Adjuvant immunotherapy with nivolumab versus observation in completely resected Merkel cell carcinoma (ADMEC-O): disease-free survival results from a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is an immunogenic but aggressive skin cancer. Even after complete resection and radiation, relapse rates are high. PD-1 and PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors showed clinical benefit in advanced MCC. We aimed to assess efficacy and safety of adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibition in completely resected MCC (ie, a setting without an established systemic standard-of-care treatment). METHODS: In this multicentre phase 2 trial, patients (any stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1) at 20 academic medical centres in Germany and the Netherlands with completely resected MCC lesions were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks for 1 year, or observation, stratified by stage (American Joint Committee on Cancer stages 1-2 vs stages 3-4), age (<65 vs ≥65 years), and sex. Landmark disease-free survival (DFS) at 12 and 24 months was the primary endpoint, assessed in the intention-to-treat populations. Overall survival and safety were secondary endpoints. This planned interim analysis was triggered when the last-patient-in was followed up for more than 1 year. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02196961) and with the EU Clinical Trials Register (2013-000043-78). FINDINGS: Between Oct 1, 2014, and Aug 31, 2020, 179 patients were enrolled (116 [65%] stage 3-4, 122 [68%] ≥65 years, 111 [62%] male). Stratification factors (stage, age, sex) were balanced across the nivolumab (n=118) and internal control group (observation, n=61); adjuvant radiotherapy was more common in the control group. At a median follow-up of 24·3 months (IQR 19·2-33·4), median DFS was not reached (between-groups hazard ratio 0·58, 95% CI 0·30-1·12); DFS rates in the nivolumab group were 85% at 12 months and 84% at 24 months, and in the observation group were 77% at 12 months and 73% at 24 months. Overall survival results were not yet mature. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 48 [42%] of 115 patients who received at least one dose of nivolumab and seven [11%] of 61 patients in the observation group. No treatment-related deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant therapy with nivolumab resulted in an absolute risk reduction of 9% (1-year DFS) and 10% (2-year DFS). The present interim analysis of ADMEC-O might suggest clinical use of nivolumab in this area of unmet medical need. However, overall survival events rates, with ten events in the active treatment group and six events in the half-the-size observation group, are not mature enough to draw conclusions. The explorative data of our trial support the continuation of ongoing, randomised trials in this area. ADMEC-O suggests that adjuvant immunotherapy is clinically feasible in this area of unmet medical need. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb.

Adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone versus placebo in patients with resected stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease (IMMUNED): final results of a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The IMMUNED trial previously showed significant improvements in recurrence-free survival for adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab as well as for adjuvant nivolumab alone in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after resection or radiotherapy. Here, we report the final analysis, including overall survival data. METHODS: IMMUNED was an investigator-sponsored, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-arm, phase 2 trial conducted in 20 academic medical centres in Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18-80 years with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after surgery or radiotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to either nivolumab plus ipilimumab (nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks), nivolumab monotherapy (nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks), or matching placebo, for up to 1 year. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints were time-to-recurrence, overall survival, progression-free survival or recurrence-free survival 2 (in patients in the placebo group who crossed over to nivolumab monotherapy after experiencing disease recurrence), and safety endpoints. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02523313), and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 2, 2015, and Nov 20, 2018, 175 patients were enrolled in the study, and 167 were randomly assigned to receive either nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=56), nivolumab plus ipilimumab-matching placebo (n=59), or double placebo control (n=52). At a median follow-up of 49·2 months (IQR 34·9-58·1), 4-year recurrence-free survival was 64·2% (95% CI 49·2-75·9) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 31·4% (19·7-43·8) in the nivolumab alone group, and 15·0% (6·7-26·6) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence for the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo was 0·25 (97·5% CI 0·13-0·48; p<0·0001), and for the nivolumab group versus placebo was 0·60 (0·36-1·00; p=0·024). Median overall survival was not reached in any treatment group. The HR for overall survival was significantly in favour of the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo (HR 0·41; 95% CI 0·17-0·99; p=0·040), but not for the nivolumab group versus placebo (HR 0·75; 0·36-1·56; p=0·44). 4-year overall survival was 83·8% (95% CI 68·8-91·9) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 72·6% (57·4-83·2) in the nivolumab alone group, and 63·1% (46·9-75·6) in the placebo group. The median progression-free survival or recurrence-free survival 2 of patients in the placebo group who crossed over to nivolumab monotherapy after experiencing disease recurrence was not reached (95% CI 21·2 months to not reached). Rates of grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events remained largely unchanged compared with our previous report, occurring in 71% (95% CI 57-82) of the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, and 29% (95% CI 17-42) of patients receiving nivolumab alone. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Both active regimens continued to show significantly improved recurrence-free survival compared with placebo in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease who were at high risk of recurrence. Overall survival was significantly improved for patients receiving nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared with placebo. Use of subsequent anti-PD-1-based therapy was high in patients in the placebo group after recurrence and most likely impacted the overall survival comparison of nivolumab alone versus placebo. The recurrence-free and overall survival benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab over placebo reinforces the change of practice already initiated for the treatment of patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

The role of diabetes in metastatic melanoma patients treated with nivolumab plus relatlimab.

BACKGROUND: The combination of nivolumab + relatlimab is superior to nivolumab alone in the treatment of naive patients and has activity in PD-1 refractory melanoma. We had previously observed a reduced expression of LAG3 in melanoma tissue from patients with type 2 diabetes. METHOD: To evaluate the impact of diabetes on oncological outcomes of patients with advanced melanoma treated with nivolumab plus the LAG3 inhibitor relatlimab we performed a retrospective multicenter study. RESULTS: Overall, 129 patients were included: 88 without diabetes before the treatment, 37 who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes before the start of treatment, and 4 without diabetes before treatment who developed immune checkpoint inhibitor-induced diabetes (ICI-DM). PFS was 21.71 months (95% CI: 15.61-27.81) in patients without diabetes, 10.23 months (95% CI: 5.81-14.66) in patients with type 2 diabetes, and 50.85 months (95% CI: 23.04-78.65) in patients who developed ICI-DM. OS was 37.94 months (95% CI: 31.02-44.85) in patients without diabetes, 22.12 months (95% CI: 14.41-29.85) in those with type 2 diabetes and 57.64 months (95% CI: 42.29-72.99) in those who developed ICI-DM. Multivariate analysis showed that the presence of diabetes and LDH was correlated with OS and PFS. The mean OS was 64.63 months in subjects with low levels of glucose (< 137 mg/dl) and 36.27 months in those with high levels (hazard ratio 0.16, 95% CI: 0.04-0.58; p = 0.005). The patients whose glucose blood level increased after 3 months of treatment with nivolumab + relatinib compared to baseline (ratio of blood level at baseline/after 3 months > 1.5) had a worse prognosis than those whose glucose level had not increased. This result was observed also in subgroups treated either in first line or further lines. Patients who developed ICI-DM during the study period had better outcomes than the overall population and patients without diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: LAG3 inhibition for treating metastatic or unresectable melanoma has a reduced efficacy in patients with type 2 diabetes, possibly due to a low expression of LAG3 in tumor tissue. Higher level evidence should be obtained.

The Latest Option: Nivolumab and Relatlimab in Advanced Melanoma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Dual immune checkpoint inhibition with ipilimumab plus nivolumab is currently the most effective, but also by far the most toxic treatment for advanced melanoma. Therefore, other combination partners that also lead to high and long-lasting responses but cause fewer adverse events were explored. RECENT FINDINGS: Relatlimab, a LAG-3 blocking antibody, was investigated in combination with nivolumab in a phase 2/3 randomized double-blind trial (RELATIVITY-047) and could demonstrate significantly improved progression-free survival in treatment-naive advanced melanoma patients compared with nivolumab monotherapy. While the safety profile is more favorable than that of ipilimumab plus nivolumab, no significant survival benefit has yet been demonstrated with the new combination over nivolumab monotherapy. The approval of relatlimab plus nivolumab by both the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency expands the arsenal of treatment options for melanoma but raises new questions in clinical practice and a re-evaluation of currently established treatment standards and sequences.

Targeting early stages of cardiotoxicity from anti-PD1 immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

AIMS: Cardiac immune-related adverse events (irAEs) from immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) targeting programmed death 1 (PD1) are of growing concern. Once cardiac irAEs become clinically manifest, fatality rates are high. Cardio-oncology aims to prevent detrimental effects before manifestation of severe complications by targeting early pathological changes. We therefore aimed to investigate early consequences of PD1 inhibition for cardiac integrity to prevent the development of overt cardiac disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: We investigated cardiac-specific consequences from anti-PD1 therapy in a combined biochemical and in vivo phenotyping approach. Mouse hearts showed broad expression of the ligand PDL1 on cardiac endothelial cells as a main mediator of immune-crosstalk. Using a novel melanoma mouse model, we assessed that anti-PD1 therapy promoted myocardial infiltration with CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, the latter being markedly activated. Left ventricular (LV) function was impaired during pharmacological stress, as shown by pressure-volume catheterization. This was associated with a dysregulated myocardial metabolism, including the proteome and the lipidome. Analogous to the experimental approach, in patients with metastatic melanoma (n = 7) receiving anti-PD1 therapy, LV function in response to stress was impaired under therapy. Finally, we identified that blockade of tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFα) preserved LV function without attenuating the anti-cancer efficacy of anti-PD1 therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-PD1 therapy induces a disruption of cardiac immune homeostasis leading to early impairment of myocardial functional integrity, with potential prognostic effects on the growing number of treated patients. Blockade of TNFα may serve as an approach to prevent the manifestation of ICI-related cardiotoxicity.

Genetic and methylation profiles distinguish benign, malignant and spitzoid melanocytic tumors.

Accurate classification of melanocytic tumors is important for prognostic evaluation, treatment and follow-up protocols of patients. The majority of melanocytic proliferations can be classified solely based on clinical and pathological criteria, however in select cases a definitive diagnostic assessment remains challenging and additional diagnostic biomarkers would be advantageous. We analyzed melanomas, nevi, Spitz nevi and atypical spitzoid tumors using parallel sequencing (exons of 611 genes and 507 gene translocation analysis) and methylation arrays (850k Illumina EPIC). By combining detailed genetic and epigenetic analysis with reference-based and reference-free DNA methylome deconvolution we compared Spitz nevi to nevi and melanoma and assessed the potential for these methods in classifying challenging spitzoid tumors. Results were correlated with clinical and histologic features. Spitz nevi were found to cluster independently of nevi and melanoma and demonstrated a different mutation profile. Multiple copy number alterations and TERT promoter mutations were identified only in melanomas. Genome-wide methylation in Spitz nevi was comparable to benign nevi while the Leukocytes UnMethylation for Purity (LUMP) algorithm in Spitz nevi was comparable to melanoma. Histologically difficult to classify Spitz tumor cases were assessed which, based on methylation arrays, clustered between Spitz nevi and melanoma and in terms of genetic profile or copy number variations demonstrated worrisome features suggesting a malignant neoplasm. Comprehensive sequencing and methylation analysis verify Spitz nevi as an independent melanocytic entity distinct from both nevi and melanoma. Combined genetic and methylation assays can offer additional insights in diagnosing difficult to classify Spitzoid tumors.

Combination immunotherapy with anti-PD-L1 antibody and depletion of regulatory T cells during acute viral infections results in improved virus control but lethal immunopathology.

Combination immunotherapy (CIT) is currently applied as a treatment for different cancers and is proposed as a cure strategy for chronic viral infections. Whether such therapies are efficient during an acute infection remains elusive. To address this, inhibitory receptors were blocked and regulatory T cells depleted in acutely Friend retrovirus-infected mice. CIT resulted in a dramatic expansion of cytotoxic CD4+ and CD8+ T cells and a subsequent reduction in viral loads. Despite limited viral replication, mice developed fatal immunopathology after CIT. The pathology was most severe in the gastrointestinal tract and was mediated by granzyme B producing CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. A similar post-CIT pathology during acute Influenza virus infection of mice was observed, which could be prevented by vaccination. Melanoma patients who developed immune-related adverse events under immune checkpoint CIT also presented with expanded granzyme-expressing CD4+ and CD8+ T cell populations. Our data suggest that acute infections may induce immunopathology in patients treated with CIT, and that effective measures for infection prevention should be applied.

The Prognostic Relevance of PMCA4 Expression in Melanoma: Gender Specificity and Implications for Immune Checkpoint Inhibition.

PMCA4 is a critical regulator of Ca2+ homeostasis in mammalian cells. While its biological and prognostic relevance in several cancer types has already been demonstrated, only preclinical investigations suggested a metastasis suppressor function in melanoma. Therefore, we studied the expression pattern of PMCA4 in human skin, nevus, as well as in primary and metastatic melanoma using immunohistochemistry. Furthermore, we analyzed the prognostic power of PMCA4 mRNA levels in cutaneous melanoma both at the non-metastatic stage as well as after PD-1 blockade in advanced disease. PMCA4 localizes to the plasma membrane in a differentiation dependent manner in human skin and mucosa, while nevus cells showed no plasma membrane staining. In contrast, primary cutaneous, choroidal and conjunctival melanoma cells showed specific plasma membrane localization of PMCA4 with a wide range of intensities. Analyzing the TCGA cohort, PMCA4 mRNA levels showed a gender specific prognostic impact in stage I-III melanoma. Female patients with high transcript levels had a significantly longer progression-free survival. Melanoma cell specific PMCA4 protein expression is associated with anaplasticity in melanoma lung metastasis but had no impact on survival after lung metastasectomy. Importantly, high PMCA4 transcript levels derived from RNA-seq of cutaneous melanoma are associated with significantly longer overall survival after PD-1 blockade. In summary, we demonstrated that human melanoma cells express PMCA4 and PMCA4 transcript levels carry prognostic information in a gender specific manner.

Ipilimumab alone or ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 therapy in patients with metastatic melanoma resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Anti-PD-1 therapy (hereafter referred to as anti-PD-1) induces long-term disease control in approximately 30% of patients with metastatic melanoma; however, two-thirds of patients are resistant and will require further treatment. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (pembrolizumab or nivolumab) compared with ipilimumab monotherapy in patients who are resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 therapy (hereafter referred to as anti-PD-[L]1). METHODS: This multicentre, retrospective, cohort study, was done at 15 melanoma centres in Australia, Europe, and the USA. We included adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic melanoma (unresectable stage III and IV), who were resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 (innate or acquired resistance) and who then received either ipilimumab monotherapy or ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (pembrolizumab or nivolumab), based on availability of therapies or clinical factors determined by the physician, or both. Tumour response was assessed as per standard of care (CT or PET-CT scans every 3 months). The study endpoints were objective response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety of ipilimumab compared with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1. FINDINGS: We included 355 patients with metastatic melanoma, resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab), who had been treated with ipilimumab monotherapy (n=162 [46%]) or ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (n=193 [54%]) between Feb 1, 2011, and Feb 6, 2020. At a median follow-up of 22·1 months (IQR 9·5-30·9), the objective response rate was higher with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (60 [31%] of 193 patients) than with ipilimumab monotherapy (21 [13%] of 162 patients; p<0·0001). Overall survival was longer in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group (median overall survival 20·4 months [95% CI 12·7-34·8]) than with ipilimumab monotherapy (8·8 months [6·1-11·3]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·50, 95% CI 0·38-0·66; p<0·0001). Progression-free survival was also longer with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (median 3·0 months [95% CI 2·6-3·6]) than with ipilimumab (2·6 months [2·4-2·9]; HR 0·69, 95% CI 0·55-0·87; p=0·0019). Similar proportions of patients reported grade 3-5 adverse events in both groups (59 [31%] of 193 patients in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group vs 54 [33%] of 162 patients in the ipilimumab group). The most common grade 3-5 adverse events were diarrhoea or colitis (23 [12%] of 193 patients in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group vs 33 [20%] of 162 patients in the ipilimumab group) and increased alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase (24 [12%] vs 15 [9%]). One death occurred with ipilimumab 26 days after the last treatment: a colon perforation due to immune-related pancolitis. INTERPRETATION: In patients who are resistant to anti-PD-(L)1, ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 seemed to yield higher efficacy than ipilimumab with a higher objective response rate, longer progression-free, and longer overall survival, with a similar rate of grade 3-5 toxicity. Ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 should be favoured over ipilimumab alone as a second-line immunotherapy for these patients with advanced melanoma. FUNDING: None.

Melanoma recurrence patterns and management after adjuvant targeted therapy: a multicentre analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant targeted therapy (TT) improves relapse free survival in patients with resected BRAF mutant stage III melanoma. The outcomes and optimal management of patients who relapse after adjuvant TT is unknown. METHODS: Patients from twenty-one centres with recurrent melanoma after adjuvant TT were included. Disease characteristics, adjuvant therapy, recurrence, treatment at relapse and outcomes were examined. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients developed recurrent melanoma; nineteen (22%) during adjuvant TT. Median time to first recurrence was 18 months and median follow-up from first recurrence was 31 months. Fifty-eight (68%) patients received immunotherapy (IT) or TT as 1st line systemic therapy at either first or subsequent recurrence and had disease that was assessable for response. Response to anti-PD-1 (±trial agent), combination ipilimumab-nivolumab, TT rechallenge and ipilimumab monotherapy was 63%, 62% 25% and 10% respectively. Twenty-eight (33%) patients had died at census, all from melanoma. Two-year OS was 84% for anti-PD-1 therapy (±trial agent), 92% for combination ipilimumab and nivolumab, 49% for TT and 45% for ipilimumab monotherapy (p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who relapse after adjuvant TT respond well to subsequent anti-PD-1 based therapy and have outcomes similar to those seen when first line anti-PD-1 therapy is used in stage IV melanoma.

Adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab monotherapy versus placebo in patients with resected stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease (IMMUNED): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab and ipilimumab, alone or in combination, are widely used immunotherapeutic treatment options for patients with advanced-ie, unresectable or metastatic-melanoma. This criterion, however, excludes patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. We therefore aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab monotherapy versus a placebo in this patient population. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial in 20 German academic medical centres. Eligible patients were aged 18-80 years with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after surgery or radiotherapy. Key exclusion criteria included uveal or mucosal melanoma, previous therapy with checkpoint inhibitors, and any previous immunosuppressive therapy within the 30 days before study drug administration. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a central, interactive, online system, to the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group (1 mg/kg of intravenous nivolumab every 3 weeks plus 3 mg/kg of intravenous ipilimumab every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by 3 mg/kg of nivolumab every 2 weeks), nivolumab monotherapy group (3 mg/kg of intravenous nivolumab every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab-matching placebo during weeks 1-12), or double-matching placebo group. The primary endpoint was the recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. The results presented in this report reflect the prespecified interim analysis of recurrence-free survival after 90 events had been reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02523313, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Sept 2, 2015, and Nov 20, 2018, 167 patients were randomly assigned to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=56), nivolumab (n=59), or placebo (n=52). As of July 2, 2019, at a median follow-up of 28·4 months (IQR 17·7-36·8), median recurrence-free survival was not reached in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, whereas median recurrence-free survival was 12·4 months (95% CI 5·3-33·3) in the nivolumab group and 6·4 months (3·3-9·6) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio for recurrence for the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo group was 0·23 (97·5% CI 0·12-0·45; p<0·0001), and for the nivolumab group versus placebo group was 0·56 (0·33-0·94; p=0·011). In the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, recurrence-free survival at 1 year was 75% (95% CI 61·0-84·9) and at 2 years was 70% (55·1-81·0); in the nivolumab group, 1-year recurrence-free survival was 52% (38·1-63·9) and at 2 years was 42% (28·6-54·5); and in the placebo group, this rate was 32% (19·8-45·3) at 1 year and 14% (5·9-25·7) at 2 years. Treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 71% (95% CI 57-82) of patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and in 27% (16-40) of those in the nivolumab group. Treatment-related adverse events of any grade led to treatment discontinuation in 34 (62%) of 55 patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and seven (13%) of 56 in the nivolumab group. Three deaths from adverse events were reported but were considered unrelated to the study treatment. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant therapy with nivolumab alone or in combination with ipilimumab increased recurrence-free survival significantly compared with placebo in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. The rates of grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events in both active treatment groups were higher than the rates reported in previous pivotal trials done in advanced melanoma with measurable disease. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

[Malignant melanoma]. / Malignes Melanom.

Malignant melanoma is an aggressive skin cancer that originates from cells of the melanocytic lineage and is associated with an invasive growth pattern and early spread. Besides endogenous risk factors such as fair skin type or genetic disposition for the formation of multiple nevi, exposure to ultraviolet light is the most important exogenous risk factor. Treatment of patients with primary tumors includes the complete excision of the primary lesion with appropriate safety margins and in patients with an increased risk of metastasis sentinel lymph node excision. Prognostically significant parameters are the Breslow invasion depth, ulceration of the primary lesion, and sentinel lymph node status. Systemic therapy plays an important role in the adjuvant setting and for inoperable tumors. Depending on the indication and the molecular profile of the tumor tissue, immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted kinase inhibitors can be used and may result in a significant prolongation of survival times.

[Malignant melanoma]. / Malignes Melanom.

Malignant melanoma is an aggressive skin cancer that originates from cells of the melanocytic lineage and is associated with an invasive growth pattern and early spread. Besides endogenous risk factors such as fair skin type or genetic disposition for the formation of multiple nevi, exposure to ultraviolet light is the most important exogenous risk factor. Treatment of patients with primary tumors includes the complete excision of the primary lesion with appropriate safety margins and in patients with an increased risk of metastasis sentinel lymph node excision. Prognostically significant parameters are the Breslow invasion depth, ulceration of the primary lesion, and sentinel lymph node status. Systemic therapy plays an important role in the adjuvant setting and for inoperable tumors. Depending on the indication and the molecular profile of the tumor tissue, immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted kinase inhibitors can be used and may result in a significant prolongation of survival times.

Side effect management during immune checkpoint blockade using CTLA-4 and PD-1 antibodies for metastatic melanoma - an update.

CTLA-4 and PD-1 play a key role in tumor-induced downregulation of lymphocytic immune responses. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have been shown to alter the immune response to various cancer types. Anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 antibodies affect the interaction between tumor, antigen-presenting cells and T lymphocytes. Clinical studies of the anti-CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab and the anti-PD-1 antibodies nivolumab and pembrolizumab have provided evidence of their positive effects on overall survival in melanoma patients. Combined treatment using ipilimumab and nivolumab has been shown to achieve five-year survival rates of 52 %. Such enhancement of the immune response is inevitably associated with adverse events. Knowledge of the spectrum of side effects is essential, both in terms of prevention and management. Adverse events include colitis, dermatitis, hypophysitis, thyroiditis, hepatitis and other, less common autoimmune phenomena. In recent years, considerable progress has been made in the detection and treatment of the aforementioned immune-related adverse events. However, early diagnosis of rare neurological or cardiac side effects, which may be associated with increased mortality, frequently pose a challenge. The present update highlights our current understanding as well as new insights into the spectrum of side effects associated with checkpoint inhibitors and their management.

MHC class-I downregulation in PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor refractory Merkel cell carcinoma and its potential reversal by histone deacetylase inhibition: a case series.

BACKGROUND: Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is an aggressive skin cancer in which PD-1/PD-L1 blockade has shown remarkable response rates. However, a significant proportion of patients shows primary or secondary resistance against PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition, with HLA class-I downregulation and insufficient influx of CD8+ T cells into the tumor as possible immune escape mechanisms. Histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) have been demonstrated to reverse low HLA class-I expression caused by epigenetic downregulation of the antigen machinery (APM) in vitro and in pre-clinical models in vivo. CASE PRESENTATIONS: We report four cases of patients with metastatic MCC who did not respond to immunotherapy by PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. Two of the patients received, subsequently, the HDACi panobinostat in combination with PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. Tumor biopsies of the patients were analyzed for cellular and molecular markers of antigen processing and presentation as well as the degree of T-cell infiltration. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Low expression of APM-related genes associated with low HLA class-I surface expression was observed in all MCC patients, progressing on PD-1/PD-L1 blockade. In one evaluable patient, of the two treated with the combination therapy of the HDACi, panobinostat and PD-1/PD-L1 blockade, reintroduction of HLA class-I-related genes, enhanced HLA class-I surface expression, and elevated CD8+ T-cell infiltration into the MCC tumor tissue were observed; however, these changes did not translate into a clinical benefit. Our findings suggest that HDACi may be useful to overcome HLA class-I downregulation as a resistance mechanism against anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies in MCC patients. Prospective clinical trials are needed to evaluate this notion.

Simultaneous primary cancer occurrence of melanoma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma in leptomeningeal metastases: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Leptomeningeal metastasis (LM) is a predominantly late stage, devastating complication of a variety of malignant solid tumors. Diagnosis relies predominantly on neurological, radiographic, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) assessments. Recently, liquid biopsy tests derived from CSF has shown to be a feasible, noninvasive promising approach to tumor molecular profiling for proper brain cancer diagnostic treatment, thereby providing an opportunity for CSF-based personalized medicine. However, LM is typically misleadingly assumed to originate from only one primary tumor type. CASE PRESENTATION: In this case report, we provide first evidence of the co-occurrence of LM originating from more than one primary tumor types. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Based on this patient case profile, the co-occurrence of LM from two or more primary tumor types should be accounted for when deriving diagnostic conclusions from liquid biopsy tests.

Sebaceous tumours: more than skin deep.

CLINICAL PRESENTATION: A 77-year-old man presented to our skin cancer centre with various cutaneous tumours occurring in 2006-2017. Histopathology showed a 'hidradenocarcinoma' on the left upper back (2006) and a sebaceous adenoma (figure 1) on the left shoulder (2011). In 2017, he developed a sebaceous carcinoma on the middle upper back, which manifested as a slowly enlarging, asymptomatic nodule. Medical history was significant for curative resection of colorectal cancer in 1988.gutjnl;67/11/1957/F1F1F1Figure 1Clinical appearance of the sebaceous adenoma on the patient's left shoulder in 2011.The most recent lesion was subjected to extensive immunohistochemical assessment. The neoplastic cells were positive for cytokeratin 5/6, cytokeratin 7, cluster of differentiation antigen 10, adipophilin, androgen receptor, epithelial membrane antigen, KI67 antigen, MLH1 and PMS2, but stained negative for gross cystic disease fluid protein 15, prostate-specific antigen, carbohydrate antigen 19/9, CDX2 protein, hepatocyte-specific antigen, carcinoembryonic antigen, cluster of differentiation antigen 117 and cytokeratin 19. Given the variety of histological manifestations of the patient's skin neoplasms, further studies were performed. They revealed positive nuclear expression signals for MLH1, MSH6 and PMS2, whereas MSH2 expression was absent in almost all tumour cells (figure 2). Positron emission tomography (PET)/CT and colonoscopy did not detect any pathological findings. However, molecular genetic analysis of peripheral blood showed a heterozygous deletion of exon 7 of the MSH2 gene. Subsequently, several family members tested positive for MSH2 mutations and underwent genetic counselling.gutjnl;67/11/1957/F2F2F2Figure 2(A-D) Histopathological images of the patient's most recent lesion (diaminobenzidine, original magnification, ×100). The tumour cells demonstrated strong nuclear positivity for MLH1 (A) and PMS2 (B), but were essentially negative for MSH6 (C) and MSH2 (D). QUESTION: What is your diagnosis? DIAGNOSIS: Muir-Torre syndrome (MTS).

Clinical outcome of concomitant vs interrupted BRAF inhibitor therapy during radiotherapy in melanoma patients.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2017.85.

Ipilimumab in metastatic melanoma patients with pre-existing autoimmune disorders.

BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab and programmed death (PD) 1-antibodies are effective treatment options in metastatic melanoma. The safety and efficacy of ipilimumab in patients with pre-existing autoimmune disorders (AD) has only been evaluated in a selected number of patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis in 14 German skin cancer centers for patients with metastatic melanoma and pre-existing AD treated with ipilimumab. RESULTS: 41 patients with 44 pre-existing AD were treated with ipilimumab (thyroiditis n = 15, rheumatoid n = 11, dermatologic n = 10, Crohn's disease/ulcerative colitis n = 3, neurological n = 2, sarcoidosis n = 2, pancreatitis n = 1). 3 out of 41 patients had two AD, 11 patients required immunosuppressants at the time of induction of ipilimumab. 12 patients (29.2%) experienced a flare of their pre-existing AD, mainly patients with rheumatoid or dermatologic diseases. Additional immune-related adverse events (irAEs) occurred in 12 patients (29.2%). In 23 patients (56%) neither a change of their AD nor additional irAEs were observed. Objective responses were seen in five patients (one complete remission, four partial remissions, 12.1%). CONCLUSION: This is the largest series of patients with pre-existing AD and treatment with ipilimumab reported. Flares of pre-existing AD were observed but manageable. Response rates and occurrence of new irAEs were comparable to previous trials. Thus, in this patient subgroup, ipilimumab can be a treatment option after a thorough discussion of pros and cons and taking severity and activity of the preexisting AD into account.