Biomarkers of treatment benefit with atezolizumab plus vemurafenib plus cobimetinib in BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma.

BACKGROUND: The phase III IMspire150 study (NCT02908672) demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) with atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) versus placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group) in patients with BRAFV600-mutated advanced melanoma. We report exploratory biomarker analyses to optimize targeting of patients who are more likely to benefit from triplet combination therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hundred fourteen patients were randomized to atezolizumab (n = 256) or control (n = 258). Outcomes were evaluated in subgroups defined by key biomarkers, including programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and interferon-γ (IFN-γ) gene signature. Exploratory recursive partitioning analysis was then used to model associations between PFS and baseline covariates, including key biomarkers. RESULTS: PFS benefit for atezolizumab versus control was greater in patients with high TMB [≥10 mutations/Mb; hazard ratio (HR) 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-1.02; P = 0.067] versus low TMB (<10 mutations/Mb; HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.65-1.30; P = 0.64) and similar between patients with strong IFN-γ (≥median; HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.54-1.06) versus weak IFN-γ (

Pembrolizumab for locally advanced and recurrent/metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (KEYNOTE-629 study): an open-label, nonrandomized, multicenter, phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: Pembrolizumab demonstrated clinically meaningful and durable antitumor activity with a manageable safety profile in recurrent/metastatic (R/M) cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: KEYNOTE-629 was a global, open-label, nonrandomized, phase II trial of patients with locally advanced (LA) or R/M cSCC conducted at 59 centers. Eligible patients received intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles. Primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), defined as the percentage of patients with a complete (CR) or partial response (PR), by blinded independent central review as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), disease control rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety and tolerability. Efficacy and safety were analyzed in patients who were treated with at least one dose of pembrolizumab. RESULTS: Between 29 November 2017 and 25 September 2019, 159 patients were enrolled and treated with pembrolizumab (LA cohort, n = 54; R/M cohort, n = 105). The median time from the first dose to data cut-off date (29 July 2020) was 14.9 [interquartile range (IQR), 12.6-17.2] months for the LA cohort and 27.2 (IQR, 25.6-29.2) months for the R/M cohort. In the LA cohort, ORR was 50.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), 36.1% to 63.9%], including 16.7% of patients with a CR and 33.3% with a PR. In the R/M cohort, ORR was 35.2% (95% CI, 26.2% to 45.2%), including 10.5% of patients with a CR and 24.8% with a PR. Median DOR was not reached in either cohort. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 11.9% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The robust antitumor activity of pembrolizumab in both LA and R/M cSCC was confirmed and demonstrated to be durable without unexpected safety signals. Our findings establish pembrolizumab as a promising treatment option for cSCC.

Effectiveness, safety and utilization of vismodegib in locally advanced basal cell carcinoma under real-world conditions in Germany - The non-interventional study NIELS.

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) can arise by the uncontrolled proliferation of cells from multiple epidermal compartments due to aberrant activation of the Hedgehog (Hh) signalling pathway. Vismodegib, a small-molecule inhibitor of this pathway, is approved for treatment of patients with locally advanced (la) BCC inappropriate for surgery or radiotherapy or patients with symptomatic metastatic (m) BCC. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this non-interventional study was to assess effectiveness with a special focus on duration of response (DOR), safety and utilization of vismodegib for treatment of laBCC in daily practice in Germany. METHODS: This non-interventional study (NIS) observed treatment of laBCC with vismodegib according to the German label in clinical practice. All available patients who had received at least one dose of vismodegib between commercial availability of vismodegib in Germany (02 August 2013) and 3 years before end of study (31 March 2016) could be included and were documented retrospectively and/or prospectively for up to 3 years. Primary effectiveness variable was DOR. Assessment of tumour response was carried out by the treating physicians. Exploratory variables included utilization of vismodegib, decision makers for therapy and method of tumour response evaluation. All statistical analyses were descriptive. RESULTS: Between September 2015 and March 2019, 66 patients were observed at 26 German centres. The objective response rate (ORR) was 74.2% and the disease control rate (DCR) was 90.9%. The median DOR was 15.9 months (95% CI: 9.2; 25.7; n = 49 patients with response). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 19.1 months and the median time to response (TTR) 2.7 months. A total of 340 adverse events were reported in 63 (95.5%) patients; no new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: The NIS NIELS shows effectiveness and safety of vismodegib in patients with laBCC. It confirms the transferability of the results of the pivotal trial into routine clinical practice.

Long-term efficacy and safety of sonidegib in patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma: 42-month analysis of the phase II randomized, double-blind BOLT study.

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) exhibit aberrant activation of the hedgehog pathway. Sonidegib is a hedgehog pathway inhibitor approved for the treatment of locally advanced BCC (laBCC) and metastatic BCC (mBCC) based on primary results of the BOLT study [Basal Cell Carcinoma Outcomes with LDE225 (sonidegib) Treatment]. OBJECTIVES: This is the final 42-month analysis of the BOLT study, evaluating the efficacy and safety of sonidegib. METHODS: Adults with no prior hedgehog pathway inhibitor therapy were randomized in a 1 : 2 ratio to sonidegib 200 mg or 800 mg once daily. Treatment continued for up to 42 months or until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, death, study termination or withdrawal of consent. The primary efficacy end point was the objective response rate (ORR) by central review, assessed at baseline; weeks 5, 9 and 17; then subsequently every 8 or 12 weeks during years 1 or 2, respectively. Safety end points included adverse event monitoring and reporting. RESULTS: The study enrolled 230 patients, 79 and 151 in the 200-mg and 800-mg groups, respectively, of whom 8% and 3.3% remained on treatment by the 42-month cutoff, respectively. The ORRs by central review were 56% [95% confidence interval (CI) 43-68] for laBCC and 8% (95% CI 0·2-36) for mBCC in the 200-mg group and 46·1% (95% CI 37·2-55·1) for laBCC and 17% (95% CI 5-39) for mBCC in the 800-mg group. No new safety concerns emerged. CONCLUSIONS: Sonidegib demonstrated sustained efficacy and a manageable safety profile. The final BOLT results support sonidegib as a viable treatment option for laBCC and mBCC. What's already known about this topic? Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is usually treatable with surgery or radiation therapy, but there are limited treatment options for patients with advanced BCC. Sonidegib, a hedgehog pathway inhibitor approved for the treatment of advanced BCC, demonstrated clinically relevant efficacy and manageable safety in prior analyses of the phase II randomized, double-blind BOLT study [Basal Cell Carcinoma Outcomes with LDE225 (sonidegib) Treatment]. What does this study add? This final 42-month analysis of BOLT is the longest follow-up available for a hedgehog pathway inhibitor. Clinically relevant efficacy results were sustained from prior analyses, with objective response rates by central review of the approved 200-mg daily dose of 56% in locally advanced BCC and 8% in metastatic BCC. No new safety concerns were raised. The results confirmed sonidegib as a viable long-term treatment option for patients with advanced BCC.

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.

Sonidegib and vismodegib in the treatment of patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma: a joint expert opinion.

Sonidegib and vismodegib are hedgehog pathway inhibitors (HhIs) approved for the treatment of advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC). Until recently, vismodegib was the only targeted treatment available for patients with locally advanced BCC (laBCC) in cases where surgery and radiotherapy are inappropriate. Sonidegib has recently been approved and now presents an alternative treatment option. The clinical differences between the two HhIs in patients with laBCC are unclear, as no head-to-head randomized controlled trials are or will be initiated. Moreover, there were important differences in the designs of their pivotal studies, BOLT (sonidegib) and ERIVANCE (vismodegib), and these differences complicate evidence-based analysis of their relative efficacy and safety profiles. In this paper, a group of clinical experts in the management of laBCC summarizes the clinical and pharmacological profiles of sonidegib and vismodegib based on published data and their own clinical experience. One key difference between the two pivotal studies was the criteria used to assess BCC severity. ERIVANCE (a single-arm phase II trial) used the conventional Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), while the more recent double-blind randomized BOLT trial used the stringent modified RECIST. A preplanned analysis adjusted the outcomes from BOLT with RECIST-like criteria, and this enabled the experts to discuss relative efficacy outcomes for the two treatments. Centrally reviewed objective response rate (ORR) for vismodegib was 47.6% (95% CI: 35.5-60.6) at 21-month follow-up using RECIST. After adjusting with RECIST-like criteria, the ORR for sonidegib according to central review at 18-month follow-up was 60.6% (95% CI: 47.8-72.4). Both treatments were associated with similar patterns of adverse events. Sonidegib and vismodegib share the same efficacy and tolerability profiles, but their pharmacokinetic profiles show several differences, such as volume of distribution and half-life. Further studies are needed to understand how these differences may impact clinical practice.

[Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma]. / Kutanes Plattenepithelkarzinom.

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is one of the most common cancers of the Caucasian population and accounts for 20% of all skin tumours. An S3 guideline of the German Guideline Program in Oncology has been available since 2019. The diagnosis is based on the clinical examination. Excision and histological confirmation is required for all clinically suspicious lesions to allow prognostic assessment and correct treatment. The therapy of first choice is complete excision with histological control of the surgical margin. In cSCC with risk factors such as tumor thickness >6 mm, sentinel lymph node biopsy may be discussed, but there is currently no clear evidence of its prognostic and therapeutic relevance. Adjuvant radiation therapy may be considered in cases of high risk of recurrence and should be tested in cases of inoperable tumors. The indication for electrochemotherapy should also be considered in the treatment of local or locoregional recurrence. The immune checkpoint inhibitor cemiplimab is approved for the treatment of inoperable or metastasized cSCC. In case of contraindications, chemotherapeutic agents, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors or palliative radiotherapy can be used. Since the evidence is low in these cases, a systemic therapy should be used preferentially within clinical studies. Follow-up care should be risk-adapted and includes a dermatological control, supplemented by ultrasound examinations in high-risk patients.

Medical treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma.

Considering the rising incidence, cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma (cSCC) has a high clinical relevance. In patients with localized cSCC, complete surgical resection is indicated. Radiotherapy should be performed in patients with non-resectable tumours or in patients who are not suitable for surgery. Systemic therapy is reserved for cSCC that are neither surgically nor radiotherapeutically curable due to their extensive local spread and/or local or distant metastasis. In the absence of prospective randomized phase 3 trials to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of chemotherapeutics, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors and anti-PD-1 antibodies, no final recommendation for systemic therapy can be given for patients with locally advanced or metastatic cSCC. Anti-PD-1 antibodies currently show promising results with response rates of up to 50% in both locally advanced and metastatic cSCC. Anti-PD-1 antibodies appear to achieve higher response rates compared with EGFR inhibitors, and the duration of response appears to be superior to both chemotherapy and EGFR inhibitors. Compared with chemotherapy, the side effect profile of anti-PD-1 antibodies appears to be favourable. Altogether, PD-1 inhibitors are expected to become the new standard of care for patients with locally advanced and metastatic cSCC. Currently, placebo-controlled clinical trials are investigating the adjuvant use of cemiplimab and pembrolizumab in patients undergoing resection and radiotherapy of high-risk cSCC. Patients not eligible for anti-PD-1 treatment, e.g. in organ transplant recipients, or in patients refractory to anti-PD-1 may be offered EGFR inhibitors and/or chemotherapies. Chemotherapies appear to be superior to EGFR inhibitors in terms of response rates, whereas EGFR inhibitors have a more favourable toxicity profile. EGFR inhibitors are therefore more suitable for multimorbid and/or frail elderly patients. By combining EGFR inhibitors with local therapy such as surgery or radiotherapy, response rates and duration of response may be improved.

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.

Long-term efficacy and safety of sonidegib in patients with locally advanced and metastatic basal cell carcinoma: 30-month analysis of the randomized phase 2 BOLT study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (laBCC) or metastatic BCC (mBCC), two difficult-to-treat populations, have had limited treatment options. Sonidegib, a hedgehog pathway inhibitor (HPI), was approved in laBCC based on results from the BOLT trial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term efficacy and safety of sonidegib in laBCC and mBCC in the BOLT 18- and 30-month analyses. METHODS: BOLT (NCT01327053, ClinicalTrials.gov), a double-blind phase 2 study, enrolled patients from July 2011 until January 2013. Eligible HPI-treatment-naïve patients with laBCC not amenable to curative surgery/radiotherapy or mBCC were randomized 1 : 2 to sonidegib 200 mg (laBCC, n = 66; mBCC, n = 13) or 800 mg (laBCC, n = 128; mBCC, n = 23). Tumour response was assessed per central and investigator review. RESULTS: With 30 months of follow-up, among patients treated with sonidegib 200 mg (approved dose), objective response rates were 56.1% (central) and 71.2% (investigator) in laBCC and 7.7% (central) and 23.1% (investigator) in mBCC. Tumour responses were durable as follows: median duration of response was 26.1 months (central) and 15.7 months (investigator) in laBCC and 24.0 months (central) and 18.1 months (investigator) in mBCC. Five patients with laBCC and three with mBCC in the 200-mg arm died. Median overall survival was not reached in either population; 2-year overall survival rates were 93.2% (laBCC) and 69.3% (mBCC). In laBCC, efficacy was similar regardless of aggressive or non-aggressive histology. Sonidegib 200 mg continued to have a better safety profile than 800 mg, with lower rates of grade 3/4 adverse events (43.0% vs. 64.0%) and adverse events leading to discontinuation (30.4% vs. 40.0%). CONCLUSION: Sonidegib continued to demonstrate long-term efficacy and safety in these populations. These data support the use of sonidegib 200 mg per local treatment guidelines.

Adjuvant treatment with pegylated interferon α-2a versus low-dose interferon α-2a in patients with high-risk melanoma: a randomized phase III DeCOG trial.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant treatment with interferon (IFN)-α-2a improved disease-free survival (DFS) and showed a trend for improving overall survival (OS) in melanoma. This trial was designed to examine whether PEG-IFN is superior to IFN with regard to distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), DFS and OS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label, prospective randomized phase III trial, patients with resected cutaneous melanoma stage IIA(T3a)-IIIB (AJCC 2002) were randomized to receive PEG-IFN (180 µg subcutaneously 1×/week; 24 months) or IFN α-2a (3MIU subcutaneously 3×/week; 24 months). Randomization was stratified for stage, number of metastatic nodes, age and previous IFN treatment. The primary end point was DMFS; secondary end points were OS, DFS, quality of life (QoL) and tolerability. RESULTS: A total of 909 patients were enrolled (451 PEG-IFN versus 458 IFN). Neither 5-year DMFS [PEG-IFN 61.0% versus IFN 67.3%; hazard ratio (HR) 1.16, P = 0.21] nor 5-year OS (PEG-IFN 73.2% versus IFN 75.2%; HR 1.05, P = 0.70) nor 5-year DFS (PEG-IFN 57.3% versus IFN 60.9%; HR 1.09, P = 0.40) showed significant differences. Subgroup analyses in patients ± ulcerated primaries and of different tumor stages did not find differences in DMFS, OS or DFS between the treatment groups. One hundred and eighteen patients (26.2%) in the PEG-IFN and 61 patients (13.3%) in the IFN population did not receive the full dosage and length of treatment due to adverse events (P < 0.001). Leukopenia and elevation of liver enzymes were more common in the PEG-IFN arm (56% versus 23.5% LCP; 19.1% versus 9.4% AST; 33.0% versus 16.5% ALT). QoL was identical for nearly all domains. CONCLUSION: PEG-IFN did not improve the outcome over IFN. A higher percentage of patients under PEG-IFN discontinued treatment due to toxicity. CLINICAL TRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT00204529.

Prospective assessment of a gene signature potentially predictive of clinical benefit in metastatic melanoma patients following MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic (PREDICT).

BACKGROUND: Genomic profiling of tumor tissue may aid in identifying predictive or prognostic gene signatures (GS) in some cancers. Retrospective gene expression profiling of melanoma and non-small-cell lung cancer led to the characterization of a GS associated with clinical benefit, including improved overall survival (OS), following immunization with the MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic. The goal of the present study was to prospectively evaluate the predictive value of the previously characterized GS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An open-label prospective phase II trial ('PREDICT') in patients with MAGE-A3-positive unresectable stage IIIB-C/IV-M1a melanoma. RESULTS: Of 123 subjects who received the MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic, 71 (58.7%) displayed the predictive GS (GS+). The 1-year OS rate was 83.1%/83.3% in the GS+/GS- populations. The rate of progression-free survival at 12 months was 5.8%/4.1% in GS+/GS- patients. The median time-to-treatment failure was 2.7/2.4 months (GS+/GS-). There was one complete response (GS-) and two partial responses (GS+). The MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic was similarly immunogenic in both populations and had a clinically acceptable safety profile. CONCLUSION: Treatment of patients with MAGE-A3-positive unresectable stage IIIB-C/IV-M1a melanoma with the MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic demonstrated an overall 1-year OS rate of 83.5%. GS- and GS+ patients had similar 1-year OS rates, indicating that in this study, GS was not predictive of outcome. Unexpectedly, the objective response rate was lower in this study than in other studies carried out in the same setting with the MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic. Investigation of a GS to predict clinical benefit to adjuvant MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic treatment is ongoing in another melanoma study.This study is registered at www.clinicatrials.gov NCT00942162.

Histamine H4 receptor knockout mice display reduced inflammation in a chronic model of atopic dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: The histamine H4 receptor (H4R) was brought into focus as a new therapeutic target for the treatment of allergic disorders such as atopic dermatitis (AD). H4R antagonists have already been tested in several animal models of AD, but these studies have yielded conflicting results. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The development of ovalbumin-induced AD-like skin lesions was analysed in H4R(-/-) mice and in H4R antagonist (JNJ28307474)-treated mice. RESULTS: H4R(-/-) mice showed a clear amelioration of the skin lesions, with a diminished influx of inflammatory cells and a reduced epidermal hyperproliferation at lesional skin sites. H4R(-/-) mice had a reduced amount of ovalbumin-specific IgE, a reduced number of splenocytes and lymph node cells with a decreased number of CD4+ T cells. The H4R modulated the cytokine secretion of CD4+ T cells and splenocytes and altered the cellular profile in the lymph nodes. The anti-inflammatory effect could only partially be mimicked by JNJ28307474 and only when the H4R antagonist was given during sensitization and challenge and not when JNJ28307474 was only given during the provocation phase of the allergic reaction. CONCLUSION: The H4R modulates inflammation in a chronic allergic dermatitis setting. However, results of this study indicate that it is necessary to block the H4R during ontogeny and development of the allergic inflammation.

Human basophil chemotaxis and activation are regulated via the histamine H4 receptor.

BACKGROUND: IgE-mediated cross-linking of FcεRI results in the release of mediators stored in basophil granules, such as histamine and proteases, and in the de novo synthesis of sulfidoleukotrienes. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we investigated the role of the histamine receptors, in particular that of the histamine H4 receptor (H4R), in modulating human basophil function. METHODS: The mRNA expression of the histamine receptors was measured by real-time PCR. Migration of basophils was assessed using the modified Boyden chamber technique. The expression levels of CD63 and CD203c on the cell surface and the sulfidoleukotriene release were determined by flow cytometry and ELISA, respectively. RESULTS: We could show that highly purified basophils express the H1R, H2R, and H4R but not the H3R mRNA. Human basophils expressed higher H4R mRNA levels as compared to the expression levels of the H1R (P < 0.01). Histamine and the H4R agonist ST-1006 initiated active migration of basophils (P < 0.001). A significant reduction in FcεRI cross-linking-mediated surface expression of CD63 and CD203c was observed on basophils after pre-incubation with histamine or the specific H4R agonist ST-1006 (P < 0.01). The synthesis and release of sulfidoleukotrienes from basophils after activation with different stimuli, by FcεRI cross-linking or by stimulation with hymenoptera venom allergens, were significantly reduced by histamine or the H4R agonist ST-1006 (P < 0.05-0.001). CONCLUSION: These data imply that the H4R regulates IgE-dependent processes in human basophils and provides a novel function of the H4R preventing an overwhelming immune reaction by engagement of a negative feedback loop.

[Systemic treatment of inoperable metastasized malignant melanoma]. / Systemtherapie des inoperabel metastasierten malignen Melanoms.

BACKGROUND: The medical therapy of inoperable malignant melanoma has changed dramatically over the last few years. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this article is to summarize the current state of systemic medical treatment of malignant melanoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical studies and guidelines in the therapy of malignant melanoma are reviewed. RESULTS: Medical therapy of inoperable melanoma changed due to developments in immunotherapies (checkpoint inhibitors) and molecular-targeted therapies (BRAF and MEK inhibitors). Checkpoint inhibitors are antibodies administered as infusions every 2-3 weeks, blocking the checkpoints PD-1 or CTLA-4, thus, preventing downregulation of the immune system. BRAF and MEK inhibitors are small molecules, they are given orally and block a certain signaling pathway in tumor cells. The activation of this pathway has to be demonstrated by molecular analysis of tumor tissue first. This strategy is currently registered for 40-50 % of melanomas harboring a BRAF V600 mutation, while the combination of a BRAF plus MEK inhibitor has been proven more efficient than a BRAF inhibitor alone. DISCUSSION: A fascinating development has started in the melanoma field due to immunotherapeutic and molecular-targeted treatment strategies. The continuation of this development needs further clinical and translational studies. This includes particular clinical studies with the new substances in the adjuvant situation, and sequences and combinations in the metastatic setting. Translational studies are needed to develop biomarkers for response and side effects.

[Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma]. / Kutanes Plattenepithelkarzinom.

Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the skin accounts for 20 % of non-melanoma skin cancer and is one of the most frequent types of cancer in Caucasian populations. Diagnosis is based on the clinical features and should be histopathologically confirmed to adequately address the prognosis and treatment. Complete surgical excision with histopathological control of excision margins is the gold standard in the treatment of primary SCC. Sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNB) can be considered in SCC with a tumor thickness of >6 mm but there is currently no evidence concerning prognostic and therapeutic effects. Radiotherapy can be discussed as an alternative to surgery for inoperable tumors or as adjuvant therapy for a high risk of recurrence. In SCC with distant metastases various chemotherapeutic agents are used; however, there is no standard regimen. The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors and immune checkpoint blockers can be discussed as treatment options, preferentially in clinical trials. There is no standard follow-up schedule for patients with SCC. A risk-adapted follow-up is recommended based on the risk of metastatic spread or development of new lesions primarily by dermatological control and supplemented by ultrasound investigations in high risk patients.