Malignant Melanoma Registry (CMMR) of the German Dermatologic Society. METHODS: The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the potential influence of clinical and histological parameters on ALM disease-specific survival (DSS) curves, which were compared using the log-rank test. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify independent prognostic factors for DSS. RESULTS: In total, 2050 patients with ALM were identified from 58 949 patients with CM recorded by the CMMR with follow-up data. In multivariate analyses, age (P = 0·006), ulceration (P = 0·013), tumour thickness (P < 0·001) and tumour spread (P < 0·001) turned out to be significant prognostic factors for DSS in ALM whereas sex, nevus association and level of invasion were not independent factors. CONCLUSIONS: ALM has the same prognostic factors as other subtypes of melanoma. Unfavourable prognosis probably derives from the delay in diagnosis in comparison with other melanoma subtypes.

[Malignant melanoma : Current status]. / Malignes Melanom : Aktueller Stand.

CLINICAL ISSUE: The incidence of malignant melanoma is continuously increasing. The prognosis of metastatic disease is still limited. STANDARD TREATMENT: Until a few years ago palliative chemotherapy with a limited response rate was the standard treatment for metastatic melanoma. TREATMENT INNOVATIONS: Immunotherapy and targeted therapy provide new treatment options. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved the prognosis. DIAGNOSTIC WORK-UP: Regional lymph node sonography, computed tomography (CT) of the neck, chest and abdomen and brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are routinely used. As an alternative to CT scans 18 F fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) may be used. PERFORMANCE AND ACHIEVEMENTS: Immunotherapy provides the chance of long-term disease control in metastatic melanoma. Ipilimumab may provide long-term tumor control in approximately 20% of patients. Median overall survival of approximately 2 years is achieved during therapy with anti-programmed cell death (PD) 1 antibodies. For combined therapy of ipilimumab and nivolumab a response rate of almost 60% is achieved and 2­year survival is also approximately 60%. The range of immune-mediated side effects demands particular consideration. For response evaluation immune-related response criteria were defined. Furthermore, immunotherapeutic approaches, such as talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC), which is a modified herpes virus can be used for intralesional injection. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: An individual definition of the appropriate therapy for each patient is of particular importance. In the context of modern therapy regimens close patient monitoring is crucial.

PD-1 blockade: a therapeutic option for treatment of metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma.

The immune system is extremely important in the development and progression of Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). Immune checkpoint blockade has recently been shown to enable efficacious treatment of a variety of tumours. We report the use of an anti-programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1) antibody for treatment of a patient with metastatic MCC. An 80-year-old patient with metastatic MCC received off-label treatment with the anti-PD-1 antibody pembrolizumab after the disease had progressed during therapy with oral etoposide. A positron emission tomography (PET) computed tomography scan performed after three cycles of pembrolizumab revealed responses to therapy with reduced size of the adrenal gland metastases and less PET activity in the adrenal gland and lymph node metastases. Treatment was resumed owing to disease progression after a treatment-free interval of > 4 months. During subsequent months of treatment, the size of the metastases stabilized and uptake of nuclide by all tumour sites once again decreased. These results reveal the potential efficacy of an anti-PD-1 antibody for treatment of metastatic MCC. Thus, they contribute to currently limited data on the use of anti-PD-1 antibodies for the treatment of MCC. Moreover, this is the first report of successful resumption of treatment of metastatic MCC with an anti-PD-1 antibody. Results from ongoing trials will contribute to determination of the relevance of PD-1 blockade in metastatic MCC.

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

Background: Anti-PD-1 antibodies (anti-PD-1) have clinical activity in a number of malignancies. All clinical trials have excluded patients with significant preexisting autoimmune disorders (ADs) and only one has included patients with immune-related adverse events (irAEs) with ipilimumab. We sought to explore the safety and efficacy of anti-PD-1 in such patients. Patients and methods: Patients with advanced melanoma and preexisting ADs and/or major immune-related adverse events (irAEs) with ipilimumab (requiring systemic immunosuppression) that were treated with anti-PD-1 between 1 July 2012 and 30 September 2015 were retrospectively identified. Results: One hundred and nineteen patients from 13 academic tertiary referral centers were treated with anti-PD-1. In patients with preexisting AD (N = 52), the response rate was 33%. 20 (38%) patients had a flare of AD requiring immunosuppression, including 7/13 with rheumatoid arthritis, 3/3 with polymyalgia rheumatica, 2/2 with Sjogren's syndrome, 2/2 with immune thrombocytopaenic purpura and 3/8 with psoriasis. No patients with gastrointestinal (N = 6) or neurological disorders (N = 5) flared. Only 2 (4%) patients discontinued treatment due to flare, but 15 (29%) developed other irAEs and 4 (8%) discontinued treatment. In patients with prior ipilimumab irAEs requiring immunosuppression (N = 67) the response rate was 40%. Two (3%) patients had a recurrence of the same ipilimumab irAEs, but 23 (34%) developed new irAEs (14, 21% grade 3-4) and 8 (12%) discontinued treatment. There were no treatment-related deaths. Conclusions: In melanoma patients with preexisting ADs or major irAEs with ipilimumab, anti-PD-1 induced relatively frequent immune toxicities, but these were often mild, easily managed and did not necessitate discontinuation of therapy, and a significant proportion of patients achieved clinical responses. The results support that anti-PD-1 can be administered safely and can achieve clinical benefit in patients with preexisting ADs or prior major irAEs with ipilimumab.

Use of LDH and autoimmune side effects to predict response to ipilimumab treatment.

BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab is a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 antibody that enhances T-cell activity and proliferation. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of 86 patients the clinical benefits of ipilimumab treatment were correlated with laboratory and clinical data. RESULTS: A lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) value within the normal range before the start of therapy was significantly correlated with better OS (p ≤ 0.009). An increase in LDH level after two cycles was indicative of a poor outcome, and was significantly negatively correlated with treatment response and overall survival and progression-free survival. 42% of all patients suffered from autoimmune toxicity (CTCAE grades 2-4). The occurrence of autoimmune toxicity clearly correlated with clinical benefit. CONCLUSION: Changes in LDH level and side effects correlate with response to therapy and survival.

Effect of nivolumab on health-related quality of life in patients with treatment-naïve advanced melanoma: results from the phase III CheckMate 066 study.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab has shown significant survival benefit and a favorable safety profile compared with dacarbazine chemotherapy among treatment-naïve patients with metastatic melanoma in the CheckMate 066 phase III study. Results from the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) analyses from CheckMate 066 are presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: HRQoL was evaluated at baseline and every 6 weeks while on treatment using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Care (EORTC) Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the EuroQoL Five Dimensions Questionnaire (EQ-5D). Via a multi-step statistical plan, data were analyzed descriptively, cross-sectionally, and longitudinally, adjusting for baseline covariates, in patients having baseline plus ≥1 post-baseline assessment. RESULTS: Baseline-adjusted completion rates for all HRQoL questionnaires across treatment arms were 65% and 70% for dacarbazine and nivolumab, respectively, and remained similar throughout treatment. The mean baseline HRQoL scores were similar for patients treated with nivolumab and dacarbazine. Baseline HRQoL levels with nivolumab were maintained over time. This exploratory analysis showed a between-arm difference in favor of nivolumab on the EQ-5D utility index and clinically meaningful EQ-5D improvements from baseline at several time points for patients receiving nivolumab. Patients treated with nivolumab did not show increased symptom burden as assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30. No HRQoL change was noted with dacarbazine patients up to week 43, although the high attrition rate after week 13 did not allow any meaningful analyses. Patients receiving nivolumab deteriorated significantly later than those receiving dacarbazine on several EORTC QLQ-C30 scales and the EQ-5D utility index. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to prolonged survival, these exploratory HRQoL results show that nivolumab maintains baseline HRQoL levels to provide long-term quality of survival benefit, compared with dacarbazine in patients with advanced melanoma.