Genetic Alterations of Melanoma Brain Metastases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Data on molecular alterations harbored by melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) are limited, and this has hampered the development of more effective therapeutic strategies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all the studies reporting DNA sequencing data of MBMs, in order to identify recurrently mutated genes and molecular pathways significantly enriched for genetic alterations. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase and Scopus for articles published from the inception of each database to June 30, 2021. We included in the analysis all the studies that reported individual patient data on DNA sequencing of MBMs, assessing single nucleotide variants (SNVs) and/or gene copy number variations (CNVs) in at least five tumor samples. Meta-analysis was performed for genes evaluated for SNVs and/or CNVs in at least two studies. Pooled proportions of samples with SNVs and/or CNVs was calculated by applying random-effect models based on the DerSimonian-Laird method. Gene-set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was performed to identify molecular pathways significantly enriched for mutated genes. RESULTS: Ten studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis, for a total of 531 samples of MBMs evaluated. Twenty-seven genes were found recurrently mutated with a meta-analytic rate of SNVs higher than 5%. GSEA conducted on the list of these 27 recurrently mutated genes revealed vascular endothelial growth factor-activated receptor activity and transmembrane receptor protein tyrosine kinase activity to be among the top 10 gene ontology (GO) molecular functions significantly enriched for mutated genes, while regulation of apoptosis and cell proliferation were among the top 10 significantly enriched GO biological processes. Notably, a high meta-analytic rate of SNVs was found in several actionable cancer-associated genes, such as all the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor isoforms (i.e., Flt1 and Flt2 genes, for both SNV rate: 0.22, 95% CI 0.04-0.49; KDR gene, SNV rate: 0.1, 95% CI 0.05-0.16). Finally, two tumor suppressor genes were characterized by a high meta-analytic rate of CNVs: CDKN2A/B (CNV rate: 0.59, 95% CI 0.23-0.90) and PTEN (CNV rate: 0.31, 95% CI 0.02-0.95). CONCLUSION: MBMs harbored actionable molecular alterations that could be exploited as therapeutic targets to improve the poor prognosis of patients.

Association of Anticancer Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors With Patient-Reported Outcomes Assessed in Randomized Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: The association of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with patient quality of life has been poorly explored. Objective: To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessed in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of immunotherapy-based treatments. Data Sources: This systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis used RCTs identified in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus from database inception to June 1, 2021. Study Selection: A total of 2259 RCTs were identified that assessed ICIs as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy or combined with another ICI and/or targeted therapy vs control groups not containing immunotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumors. Studies were reviewed independently by 2 authors. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This meta-analysis followed the PRISMA guidelines and recommendations of the Setting International Standards in Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Quality of Life Endpoints Data Consortium. Main Outcomes and Measures: The coprimary aims of the meta-analysis were (1) pooled differences between treatment groups in the mean change of PRO score from baseline to 12 and 24 weeks of follow-up and (2) pooled differences between treatment groups in the time to deterioration of PRO score. For each end point, RCTs have been analyzed according to the type of treatment administered in the experimental group: ICIs given as monotherapy, ICIs combined with chemotherapy, or ICIs in association with another ICI and/or with targeted therapies. Results: Of the 2259 identified RCTs, 34 (18 709 patients) met the selection criteria and were analyzed. In the group of 19 RCTs testing ICIs as monotherapy, the pooled between-groups difference of mean change from baseline to 12 weeks of follow-up was 4.6 (95% CI, 2.8-6.4), and the mean change from baseline to 24 weeks of follow-up was 6.1 (95% CI, 4.2-8.1), significantly favoring ICIs. The pooled difference was 1.4 (95% CI, -0.4 to 3.2) at week 12 and 2.5 (95% CI, -0.8 to 5.9) at week 24 in the group of 8 RCTs testing ICIs combined with chemotherapy and 2.1 (95% CI, -0.8 to 5.0) at week 12 and 2.1 (95% CI, -0.4 to 4.5) at week 24 in the group of 8 RCTs testing other ICI-containing combinations. The time to deterioration was significantly longer in the immunotherapy-containing groups compared with control groups in all 3 groups of RCTs evaluated (hazard ratios of 0.80 [95% CI, 0.70-0.91] for ICIs as monotherapy, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.78-1.00] for ICIs plus chemotherapy, and 0.78 [95% CI, 0.63-0.96] for other ICI-containing combinations). Conclusions and Relevance: Immune checkpoint inhibitors as monotherapy appear to have a favorable association with patient-reported quality of life and can be combined with other classes of anticancer drugs without worsening this quality of life.

Course of Sars-CoV2 Infection in Patients with Cancer Treated with anti-PD-1: A Case Presentation and Review of the Literature.

The outbreak of COVID-19 pandemia is a major health worldwide concern. Patients with cancer might have a worse outcome, because of the immunosuppression determined by the tumor itself and anti-cancer treatments, including chemotherapy and radiotherapy. The impact and course of viral infection in patients receiving immunotherapy remains unknown. We report the case of a patient with metastatic melanoma, long responder to anti PD-1 blockade who got infected with Sars CoV-2, recovering without sequelae. A critical review of literature was performed. Limited data available in literature support the possibility to continue the immunotherapy in patients with cancer under control.