Influence of adjuvant therapies on organ-specific recurrence of cutaneous melanoma: A multicenter study on 1383 patients of the prospective DeCOG registry ADOReg.

This study investigated whether adjuvant treatments in stage III cutaneous melanoma (CM) influenced patterns of recurrence. Patients with primary (n = 1033) or relapsed CM (n = 350) who received adjuvant therapies with Nivolumab (N), Pembrolizumab (P), or Dabrafenib and Trametinib (D + T) were extracted from the prospective multicenter real-world skin cancer registry ADOReg. Endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), organ-specific DMFS, and overall survival (OS). For primary cases, D + T indicated an improved PFS (1- and 2-year PFS: 90.9%; 82.7%) as compared to P (81.0%, 73.9%; p = .0208), or N (83.8%, 75.2%; p = .0539). BRAF-mutated(mut) CM demonstrated significantly lower PFS (p = .0022) and decreased DMFS (p = .0580) when treated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) instead of D + T. Besides, NRAS-mut CM tended to perform worse than wt CM upon ICI (PFS: p = .1349; DMFS: p = .0540). OS was similar between the groups. Relapsed cases showed decreased PFS, DMFS, and OS in comparison to primary (all: p < .001), without significant differences between the subgroups. Organ-specific DMFS was significantly altered for primary cases with bone (p = .0367) or brain metastases (p = .0202). In relapsed CM, the frequency of liver (D + T: 1.5%; P: 12%; N: 9%) and LN metastases (D + T: 1.5%; P: 12%; N: 10.2%) was significantly lower with adjuvant D + T than ICI. NRAS-mut CM showed increased recurrence in primary and relapsed cases. These data show that adjuvant D + T is superior to ICI in primary BRAF-mut CM.

Effectiveness, Safety and Utilization of Vismodegib for Locally Advanced Basal Cell Carcinoma Under Real-world Conditions: Non-interventional Cohort Study JONAS.

Most patients with advanced basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) may not benefit sufficiently from standard treatment comprising surgery and radiation. Vismodegib, an oral selective hedgehog pathway inhibitor, is approved for treatment of patients with locally advanced BCC inappropriate for surgery or radiotherapy, or for patients with symptomatic metastatic BCC. In order to enhance understanding of the effectiveness, safety and utilization of vismodegib in clinical practice in Germany, a non-interventional study, JONAS, was conducted. A total of 53 patients with locally advanced BCC who initiated treatment with vismodegib between 2016 and 2018 were included in the study, which was embedded in the German ADOReg skin cancer registry. Duration of response, the primary endpoint, was 12.4 months, progression-free survival 32.2 months and overall response rate 77.4%. Most adverse events were mild to moderate. Overall, results confirmed previous findings, demonstrating favourable responses and manageable safety of vismodegib in patients with locally advanced BCC in clinical practice.

Complete lymph node dissection versus no dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node biopsy positive melanoma (DeCOG-SLT): a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Complete lymph node dissection is recommended in patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy results. To date, the effect of complete lymph node dissection on prognosis is controversial. In the DeCOG-SLT trial, we assessed whether complete lymph node dissection resulted in increased survival compared with observation. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients with cutaneous melanoma of the torso, arms, or legs from 41 German skin cancer centres. Patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy results were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo complete lymph node dissection or observation with permuted blocks of variable size and stratified by primary tumour thickness, ulceration of primary tumour, and intended adjuvant interferon therapy. Treatment assignment was not masked. The primary endpoint was distant metastasis-free survival and analysed by intention to treat. All patients in the intention-to-treat population of the complete lymph node dissection group were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02434107. Follow-up is ongoing, but the trial no longer recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between Jan 1, 2006, and Dec 1, 2014, 5547 patients were screened with sentinel lymph node biopsy and 1269 (23%) patients were positive for micrometastasis. Of these, 483 (39%) agreed to randomisation into the clinical trial; due to difficulties enrolling and a low event rate the trial closed early on Dec 1, 2014. 241 patients were randomly assigned to the observation group and 242 to the complete lymph node dissection group. Ten patients did not meet the inclusion criteria, so 233 patients were analysed in the observation group and 240 patients were analysed in the complete lymph node dissection group, as the intention-to-treat population. 311 (66%) patients (158 in the observation group and 153 in the dissection group) had sentinel lymph node metastases of 1 mm or less. Median follow-up was 35 months (IQR 20-54). Distant metastasis-free survival at 3 years was 77·0% (90% CI 71·9-82·1; 55 events) in the observation group and 74·9% (69·5-80·3; 54 events) in the complete lymph node dissection group. In the complete lymph node dissection group, grade 3 and 4 events occurred in 15 patients (6%) and 19 patients (8%) patients, respectively. Adverse events included lymph oedema (grade 3 in seven patients, grade 4 in 13 patients), lymph fistula (grade 3 in one patient, grade 4 in two patients), seroma (grade 3 in three patients, no grade 4), infection (grade 3 in three patients, no grade 4), and delayed wound healing (grade 3 in one patient, grade 4 in four patients); no serious adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: Although we did not achieve the required number of events, leading to the trial being underpowered, our results showed no difference in survival in patients treated with complete lymph node dissection compared with observation only. Consequently, complete lymph node dissection should not be recommended in patients with melanoma with lymph node micrometastases of at least a diameter of 1 mm or smaller. FUNDING: German Cancer Aid.

Immune checkpoint blockade with concurrent electrochemotherapy in advanced melanoma: a retrospective multicenter analysis.

Growing evidence suggests that concurrent loco-regional and systemic treatment modalities may lead to synergistic anti-tumor effects in advanced melanoma. In this retrospective multicenter study, we evaluate the use of electrochemotherapy (ECT) combined with ipilimumab or PD-1 inhibition. We investigated patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma who received the combination of ECT and immune checkpoint blockade for distant or cutaneous metastases within 4 weeks. Clinical and laboratory data were collected and analyzed with respect to safety and efficacy. A total of 33 patients from 13 centers were identified with a median follow-up time of 9 months. Twenty-eight patients received ipilimumab, while five patients were treated with a PD-1 inhibitor (pembrolizumab n = 3, nivolumab n = 2). The local overall response rate (ORR) was 66.7 %. The systemic ORR was 19.2 and 40.0 % in the ipilimumab and PD-1 cohort, respectively. The median duration of response was not reached in either group. The median time to disease progression was 2.5 months for the entire population with 2 months for ipilimumab and 5 months for PD-1 blockade. The median overall survival was not reached in patients with ipilimumab and 15 months in the PD-1 group. Severe systemic adverse events were detected in 25.0 % in the ipilimumab group. No treatment-related deaths were observed. This is the first reported evaluation of ECT and simultaneous PD-1 inhibition and the largest published dataset on ECT with concurrent ipilimumab. The local response was lower than reported for ECT only. Ipilimumab combined with ECT was feasible, tolerable and showed a high systemic response rate.

Electrochemotherapy in advanced skin tumors and cutaneous metastases - a retrospective multicenter analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Once classic treatments such as chemotherapy or radiation therapy have been exhausted, only few therapeutic options remain for extensive skin tumors or cutaneous metastases. In such cases, electrochemotherapy may be considered as alternative therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, clinical features, treatment response, and adverse effects were evaluated in 56 patients treated with electrochemotherapy at six German dermatology departments. RESULTS: The mean age of the patient cohort (14 men, 42 women) was 69.3 years. Included were 20 patients with skin metastasis of advanced malignant melanoma, 13 patients with breast cancer metastases, 15 patients with primary squamous cell carcinoma of the skin or cutaneous metastases of other carcinoma types, and 8 patients with cutaneous lymphoma or sarcoma. The overall response rate was 44.6% (10.7% complete response; 33.9% partial response). By contrast, 31 (55.4%) patients did not respond (12.5% had stable disease; 42.9%, tumor progression). Patients with melanoma and cutaneous lymphoma or sarcoma responded significantly better than those with carcinoma. Roughly one quarter of patients showed an improvement in tumor-related exudation, fetor, and chronic bleeding. CONCLUSION: Showing only few adverse effects, electrochemotherapy was effective in about one half of the patients with advanced tumors. Treatment response appears to depend on the tumor entity.

Effects of an immunosuppressive therapy on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibition in metastatic melanoma - An analysis of the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

BACKGROUND: The impact of immunosuppressive therapy (IST) on immune-checkpoint inhibition (ICI) is unclear. METHODS: Patients with unresectable advanced melanoma (MM) treated with ICI in the years 2011-2020 were identified from the prospective multicenter German skin cancer registry ADOREG. Patients with IST within 60 days before, or within 30 days after start of ICI were compared to patients without IST. End points were disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) determined by Kaplan-Meier method. Prognostic factors were evaluated in a Cox regression model. RESULTS: Of 814 patients treated with ICI, 73 (9%) received concomitant IST, mainly steroids. Patients with brain metastases (BM) received IST more frequently (n = 34/130 patients; 26%), than patients without BM (39/684 patients; 6%). In patients without BM, IST initiated before, but not IST initiated after start of ICI was significantly associated with worse PFS (univariate hazard ratio (HR) 2.59, 95% confidence interval (95%-CI) 1.07-6.28, p = 0.035; multivariate HR 3.48, 95%-CI 1.26-9.6, p = 0.016). There was no association between IST and OS or DCR. In patients with BM, IST initiated before, but not after start of ICI was significantly associated with worse OS (univariate HR 2.06, 95%-CI 1.07-3.95, p = 0.031; multivariate HR 5.91, 95%-CI 1.74-20.14, p = 0.004). There was no association between IST and PFS or DCR. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving IST 60 days before start of ICI showed a tendency to an impaired therapy outcome. IST initiated within 30 days after start of ICI, mainly due to early side effects, did not affect the efficacy of ICI therapy.

Clinical and genetic characteristics of BAP1-mutated non-uveal and uveal melanoma.

Background: Screening for gene mutations has become routine clinical practice across numerous tumor entities, including melanoma. BAP1 gene mutations have been identified in various tumor types and acknowledged as a critical event in metastatic uveal melanoma, but their role in non-uveal melanoma remains inadequately characterized. Methods: A retrospective analysis of all melanomas sequenced in our department from 2014-2022 (n=2650) was conducted to identify BAP1 mutated samples. Assessment of clinical and genetic characteristics was performed as well as correlations with treatment outcome. Results: BAP1 mutations were identified in 129 cases and distributed across the entire gene without any apparent hot spots. Inactivating BAP1 mutations were more prevalent in uveal (55%) compared to non-uveal (17%) melanomas. Non-uveal BAP1 mutated melanomas frequently exhibited UV-signature mutations and had a significantly higher mutation load than uveal melanomas. GNAQ and GNA11 mutations were common in uveal melanomas, while MAP-Kinase mutations were frequent in non-uveal melanomas with NF1, BRAF V600 and NRAS Q61 mutations occurring in decreasing frequency, consistent with a strong UV association. Survival outcomes did not differ among non-uveal melanoma patients based on whether they received targeted or immune checkpoint therapy, or if their tumors harbored inactivating BAP1 mutations. Conclusion: In contrast to uveal melanomas, where BAP1 mutations serve as a significant prognostic indicator of an unfavorable outcome, BAP1 mutations in non-uveal melanomas are primarily considered passenger mutations and do not appear to be relevant from a prognostic or therapeutic perspective.

Shortened progression free and overall survival to immune-checkpoint inhibitors in BRAF-, RAS- and NF1- ("Triple") wild type melanomas.

BACKGROUND: Melanomas lacking mutations in BRAF, NRAS and NF1 are frequently referred to as "triple wild-type" (tWT) melanomas. They constitute 5-10 % of all melanomas and remain poorly characterized regarding clinical characteristics and response to therapy. This study investigates the largest multicenter collection of tWT-melanomas to date. METHODS: Targeted next-generation sequencing of the TERT promoter and 29 melanoma-associated genes were performed on 3109 melanoma tissue samples of the prospective multicenter study ADOREG/TRIM of the DeCOG revealing 292 patients suffering from tWT-melanomas. Clinical characteristics and mutational patterns were analyzed. As subgroup analysis, we analyzed 141 tWT-melanoma patients receiving either anti-CTLA4 plus anti-PD1 or anti PD1 monotherapy as first line therapy in AJCC stage IV. RESULTS: 184 patients with cutaneous melanomas, 56 patients with mucosal melanomas, 34 patients with acral melanomas and 18 patients with melanomas of unknown origin (MUP) were included. A TERT promoter mutation could be identified in 33.2 % of all melanomas and 70.5 % of all tWT-melanomas harbored less than three mutations per sample. For the 141 patients with stage IV disease, mPFS independent of melanoma type was 6.2 months (95 % CI: 4-9) and mOS was 24.8 months (95 % CI: 14.2-53.4) after first line anti-CTLA4 plus anti-PD1 therapy. After first-line anti-PD1 monotherapy, mPFS was 4 months (95 %CI: 2.9-8.5) and mOS was 29.18 months (95 % CI: 17.5-46.2). CONCLUSIONS: While known prognostic factors such as TERT promoter mutations and TMB were equally distributed among patients who received either anti-CTLA4 plus anti-PD1 combination therapy or anti-PD1 monotherapy as first line therapy, we did not find a prolonged mPFS or mOS in either of those. For both therapy concepts, mPFS and mOS were considerably shorter than reported for melanomas with known oncogene mutations.

Early versus late response to PD-1-based immunotherapy in metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) currently is the most effective treatment to induce durable responses in metastatic melanoma. The aims of this study are the characterization of patients with early, late and non-response to ICI and analysis of survival outcomes in a real-world patient cohort. METHODS: Patients who received PD-1-based immunotherapy for non-resectable stage-IV melanoma in any therapy line were selected from the prospective multicenter real-world DeCOG study ADOREG-TRIM (NCT05750511). Patients showing complete (CR) or partial (PR) response already during the first 3 months of treatment (Early Responders, EarlyR) were compared to patients showing CR/PR at a later time (Late Responders, LateR), a stable disease (SD) and to patients showing progressive disease (Non-Responders, NonR). RESULTS: Of 522 patients, 8.2 % were EarlyR (n = 43), 19.0 % were LateR (n = 99), 37.0 % had a SD (n = 193) and 35.8 % were NonR (n = 187). EarlyR, LateR and SD patients had comparable baseline characteristics. Multivariate logbinomial regression analyses adjusted for age and sex revealed positive tumor PD-L1 (RR=1.99, 95 %-CI=1.14-3.46, p = 0.015), and normal serum CRP (RR=1.59, 95 %-CI=0.93-2.70, p = 0.036) as independently associated with the achievement of an early response compared to NonR. The median progression-free and overall survival was 46.0 months (95 % CI 19.1; NR) and 47.8 months (95 %-CI 36.9; NR) for EarlyR, NR (95 %-CI NR; NR) for LateR, 8.1 months (7.0; 10.4) and 35.4 months (29.2; NR) for SD, and 2.0 months (95 %-CI 1.9; 2.1) and 6.1 months (95 %-CI 4.6; 8.8) for NonR patients. CONCLUSION: Less than 10 % of metastatic melanoma patients achieved an early response during the first 3 months of PD-1-based immunotherapy. Early responders were not superior to late responders in terms of response durability and survival.

Characterisation and outcome of RAC1 mutated melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Activating hot spot R29S mutations in RAC1, a small GTPase influencing several cellular processes including cell proliferation and cytoskeleton rearrangement, have been reported in up to 9% of sun-exposed melanomas. Clinical characteristics and treatment implications of RAC1 mutations in melanoma remain unclear. METHODS: We investigated the largest set (n = 64) of RAC1 mutated melanoma patients reported to date, including a retrospective single institution cohort (n = 34) from the University Hospital Essen and a prospective multicentre cohort (n = 30) from the translational study Tissue Registry in Melanoma (TRIM; CA209-578), for patient and tumour characteristics as well as therapy outcomes. RESULTS: From 3037 sequenced melanoma samples screened RAC1 mutations occurred in ∼2% of samples (64/3037). The most common RAC1 mutation was P29S (95%, 61/64). The majority of tumours had co-occuring MAP kinase mutations (88%, 56/64); mostly activating NRAS (47%, 30/64) mutations, followed by activating BRAF (28%, 18/64) and NF1 (25%, 16/64) mutations. RAC1 mutated melanomas were almost exclusively of cutaneous origin (84%, 54/64) or of unknown primary (MUP, 14%, 9/64). C > T alterations were the most frequent mutation type identified demonstrating a UV-signature for RAC1 mutated melanoma. Most patients with unresectable disease (39) received immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) (77%, 30/39). Objective response rate of first-line treatment in patients with stage III/IV disease was 21%; median overall survival was 47.8 months. CONCLUSIONS: RAC1 mutated melanomas are rare, mostly of cutaneous origin and frequently harbour concomitant MAP kinase mutations, particularly in NRAS. Patients with advanced disease benefit from systemic treatment with ICI.

Immune checkpoint inhibition in patients with NRAS mutated and NRAS wild type melanoma: a multicenter Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group study on 637 patients from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

BACKGROUND: Melanomas frequently harbour somatic mutations in BRAF (40%) or NRAS (20%). Impact of NRAS mutations on the therapeutic outcome of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) remains controversial. Potential correlation of the NRAS mutational status and programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression in melanoma is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Advanced, non-resectable melanoma patients with known NRAS mutation status treated with first-line ICI between 06/2014 and 05/2020 in the prospective multicenter skin cancer registry ADOREG were included. Overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) according to NRAS status were analysed. A multivariate Cox model was used to analyse factors associated with PFS and OS; survival was analysed using the Kaplan-Meier approach. RESULTS: Among 637 BRAF wild-type patients, 310 (49%) had an NRAS mutation with Q61R (41%) and Q61K (32%). NRAS-mutated (NRASmut) melanomas were significantly more often located on the lower extremities and trunk (p = 0.001); nodular melanoma was the most common subtype (p < 0.0001). No significant differences were found for PFS and OS for anti-PD1 monotherapy (2-year PFS 39%, [95% confidence interval (CI), 33-47] in NRASmut patients and 41% [95% CI, 35-48] in NRAS-wild type (NRASwt) patients; 2-year OS was 54% [95% CI, 48-61] in NRASmut patients and 57% [95% CI, 50-64] in NRASwt patients) and anti-PD1 plus anti-CTLA4 therapy between both cohorts (2-year PFS was 54% [95% CI, 44-66] in NRASmut patients and 53% [95% CI, 41-67] in NRASwt patients; 2-year OS was 58% [95% CI, 49-70] in NRASmut patients and 62% [95% CI, 51-75] in NRASwt patients). The ORR to anti-PD1 was 35% for NRASwt patients and 26% for NRASmut patients and 34% compared to 32% for combinational therapy. Data on PD-L1 expression was available in 82 patients (13%). PD-L1 expression (>5%) was not correlated to NRAS mutational status. In multivariate analysis, elevated lactate dehydrogenase, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 1, and brain metastases were significantly associated with a higher risk of death in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: The PFS and OS were not affected by NRAS mutational status in patients treated with anti-PD1-based ICI. Similar ORR was seen in NRASwt and NRASmut patients. Tumour PD-L1 expression did not correlate with NRAS mutational status.

First-Line, Fixed-Duration Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Followed by Nivolumab in Clinically Diverse Patient Populations With Unresectable Stage III or IV Melanoma: CheckMate 401.

PURPOSE: To address the paucity of data in patients with historically poor outcomes, we conducted the single-arm phase IIIb CheckMate 401 study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab monotherapy in clinically diverse patient populations with advanced melanoma. METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with unresectable stage III-IV melanoma received nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (four doses) followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg (240 mg following a protocol amendment) once every 2 weeks for ≤24 months. The primary end point was the incidence of grade 3-5 select treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Overall survival (OS) was a secondary end point. Outcomes were evaluated in subgroups defined by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), brain metastasis status, and melanoma subtype. RESULTS: In total, 533 patients received at least one dose of study drug. Grade 3-5 select TRAEs affecting the GI (16%), hepatic (15%), endocrine (11%), skin (7%), renal (2%), and pulmonary (1%) systems occurred in the all-treated population; similar incidence rates were observed across all subgroups. At 21.6 months' median follow-up, 24-month OS rates were 63% in the all-treated population, 44% in the ECOG PS 2 subgroup (including patients with cutaneous melanoma only), 71% in the brain metastasis subgroup, 36% in the ocular/uveal melanoma subgroup, and 38% in the mucosal melanoma subgroup. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab monotherapy was tolerable in patients with advanced melanoma and poor prognostic characteristics. Efficacy was similar between the all-treated population and patients with brain metastases. Reduced efficacy was observed in patients with ECOG PS 2, ocular/uveal melanoma, and/or mucosal melanoma, highlighting the continued need for novel treatment options for these difficult-to-treat patients.

Correlation of tumor PD-L1 expression in different tissue types and outcome of PD-1-based immunotherapy in metastatic melanoma - analysis of the DeCOG prospective multicenter cohort study ADOREG/TRIM.

BACKGROUND: PD-1-based immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) is the major backbone of current melanoma therapy. Tumor PD-L1 expression represents one of few biomarkers predicting ICI therapy outcome. The objective of the present study was to systematically investigate whether the type of tumor tissue examined for PD-L1 expression has an impact on the correlation with ICI therapy outcome. METHODS: Pre-treatment tumor tissue was collected within the prospective DeCOG cohort study ADOREG/TRIM (CA209-578; NCT05750511) between February 2014 and May 2020 from 448 consecutive patients who received PD-1-based ICI for non-resectable metastatic melanoma. The primary study endpoint was best overall response (BOR), secondary endpoints were progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). All endpoints were correlated with tumor PD-L1 expression (quantified with clone 28-8; cutoff ≥5%) and stratified by tissue type. FINDINGS: Tumor PD-L1 was determined in 95 primary tumors (PT; 36.8% positivity), 153 skin/subcutaneous (34.0% positivity), 115 lymph node (LN; 50.4% positivity), and 85 organ (40.8% positivity) metastases. Tumor PD-L1 correlated with BOR if determined in LN (OR = 0.319; 95% CI = 0.138-0.762; P = 0.010), but not in skin/subcutaneous metastases (OR = 0.656; 95% CI = 0.311-1.341; P = 0.26). PD-L1 positivity determined on LN metastases was associated with favorable survival (PFS, HR = 0.490; 95% CI = 0.310-0.775; P = 0.002; OS, HR = 0.519; 95% CI = 0.307-0.880; P = 0.014). PD-L1 positivity determined in PT (PFS, HR = 0.757; 95% CI = 0.467-1.226; P = 0.27; OS; HR = 0.528; 95% CI = 0.305-0.913; P = 0.032) was correlated with survival to a lesser extent. No relevant survival differences were detected by PD-L1 determined in skin/subcutaneous metastases (PFS, HR = 0.825; 95% CI = 0.555-1.226; P = 0.35; OS, HR = 1.083; 95% CI = 0.698-1.681; P = 0.72). INTERPRETATION: For PD-1-based immunotherapy in melanoma, tumor PD-L1 determined in LN metastases was stronger correlated with therapy outcome than that assessed in PT or organ metastases. PD-L1 determined in skin/subcutaneous metastases showed no outcome correlation and therefore should be used with caution for clinical decision making. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb (ADOREG/TRIM, NCT05750511); German Research Foundation (DFG; Clinician Scientist Program UMEA); Else Kröner-Fresenius-Stiftung (EKFS; Medical Scientist Academy UMESciA).

Treatment management for BRAF-mutant melanoma patients with tumor recurrence on adjuvant therapy: a multicenter study from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant therapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) or BRAF/MEK-directed targeted therapy (TT) improves recurrence-free survival (RFS) for patients with advanced, BRAFV600-mutant (BRAFmut) resected melanoma. However, 40% of these patients will develop distant metastases (DM) within 5 years, which require systemic therapy. Little data exist to guide the choice of upfront adjuvant therapy or treatment management upon DM. This study evaluated the efficacy of subsequent treatments following tumor recurrence upon upfront adjuvant therapy. METHODS: For this multicenter cohort study, we identified 515 BRAFmut patients with resected stage III melanoma who were treated with PD-1 inhibitors (anti-PD1) or TT in the adjuvant setting. Disease characteristics, treatment regimens, details on tumor recurrence, subsequent treatment management, and survival outcomes were collected within the prospective, real-world skin cancer registry ADOReg. Primary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) following DM and best tumor response to first-line (1L) treatments. RESULTS: Among 515 eligible patients, 273 patients received adjuvant anti-PD1 and 242 adjuvant TT. At a median follow-up of 21 months, 54.6% of anti-PD1 patients and 36.4% of TT patients recurred, while 39.6% (anti-PD1) and 29.3% (TT) developed DM. Risk of recurrence was significantly reduced in patients treated with TT compared with anti-PD1 (adjusted HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.68, p<0.001). Likewise, median RFS was significantly longer in TT-treated patients (31 vs 17 months, p<0.001). Patients who received TT as second adjuvant treatment upon locoregional recurrence had a longer RFS2 as compared with adjuvant CPI (41 vs 6 months, p=0.009). Patients who recurred at distant sites following adjuvant TT showed favorable response rates (42.9%) after switching to 1L ipilimumab+nivolumab (ipi+nivo). Patients with DM during adjuvant anti-PD1 achieved response rates of 58.7% after switching to 1L TT and 35.3% for 1L ipi+nivo. Overall, median PFS was significantly longer in patients who switched treatments for stage IV disease (median PFS 9 vs 5 months, p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: BRAFmut melanoma patients who developed DM upon upfront adjuvant therapy achieve favorable tumor control and prolonged PFS after switching treatment modalities in the first-line setting of stage IV disease. Patients with locoregional recurrence benefit from complete resection of recurrence followed by a second adjuvant treatment with TT.

Brain metastasis and survival outcomes after first-line therapy in metastatic melanoma: a multicenter DeCOG study on 1704 patients from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of effective systemic therapies, a significant number of advanced melanoma patients develops brain metastases. This study investigated differences in incidence and time to diagnosis of brain metastasis and survival outcomes dependent on the type of first-line therapy. METHODS: Patients with metastatic, non-resectable melanoma (AJCCv8 stage IIIC-V) without brain metastasis at start of first-line therapy (1L-therapy) were identified from the prospective multicenter real-world skin cancer registry ADOREG. Study endpoints were incidence of brain metastasis, brain metastasis-free survival (BMFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 1704 patients, 916 were BRAF wild-type (BRAFwt) and 788 were BRAF V600 mutant (BRAFmut). Median follow-up time after start of 1L-therapy was 40.4 months. BRAFwt patients received 1L-therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) against CTLA-4+PD-1 (n=281) or PD-1 (n=544). In BRAFmut patients, 1L-therapy was ICI in 415 patients (CTLA-4+PD-1, n=108; PD-1, n=264), and BRAF+MEK targeted therapy (TT) in 373 patients. After 24 months, 1L-therapy with BRAF+MEK resulted in a higher incidence of brain metastasis compared with PD-1±CTLA-4 (BRAF+MEK, 30.3%; CTLA-4+PD-1, 22.2%; PD-1, 14.0%). In multivariate analysis, BRAFmut patients developed brain metastases earlier on 1L-therapy with BRAF+MEK than with PD-1±CTLA-4 (CTLA-4+PD-1: HR 0.560, 95% CI 0.332 to 0.945, p=0.030; PD-1: HR 0.575, 95% CI 0.372 to 0.888, p=0.013). Type of 1L-therapy, tumor stage, and age were independent prognostic factors for BMFS in BRAFmut patients. In BRAFwt patients, tumor stage was independently associated with longer BMFS; ECOG Performance status (ECOG-PS), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and tumor stage with OS. CTLA-4+PD-1 did not result in better BMFS, PFS, or OS than PD-1 in BRAFwt patients. For BRAFmut patients, multivariate Cox regression revealed ECOG-PS, type of 1L-therapy, tumor stage, and LDH as independent prognostic factors for PFS and OS. 1L-therapy with CTLA-4+PD-1 led to longer OS than PD-1 (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.122 to 3.455, p=0.018) or BRAF+MEK (HR 2.41, 95% CI 1.432 to 4.054, p=0.001), without PD-1 being superior to BRAF+MEK. CONCLUSIONS: In BRAFmut patients 1L-therapy with PD-1±CTLA-4 ICI resulted in a delayed and less frequent development of brain metastasis compared with BRAF+MEK TT. 1L-therapy with CTLA-4+PD-1 showed superior OS compared with PD-1 and BRAF+MEK. In BRAFwt patients, no differences in brain metastasis and survival outcomes were detected for CTLA-4+PD-1 compared with PD-1.

Diagnostics of autoimmune bullous diseases in German dermatology departments.

BACKGROUND: No consistent data are available on the currently employed diagnostic tools for autoimmune bullous diseases in Germany. The aim of this survey was to describe currently performed diagnostic methods for bullous autoimmune diseases in German dermatology departments. METHODS: A standardized questionnaire evaluated the available diagnostic methods i. e. direct immunofluorescence microscopy (IFM), indirect IFM, commercial ELISA systems, and non-commercial serological tests as well as the number of samples per year in all 34 university and 39 non-university dermatology departments. RESULTS: The overall return rate was 89 %, 100 % and 79 % for the university and non-university departments, respectively. Direct IFM was the most frequently used method and was applied in 98 % of the responding departments. In 74 % of the responding departments, indirect IFM was used mainly on monkey esophagus and human salt-split skin. Commercial ELISA systems were employed in 58 % of the clinics; all of them used anti-desmoglein ELISA, while anti-BP180 and anti-BP230 ELISA were established in 49 % and 48 % of departments, respectively. Non-commercial analytic methods were only performed in 22 % of the departments. CONCLUSIONS: The high return rate of this survey allows a relatively precise description of the current diagnostic methods used in German dermatology departments. Standard diagnostic tests are available nationwide and in bullous pemphigoid and pemphigus, the antigen-specific detection of autoantibodies is routinely performed in half of the departments. Rare disorders may be diagnosed by cooperation with some specialized centers.

TERT promoter mutations are associated with longer progression-free and overall survival in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma receiving BRAF and MEK inhibitor therapy.

BACKGROUND: Around 50% of cutaneous melanomas harbour therapeutically targetable BRAF V600 mutations. Reliable clinical biomarkers predicting duration of response to BRAF-targeted therapies are still lacking. Recent in vitro studies demonstrated that BRAF-MEK inhibitor therapy response is associated with tumour TERT promoter mutation status. We assessed this potential association in a clinical setting. METHODS: The study cohort comprised 232 patients with metastatic or unresectable BRAF V600-mutated melanoma receiving combined BRAF/MEK inhibitor treatment, including a single-centre retrospective discovery cohort (N = 120) and a prospectively collected multicenter validation cohort (N = 112). Patients were excluded if they received BRAF or MEK inhibitors in an adjuvant setting, as monotherapy, or in combination with immunotherapy. Kaplan-Meier and univariate/multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed as appropriate. RESULTS: median age at first diagnosis was 54 years (range 16-84 years). The majority of patients were men 147/232 (63.4%). Most tumours harboured TERT promoter mutations (72%, N = 167). A survival advantage was observed in both progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients with TERT promoter-mutant versus wild-type tumours in both the discovery cohort (mPFS of 9.6 months [N = 87] vs 5.0 months [N = 33]; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.56 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.33-0.96] and mOS of 33.6 months vs 15.0 months; HR = 0.47 [95%CI 0.32-0.70]) as well as the validation cohort (mPFS of 7.3 months [N = 80] vs 5.8 months [N = 32]; HR = 0.67 [95%CI 0.41-1.10] and mOS of 51.1 months vs 15.0 months; HR = 0.33 [95%CI 0.18-0.63]). In the pooled cohort of TERT promoter-mutant (N = 167) versus wild-type (N = 65) tumours, respectively, PFS was 8.9 versus 5.5 months, (HR = 0.62; 95%CI 0.45-0.87; P = 0.004), and OS was 33.6 versus 17.0 months, (HR = 0.51; 95%CI 0.35-0.75, P = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with melanoma receiving BRAF/MEK-targeted therapies, TERT promoter mutations are associated with longer survival. If validated in larger studies, TERT promoter mutation status should be included as a predictive biomarker in treatment algorithms for advanced melanoma.

MAPKinase inhibition after failure of immune checkpoint blockade in patients with advanced melanoma - An evaluation of the multicenter prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

OBJECTIVES: Forty to sixty percent of patients with advanced melanoma show primary resistance to PD-1-based immunotherapy, 30-40% of initial responders also progress. Here, we evaluated the outcome of second-line targeted therapy (TT) after progression on PD-1-based immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) in BRAFV600-mutated melanoma. In addition, we report data on the activity of re-exposure with PD-1-based regimes. METHODS: Patients with advanced (non-resectable stage III or IV, AJCC 2017, 8th edition) melanoma progressing on PD-1-based ICI (nivolumab, pembrolizumab or ipilimumab plus nivolumab) and receiving second-line BRAF plus MEK inhibition were identified from the prospective multicenter skin cancer registry ADOREG. RESULTS: We identified 108 patients with unresectable stage III or stage IV melanoma progressing on first-line ICI (nivolumab, pembrolizumab or ipilimumab plus nivolumab) and receiving second-line combined BRAF/MEK inhibition. Seventy-three percent of the cohort presented with primary PD-1 resistant disease. Median progression-free survival (PFS) on ICI was 2.6 (95% CI 2.2-2.9) months. Median PFS on subsequent TT was 6.6 (95% CI 5.4-7.8) months. Median OS from start of second-line TT was 16.0 (95% CI 11.2-20.8) months. The 3-year PFS and OS rates on second-line TT were 16% and 30%. The objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) to TT were 42.6% and 55.6%. In patients with brain metastases, the ORR and DCR were 31.4% and 43.1%. Patients without brain metastases showed an ORR and DCR of 52.6% and 66.7%, respectively. Response to first-line ICI was associated with a numerically higher ORR and DCR to second-line TT and improved OS on TT. Twenty-three patients received third-line ICI of whom two patients showed an objective response. CONCLUSIONS: BRAF plus MEK inhibition shows meaningful activity and outcome in patients with advanced melanoma resistant to anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy. Rates of long-term benefit and survival in our study were similar to those reported for treatment-naïve patients receiving first-line MAPKi.

Impact of radiotherapy and sequencing of systemic therapy on survival outcomes in melanoma patients with previously untreated brain metastasis: a multicenter DeCOG study on 450 patients from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

BACKGROUND: Despite of various therapeutic strategies, treatment of patients with melanoma brain metastasis (MBM) still is a major challenge. This study aimed at investigating the impact of type and sequence of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) and targeted therapy (TT), radiotherapy, and surgery on the survival outcome of patients with MBM. METHOD: We assessed data of 450 patients collected within the prospective multicenter real-world skin cancer registry ADOREG who were diagnosed with MBM before start of the first non-adjuvant systemic therapy. Study endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 450 MBM patients, 175 (38.9%) received CTLA-4+PD-1 ICB, 161 (35.8%) PD-1 ICB, and 114 (25.3%) BRAF+MEK TT as first-line treatment. Additional to systemic therapy, 67.3% of the patients received radiotherapy (stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS); conventional radiotherapy (CRT)) and 24.4% had surgery of MBM. 199 patients (42.2%) received a second-line systemic therapy. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed the application of radiotherapy (HR for SRS: 0.213, 95% CI 0.094 to 0.485, p<0.001; HR for CRT: 0.424, 95% CI 0.210 to 0.855, p=0.016), maximal size of brain metastases (HR for MBM >1 cm: 1.977, 95% CI 1.117 to 3.500, p=0.019), age (HR for age >65 years: 1.802, 95% CI 1.016 to 3.197, p=0.044), and ECOG performance status (HR for ECOG ≥2: HR: 2.615, 95% CI 1.024 to 6.676, p=0.044) as independent prognostic factors of OS on first-line therapy. The type of first-line therapy (ICB vs TT) was not independently prognostic. As second-line therapy BRAF+MEK showed the best survival outcome compared with ICB and other therapies (HR for CTLA-4+PD-1 compared with BRAF+MEK: 13.964, 95% CI 3.6 to 54.4, p<0.001; for PD-1 vs BRAF+MEK: 4.587 95% CI 1.3 to 16.8, p=0.022 for OS). Regarding therapy sequencing, patients treated with ICB as first-line therapy and BRAF+MEK as second-line therapy showed an improved OS (HR for CTLA-4+PD-1 followed by BRAF+MEK: 0.370, 95% CI 0.157 to 0.934, p=0.035; HR for PD-1 followed by BRAF+MEK: 0.290, 95% CI 0.092 to 0.918, p=0.035) compared with patients starting with BRAF+MEK in first-line therapy. There was no significant survival difference when comparing first-line therapy with CTLA-4+PD-1 ICB with PD-1 ICB. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with MBM, the addition of radiotherapy resulted in a favorable OS on systemic therapy. In BRAF-mutated MBM patients, ICB as first-line therapy and BRAF+MEK as second-line therapy were associated with a significantly prolonged OS.

Real-World Therapy with Pembrolizumab: Outcomes and Surrogate Endpoints for Predicting Survival in Advanced Melanoma Patients in Germany.

Knowledge on the real-world characteristics and outcomes of pembrolizumab-treated advanced melanoma patients in Germany and on the value of different real-world endpoints as surrogates for overall survival (OS) is limited. A sample of 664 pembrolizumab-treated patients with advanced melanoma from the German registry ADOReg was used. We examined OS, real-world progression-free survival (rwPFS), real-world time to next treatment (rwTtNT), and real-world time on treatment (rwToT). Spearman's rank and iterative multiple imputation (IMI)-based correlation coefficients were computed between the OS and the rwPFS, rwTtNT, and rwToT and reported for the first line of therapy and the overall sample. The median OS was 30.5 (95%CI 25.0-35.4) months, the rwPFS was 3.9 months (95%CI 3.5-4.9), the rwTtNT was 10.7 months (95%CI 9.0-12.9), and the rwToT was 6.2 months (95%CI 5.1-6.8). The rwTtNT showed the highest correlation with the OS based on the IMI (rIMI = 0.83), Spearman rank correlations (rs = 0.74), followed by the rwToT (rIMI = 0.74 and rs = 0.65) and rwPFS (rIMI = 0.69 and rs = 0.56). The estimates for the outcomes and correlations were similar for the overall sample and those in first-line therapy. The median OS was higher compared to recent real-world studies, supporting the effectiveness of pembrolizumab in regular clinical practice. The rwTtNT may be a valuable OS surrogate, considering the highest correlation was observed with the OS among the investigated real-world endpoints.