RESUMEN
Background: Melanoma leptomeningeal disease (LMD) has a poor prognosis. However, the management of patients with advanced melanoma has evolved with time, including those with LMD. We reviewed a large cohort of melanoma LMD patients to assess factors associated with survival. Methods: Retrospective clinical data was collected on patients diagnosed with LMD at MD Anderson Cancer Center from 2015 to 2020. Overall survival (OS) was determined from LMD diagnosis to date of death or last follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to estimate OS and to assess univariate group differences, respectively. Multivariable associations of survival with variables of interest were determined using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: A total of 172 patients were identified. The median age at LMD diagnosis was 53 (range 20-79) years, and all patients had radiographic evidence of LMD on magnetic resonance imaging of either brain or spine. In total 143 patients previously received systemic therapy (83%), with a median of 2 prior treatments (range 0-5). 81 patients (47%) had concurrent uncontrolled systemic disease and 80 patients (53%) had elevated serum LDH at the time of diagnosis. With a median follow-up of 4.0 months (range 0.1-65.3 months), median OS for all patients from LMD diagnosis was 4.9 months. Patients (nâ =â 45) who received intrathecal therapy or systemic immunotherapy for LMD had a median OS of 8.0 months and 10.2 months, respectively. On multivariable analysis, decreased performance status, positive CSF cytology, elevated LDH, and whole brain radiation were associated with worse OS. Conclusions: Despite many advances in therapeutic options, the outcomes of melanoma patients with LMD remains poor. However, a subset of patients appears to derive benefit from LMD-directed treatment.
RESUMEN
In PIVOT IO 001 (NCT03635983), the combination of the investigational interleukin-2 agonist bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG) with nivolumab (NIVO) had no added clinical benefit over NIVO monotherapy in unresectable/metastatic melanoma. Pre-defined baseline and on-treatment changes in selected biomarkers were analyzed to explore the potential mechanisms underlying the clinical observations. In each treatment arm, higher baseline tumor mutational burden or immune infiltration/inflammation was associated with improved efficacy compared with lower levels. On-treatment peripheral biomarker changes showed that BEMPEG + NIVO increased all immune cell subset counts interrogated, including regulatory T cells. This was followed by attenuation of the increase in CD8 + T cells, conventional CD4 + T cells, and systemic interferon gamma levels at later treatment cycles in the combination arm. Changes in tumor biomarkers were comparable between arms. These biomarker results help provide a better understanding of the mechanism of action of BEMPEG + NIVO and may help contextualize the clinical observations from PIVOT IO 001.
RESUMEN
Patients with preexisting autoimmune disease (pAID) are generally excluded from clinical trials for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for cancer due to concern of flaring pAID. In this multi-center, retrospective observational study, we compared safety of ICI combination (two ICI agents) versus monotherapy in cancer patients with pAIDs. The primary outcome was time to AEs (immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and/or pAID flares), with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival as secondary outcomes. Sixty-four of 133 patients (48%) received ICI combination and 69 (52%) monotherapy. Most had melanoma (32%) and lung cancer (31%). Most common pAIDs were rheumatic (28%) and dermatologic (23%). Over a median follow-up of 15 months (95%CI, 11-18 mo), the cumulative incidence of any-grade irAEs was higher for combination compared to monotherapy (subdistribution hazard ratio (sHR) 2.27, 95%CI 1.35-3.82). No statistically significant difference was observed in high-grade irAEs (sHR 2.31 (0.95-5.66), P = .054) or the cumulative incidence of pAID flares. There was no statistically significant difference for melanoma PFS between combination versus monotherapy (23.2 vs. 17.1mo, P = .53). The combination group was more likely to discontinue or hold ICI, but > 50% of the combination group was still able to continue ICI therapy. No treatment-related deaths occurred. In our cohort with pAIDs, patients had a tolerable toxicity profile with ICI combination therapy. Our results support the use of ICI combination if deemed necessary for cancer therapy in patients with pAIDs, since the ICI toxicities were comparable to monotherapy, able to be effectively managed and mostly did not require ICI interruption.