Efficacy of TIL therapy in advanced cutaneous melanoma in the current immuno-oncology era: updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adoptive cell therapy with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL-ACT) has consistently shown efficacy in advanced melanoma. New results in the field provide now the opportunity to assess overall survival (OS) after TIL-ACT and to examine the effect of prior anti-programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 [anti-PD-(L)1] therapy on its efficacy. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed up to 29 February 2024. Ιn this meta-analysis we focused on studies including high-dose interleukin 2, doubling the patient numbers from our previous meta-analysis conducted up to December 2018 and using OS as the primary endpoint. Objective response rate (ORR), complete response rate (CRR), and duration of response were secondary endpoints. Findings are synthesized using tables, Kaplan-Meier plots, and forest plots. Pooled estimates for ORR and CRR were derived from fixed or random effects models. RESULTS: A total of 13 high-dose interleukin 2 studies were included in this updated meta-analysis, with OS information available for 617 patients. No difference was found in median OS between studies with prior anti-PD-(L)1 treatment {n = 238; 17.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.8-20.5 months]} and without [n = 379; 16.3 months (95% CI 14.2-20.6 months)] (log-rank P = 0.53). ORR was estimated to be 34% (95% CI 16%-52%) and 44% (95% CI 37%-51%), for the studies with and without prior anti-PD-(L)1, respectively. The pooled estimate for CRR was 10% for both groups. No statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups, either for ORR (P = 0.15) or CRR (P = 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: Prior anti-PD-(L)1 treatment has no effect on the clinical response or survival benefit from TIL-ACT in advanced cutaneous melanoma. The benefit of TIL therapy in the second-line setting is also present after anti-PD-(L)1 treatment. Our data reinforce the evidence that TIL-ACT should be considered as a treatment of choice in second line for metastatic melanoma patients failing anti-PD-(L)1 therapy.

Survival update of neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab in macroscopic stage III melanoma in the OpACIN and OpACIN-neo trials.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab has yielded high response rates in patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma. These response rates translated to high short-term survival rates. However, data on long-term survival and disease recurrence are lacking. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In OpACIN, 20 patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma were randomized to ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg q3w four cycles of adjuvant or split two cycles of neoadjuvant and two adjuvant. In OpACIN-neo, 86 patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma were randomized to arm A (2× ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg q3w; n = 30), arm B (2× ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg q3w; n = 30), or arm C (2× ipilimumab 3 mg/kg q3w plus 2× nivolumab 3 mg/kg q2w; n = 26) followed by surgery. RESULTS: The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached in either trial. After a median follow-up of 69 months for OpACIN, 1/7 patients with a pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy had disease recurrence. The estimated 5-year RFS and OS rates for the neoadjuvant arm were 70% and 90% versus 60% and 70% for the adjuvant arm. After a median follow-up of 47 months for OpACIN-neo, the estimated 3-year RFS and OS rates were 82% and 92%, respectively. The estimated 3-year RFS rate for OpACIN-neo was 95% for patients with a pathologic response versus 37% for patients without a pathologic response (P < 0.001). In multiple regression analyses, pathologic response was the strongest predictor of disease recurrence. Of the 12 patients with distant disease recurrence after neoadjuvant therapy, 5 responded to subsequent anti-PD-1 and 8 to targeted therapy, although 7 patients showed progression after the initial response. CONCLUSIONS: Updated data confirm the high survival rates after neoadjuvant combination checkpoint inhibition in macroscopic stage III melanoma, especially for patients with a pathologic response. Pathologic response is the strongest surrogate marker for long-term outcome.

Conversion of unresponsiveness to immune checkpoint inhibition by fecal microbiota transplantation in patients with metastatic melanoma: study protocol for a randomized phase Ib/IIa trial.

BACKGROUND: The gut microbiome plays an important role in immune modulation. Specifically, presence or absence of certain gut bacterial taxa has been associated with better antitumor immune responses. Furthermore, in trials using fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) to treat melanoma patients unresponsive to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), complete responses (CR), partial responses (PR), and durable stable disease (SD) have been observed. However, the underlying mechanism determining which patients will or will not respond and what the optimal FMT composition is, has not been fully elucidated, and a discrepancy in microbial taxa associated with clinical response has been observed between studies. Furthermore, it is unknown whether a change in the microbiome itself, irrespective of its origin, or FMT from ICI responding donors, is required for reversion of ICI-unresponsiveness. To address this, we will transfer microbiota of either ICI responder or nonresponder metastatic melanoma patients via FMT. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blinded phase Ib/IIa trial, 24 anti-PD1-refractory patients with advanced stage cutaneous melanoma will receive an FMT from either an ICI responding or nonresponding donor, while continuing anti-PD-1 treatment. Donors will be selected from patients with metastatic melanoma treated with anti-PD-1 therapy. Two patients with a good response (≥ 30% decrease according to RECIST 1.1 within the past 24 months) and two patients with progression (≥ 20% increase according to RECIST 1.1 within the past 3 months) will be selected as ICI responding or nonresponding donors, respectively. The primary endpoint is clinical benefit (SD, PR or CR) at 12 weeks, confirmed on a CT scan at 16 weeks. The secondary endpoint is safety, defined as the occurrence of grade ≥ 3 toxicity. Exploratory endpoints are progression-free survival and changes in the gut microbiome, metabolome, and immune cells. DISCUSSION: Transplanting fecal microbiota to restore the patients' perturbed microbiome has proven successful in several indications. However, less is known about the potential role of FMT to improve antitumor immune response. In this trial, we aim to investigate whether administration of FMT can reverse resistance to anti-PD-1 treatment in patients with advanced stage melanoma, and whether the ICI-responsiveness of the feces donor is associated with its effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05251389 (registered 22-Feb-2022). Protocol V4.0 (08-02-2022).

Pathological response and tumour bed histopathological features correlate with survival following neoadjuvant immunotherapy in stage III melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for pathological evaluation of neoadjuvant specimens and pathological response categories have been developed by the International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium (INMC). As part of the Optimal Neo-adjuvant Combination Scheme of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab (OpACIN-neo) clinical trial of neoadjuvant combination anti-programmed cell death protein 1/anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 immunotherapy for stage III melanoma, we sought to determine interobserver reproducibility of INMC histopathological assessment principles, identify specific tumour bed histopathological features of immunotherapeutic response that correlated with recurrence and relapse-free survival (RFS) and evaluate proposed INMC pathological response categories for predicting recurrence and RFS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinicopathological characteristics of lymph node dissection specimens of 83 patients enrolled in the OpACIN-neo clinical trial were evaluated. Two methods of assessing histological features of immunotherapeutic response were evaluated: the previously described immune-related pathologic response (irPR) score and our novel immunotherapeutic response score (ITRS). For a subset of cases (n = 29), cellular composition of the tumour bed was analysed by flow cytometry. RESULTS: There was strong interobserver reproducibility in assessment of pathological response (κ = 0.879) and percentage residual viable melanoma (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.965). The immunotherapeutic response subtype with high fibrosis had the strongest association with lack of recurrence (P = 0.008) and prolonged RFS (P = 0.019). Amongst patients with criteria for pathological non-response (pNR, >50% viable tumour), all who recurred had ≥70% viable melanoma. Higher ITRS and irPR scores correlated with lack of recurrence in the entire cohort (P = 0.002 and P ≤ 0.0001). The number of B lymphocytes was significantly increased in patients with a high fibrosis subtype of treatment response (P = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: There is strong reproducibility for assessment of pathological response using INMC criteria. Immunotherapeutic response of fibrosis subtype correlated with improved RFS, and may represent a biomarker. Potential B-cell contribution to fibrosis development warrants further study. Reclassification of pNR to a threshold of ≥70% viable melanoma and incorporating additional criteria of <10% fibrosis subtype of response may identify those at highest risk of recurrence, but requires validation.

Early discontinuation of PD-1 blockade upon achieving a complete or partial response in patients with advanced melanoma: the multicentre prospective Safe Stop trial.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blockers (i.e. nivolumab and pembrolizumab) has significantly improved the prognosis of patients with advanced melanoma. However, the long treatment duration (i.e. two years or longer) has a high impact on patients and healthcare systems in terms of (severe) toxicity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), resource use, and healthcare costs. While durable tumour responses have been observed and PD-1 blockade is discontinued on an individual basis, no consensus has been reached on the optimal treatment duration. The objective of the Safe Stop trial is to evaluate whether early discontinuation of first-line PD-1 blockade is safe in patients with advanced and metastatic melanoma who achieve a radiological response. METHODS: The Safe Stop trial is a nationwide, multicentre, prospective, single-arm, interventional study in the Netherlands. A total of 200 patients with advanced and metastatic cutaneous melanoma and a confirmed complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) according to response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST) v1.1 will be included to early discontinue first-line monotherapy with nivolumab or pembrolizumab. The primary objective is the rate of ongoing responses at 24 months after discontinuation of PD-1 blockade. Secondary objectives include best overall and duration of response, need and outcome of rechallenge with PD-1 blockade, and changes in (serious) adverse events and HRQoL. The impact of treatment discontinuation on healthcare resource use, productivity losses, and hours of informal care will also be assessed. Results will be compared to those from patients with CR or PR who completed 24 months of treatment with PD-1 blockade and had an ongoing response at treatment discontinuation. It is hypothesised that it is safe to early stop first-line nivolumab or pembrolizumab at confirmed tumour response while improving HRQoL and reducing costs. DISCUSSION: From a patient, healthcare, and economic perspective, shorter treatment duration is preferred and overtreatment should be prevented. If early discontinuation of first-line PD-1 blockade appears to be safe, early discontinuation of PD-1 blockade may be implemented as the standard of care in a selected group of patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Safe Stop trial has been registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR), Trial NL7293 (old NTR ID: 7502), https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7293 . Date of registration September 30, 2018.

Predicting response to cancer immunotherapy using noninvasive radiomic biomarkers.

INTRODUCTION: Immunotherapy is regarded as one of the major breakthroughs in cancer treatment. Despite its success, only a subset of patients responds-urging the quest for predictive biomarkers. We hypothesize that artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms can automatically quantify radiographic characteristics that are related to and may therefore act as noninvasive radiomic biomarkers for immunotherapy response. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this study, we analyzed 1055 primary and metastatic lesions from 203 patients with advanced melanoma and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing anti-PD1 therapy. We carried out an AI-based characterization of each lesion on the pretreatment contrast-enhanced CT imaging data to develop and validate a noninvasive machine learning biomarker capable of distinguishing between immunotherapy responding and nonresponding. To define the biological basis of the radiographic biomarker, we carried out gene set enrichment analysis in an independent dataset of 262 NSCLC patients. RESULTS: The biomarker reached significant performance on NSCLC lesions (up to 0.83 AUC, P < 0.001) and borderline significant for melanoma lymph nodes (0.64 AUC, P = 0.05). Combining these lesion-wide predictions on a patient level, immunotherapy response could be predicted with an AUC of up to 0.76 for both cancer types (P < 0.001), resulting in a 1-year survival difference of 24% (P = 0.02). We found highly significant associations with pathways involved in mitosis, indicating a relationship between increased proliferative potential and preferential response to immunotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that radiographic characteristics of lesions on standard-of-care imaging may function as noninvasive biomarkers for response to immunotherapy, and may show utility for improved patient stratification in both neoadjuvant and palliative settings.

Discontinuation of anti-PD-1 antibody therapy in the absence of disease progression or treatment limiting toxicity: clinical outcomes in advanced melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) blocking monoclonal antibodies improve the overall survival of patients with advanced melanoma but the optimal duration of treatment has not been established. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This academic real-world cohort study investigated the outcome of 185 advanced melanoma patients who electively discontinued anti-PD-1 therapy with pembrolizumab (N = 167) or nivolumab (N = 18) in the absence of disease progression (PD) or treatment limiting toxicity (TLT) at 14 medical centres across Europe and Australia. RESULTS: Median time on treatment was 12 months (range 0.7-43). The best objective tumour response at the time of treatment discontinuation was complete response (CR) in 117 (63%) patients, partial response (PR) in 44 (24%) patients and stable disease (SD) in 16 (9%) patients; 8 (4%) patients had no evaluable disease (NE). After a median follow-up of 18 months (range 0.7-48) after treatment discontinuation, 78% of patients remained free of progression. Median time to progression was 12 months (range 2-23). PD was less frequent in patients with CR (14%) compared with patients with PR (32%) and SD (50%). Six out of 19 (32%) patients who were retreated with an anti-PD-1 at the time of PD obtained a new antitumour response. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world cohort of advanced melanoma patients discontinuing anti-PD-1 therapy in the absence of TLT or PD, the duration of anti-PD-1 therapy was shorter when compared with clinical trials. In patients obtaining a CR, and being treated for >6 months, the risk of relapse after treatment discontinuation was low. Patients achieving a PR or SD as best tumour response were at higher risk for progression after discontinuing therapy, and defining optimal treatment duration in such patients deserves further study. Retreatment with an anti-PD-1 at the time of progression may lead to renewed antitumour activity in some patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02673970 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02673970?cond=melanoma&cntry=BE&city=Jette&rank=3).

Short-term CTLA-4 blockade directly followed by PD-1 blockade in advanced melanoma patients: a single-center experience.

Background: Combination of T cell checkpoint blockade by CTLA-4- and PD-1-blockade is one of the most promising therapies in patients with advanced melanoma. It induces superior response rates when compared with single-agent therapy, but at the cost of a high percentage of grade 3 and 4 adverse events (AEs). This combination therapy was until July 2016 not available in the Netherlands, which prompted several physicians to treat patients with less than standard numbers of courses of ipilimumab followed directly by nivolumab or pembrolizumab. Patients and methods: In this retrospective analysis, patients were included who were treated with two courses (day 0 and 21) anti-CTLA-4 (ipilimumab 3 mg/kg q3wk), directly followed by anti-PD-1 (starting at day 22 with nivolumab 3mg/kg q2wk or pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg q3wk). Data on treatment-related AEs were collected from electronic patient records and scored according to CTCAE 4.03 criteria. Overall response was evaluated using RECIST 1.1 for CT-scans and EORTC criteria for PET-scans. Results: Forty advanced melanoma patients could be included (29/40 pembrolizumab, 11/40 nivolumab). Median follow-up (FU) was 51 weeks (range: 4-63 weeks) with a minimum FU of 26 weeks. Treatment-related AEs of grade 3 and 4 occurred in 38% of the patients. The best overall response rate (BORR) was 55% (95% CI 39-70) and disease control rate was 75% (95% CI 59-87). Ongoing responses were observed in 82% of responding patients. Conclusion: Treatment with short-term CTLA-4 blockade directly followed by PD-1 blockade may have similar efficacy but potentially lower toxicity when compared with concurrent therapy with anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1. These results warrant further investigation in a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.

Dabrafenib plus trametinib versus dabrafenib monotherapy in patients with metastatic BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma: long-term survival and safety analysis of a phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Previous analysis of COMBI-d (NCT01584648) demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with combination dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib monotherapy in BRAF V600E/K-mutant metastatic melanoma. This study was continued to assess 3-year landmark efficacy and safety after ≥36-month follow-up for all living patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This double-blind, phase 3 study enrolled previously untreated patients with BRAF V600E/K-mutant unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma. Patients were randomized to receive dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily) plus trametinib (2 mg once daily) or dabrafenib plus placebo. The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints were OS, overall response, duration of response, safety, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Between 4 May and 30 November 2012, a total of 423 of 947 screened patients were randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib (n = 211) or dabrafenib monotherapy (n = 212). At data cut-off (15 February 2016), outcomes remained superior with the combination: 3-year PFS was 22% with dabrafenib plus trametinib versus 12% with monotherapy, and 3-year OS was 44% versus 32%, respectively. Twenty-five patients receiving monotherapy crossed over to combination therapy, with continued follow-up under the monotherapy arm (per intent-to-treat principle). Of combination-arm patients alive at 3 years, 58% remained on dabrafenib plus trametinib. Three-year OS with the combination reached 62% in the most favourable subgroup (normal lactate dehydrogenase and <3 organ sites with metastasis) versus only 25% in the unfavourable subgroup (elevated lactate dehydrogenase). The dabrafenib plus trametinib safety profile was consistent with previous clinical trial observations, and no new safety signals were detected with long-term use. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that durable (≥3 years) survival is achievable with dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma and support long-term first-line use of the combination in this setting.

Variation in use of targeted therapies for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: Results from a Dutch population-based registry.

BACKGROUND: For patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC), targeted therapies have entered the market since 2006. The aims of this study were to evaluate the uptake and use of targeted therapies for mRCC in The Netherlands, examine factors associated with the prescription of targeted therapies in daily clinical practice and study their effectiveness in terms of overall survival (OS). METHODS: Two cohorts from PERCEPTION, a population-based registry of mRCC patients, were used: a 2008-2010 Cohort (n = 645) and a 2011-2013 Cohort (n = 233). Chi-squared tests for trend were used to study time trends in the use of targeted therapy. Patients were grouped based on the eligibility criteria of the SUTENT trial, the trial that led to sunitinib becoming standard of care, to investigate the use of targeted therapies amongst patients fulfilling those criteria. Multi-level logistic regression was used to identify patient subgroups that are less likely to receive targeted therapies. RESULTS: Approximately one-third of patients fulfilling SUTENT trial eligibility criteria did not receive any targeted therapy (29 % in the 2008-2010 Cohort; 35 % in the 2011-2013 Cohort). Patients aged 65+ years were less likely to receive targeted therapy in both cohorts and different risk groups (odds ratios range between 0.84-0.92); other factors like number of metastatic sites were of influence in some subgroups. Amongst treated patients, there was a decreasing trend in sunitinib use over time (p = 0.0061), and an increasing trend in pazopanib use (p = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: Targeted therapies have largely replaced interferon-alfa as first-line standard of care. Nevertheless, many eligible patients in Dutch daily practice did not receive targeted therapies despite their ability to improve survival. Reasons for their apparent underutilisation should be examined more carefully.

Pharmacokinetically guided sunitinib dosing: a feasibility study in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: Plasma exposure of sunitinib shows large inter-individual variation. Therefore, a pharmacokinetic (PK) study was performed to determine safety and feasibility of sunitinib dosing based on PK levels. METHODS: Patients were treated with sunitinib 37.5 mg once daily. At days 15 and 29 of treatment, plasma trough levels of sunitinib and N-desethyl sunitinib were measured. If the total trough level (TTL) was <50 ng ml(-1) and the patient did not show any grade ⩾3 toxicity, the daily sunitinib dose was increased by 12.5 mg. If the patient suffered from grade ⩾3 toxicity, the sunitinib dose was lowered by 12.5 mg. RESULTS: Twenty-nine out of 43 patients were evaluable for PK assessments. Grade ⩾3 adverse events were experienced in seven patients (24%) at the starting dose and in nine patients (31%) after dose escalation. TTLs were below target in 15 patients (52%) at the starting dose. Of these, five patients (17%) reached target TTL after dose escalation without additional toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: In a third of the patients that were below target TTL at standard dose, the sunitinib dose could be increased without additional toxicities. This could be the basis for future studies and the implementation of a PK-guided dosing strategy in clinical practice.

Clinical presentation of cardiac symptoms following treatment with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes: diagnostic challenges and lessons learned.

BACKGROUND: Treatment with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) is rapidly evolving for patients with solid tumors. Following metastasectomy, TILs (autologous, intratumoral CD4+ and CD8+ T cells with the potential to recognize tumor-associated antigens) are isolated and non-specifically expanded ex vivo in the presence of interleukin-2 (IL-2). Subsequently, the TILs are adoptively transferred to the patients after a preconditioning non-myeloablative, lymphodepleting chemotherapy regimen, followed by administration of high-dose (HD) IL-2. Here, we provide an overview of known cardiac risks associated with TIL treatment and report on seven patients presenting with cardiac symptoms, all with different clinical course and diagnostic findings during treatment with lymphodepleting chemotherapy, TIL, and HD IL-2, and propose a set of clinical recommendations for diagnosis and management of these symptoms. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study included selected patients who experienced TIL treatment-related cardiac symptoms at the Netherlands Cancer Institute. In addition, 12 patients were included who received TIL in the clinical trial setting without experiencing cardiac symptoms, from whom complete cardiac biomarker follow-up during treatment was available [creatine kinase (CK), CK-myocardial band, troponin T and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide]. RESULTS: Within our TIL patient population, seven illustrative cases were chosen from the patients who developed symptoms suspected of severe cardiotoxicity: myocarditis, myocardial infarction, peri-myocarditis, atrial fibrillation, acute dyspnea, and two cases of heart failure. An overview of their clinical course, diagnostics carried out, and management of the symptoms is provided. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of TIL therapy-associated cardiotoxicity, we provided an overview of literature, case descriptions, and recommendations for diagnosis and management to help physicians in daily practice, as the number of patients qualifying for TIL treatment is rapidly increasing.

Seasonal variation of anti-PD-1 outcome in melanoma-Results from a Dutch patient cohort.

Despite the improved survival rates of patients with advanced stage melanoma since the introduction of ICIs, many patients do not have (long-term) benefit from these treatments. There is evidence that the exposome, an accumulation of host-extrinsic factors including environmental influences, could impact ICI response. Recently, a survival benefit was observed in patients with BRAF wild-type melanoma living in Denmark who initiated immunotherapy in summer as compared to winter. As the Netherlands lies in close geographical proximity to Denmark and has comparable seasonal differences, a Dutch validation cohort was established using data from our nationwide melanoma registry. In this study, we did not observe a similar seasonal difference in overall survival and are therefore unable to confirm the Danish findings. Validation of either the Dutch or Danish findings in (combined) patient cohorts from other countries would be necessary to determine whether this host-extrinsic factor influences the response to ICI-treatment.

DNA vaccines and intradermal vaccination by DNA tattooing.

Over the past two decades, DNA vaccination has been developed as a method for the induction of immune responses. However, in spite of high expectations based on their efficacy in preclinical models, immunogenicity of first generation DNA vaccines in clinical trials was shown to be poor, and no DNA vaccines have yet been licensed for human use. In recent years significant progress has been made in the development of second generation DNA vaccines and DNA vaccine delivery methods. Here we review the key characteristics of DNA vaccines as compared to other vaccine platforms, and recent insights into the prerequisites for induction of immune responses by DNA vaccines will be discussed. We illustrate the development of second generation DNA vaccines with the description of DNA tattooing as a novel DNA delivery method. This technique has shown great promise both in a small animal model and in non-human primates and is currently under clinical evaluation.

Exposure-response analyses of BRAF- and MEK-inhibitors dabrafenib plus trametinib in melanoma patients.

INTRODUCTION: Dabrafenib and trametinib are currently administered at fixed doses, at which interpatient variability in exposure is high. The aim of this study was to investigate whether drug exposure is related to efficacy and toxicity in a real-life cohort of melanoma patients treated with dabrafenib plus trametinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational study was performed in which pharmacokinetic samples were collected as routine care. Using estimated dabrafenib Area Under the concentration-time Curve and trametinib trough concentrations (Cmin), univariable and multivariable exposure-response analyses were performed. RESULTS: In total, 140 patients were included. Dabrafenib exposure was not related to either progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS). Trametinib exposure was related to survival, with Cmin ≥ 15.6 ng/mL being identified as the optimal threshold. Median OS was significantly longer in patients with trametinib Cmin ≥ 15.6 ng/mL (22.8 vs. 12.6 months, P = 0.003), with a multivariable hazard ratio of 0.55 (95% CI 0.36-0.85, P = 0.007). Median PFS in patients with trametinib Cmin levels ≥ 15.6 ng/mL (37%) was 10.9 months, compared with 6.0 months for those with Cmin below this threshold (P = 0.06). Multivariable analysis resulted in a hazard ratio of 0.70 (95% CI 0.47-1.05, P = 0.082). Exposure to dabrafenib and trametinib was not related to clinically relevant toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Overall survival of metastasized melanoma patients with trametinib Cmin levels ≥ 15.6 ng/mL is ten months longer compared to patients with Cmin below this threshold. This would theoretically provide a rationale for therapeutic drug monitoring of trametinib. Although a high proportion of patients are underexposed, there is very little scope for dose increments due to the risk of serious toxicity.

Extended follow-up from JAVELIN Renal 101: subgroup analysis of avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib by the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium risk group in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We report updated data for avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma from the third interim analysis of the phase III JAVELIN Renal 101 trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and duration of response per investigator assessment (RECIST version 1.1) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated in the overall population and in International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups; safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Overall, median OS [95% confidence interval (CI)] was not reached [42.2 months-not estimable (NE)] with avelumab plus axitinib versus 37.8 months (31.4-NE) with sunitinib [hazard ratio (HR) 0.79, 95% CI 0.643-0.969; one-sided P = 0.0116], and median PFS (95% CI) was 13.9 months (11.1-16.6 months) versus 8.5 months (8.2-9.7 months), respectively (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.568-0.785; one-sided P < 0.0001). In patients with IMDC favorable-, intermediate-, poor-, or intermediate plus poor-risk disease, respectively, HRs (95% CI) for OS with avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib were 0.66 (0.356-1.223), 0.84 (0.649-1.084), 0.60 (0.399-0.912), and 0.79 (0.636-0.983), and HRs (95% CIs) for PFS were 0.71 (0.490-1.016), 0.71 (0.578-0.866), 0.45 (0.304-0.678), and 0.66 (0.550-0.787), respectively. ORRs, complete response rates, and durations of response favored avelumab plus axitinib overall and across all risk groups. In the avelumab plus axitinib arm, 81.1% had a grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), and incidences of TEAEs and immune-related AEs were highest <6 months after randomization. CONCLUSIONS: Avelumab plus axitinib continues to show improved efficacy versus sunitinib and a tolerable safety profile overall and across IMDC risk groups. The OS trend favors avelumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib, but data remain immature; follow-up is ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.govNCT02684006; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02684006.

"One more chance to survive": the experiences of patients with advanced melanoma and their partners with tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte therapy-a qualitative study and recommendations for future care.

PURPOSE: Patients with advanced melanoma refractory to first-line treatment have a need for effective second-line treatment options. A recent phase 3 trial showed promising results for adoptive cell therapy with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) as second-line therapy in patients with advanced melanoma. However, it remains unknown how patients and their partners experience TIL therapy, which is key to evaluate and improve the quality of care. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews about the experience of TIL therapy were conducted with patients with advanced melanoma and their partners 2-4 weeks post-treatment (short term) and >6 months after treatment (long term). RESULTS: In total, 25 interviews were conducted with advanced melanoma patients treated with TIL (n=13) and their partners (n=12), with the majority being short-term interviews (n=17). Overall, patients and partners experienced TIL therapy as intense (uncertainty of successful TIL culture, multiple treatment-related toxicities, and extensive hospitalization). Patients and partners with young children or other caregiving responsibilities encountered the most challenges during TIL therapy. All patients, however, reported a recovery of all treatment-related toxicities within 2-4 weeks (except fatigue). CONCLUSION: Clinical data justify the role of TIL therapy in the treatment of advanced melanoma. With the distinct nature of TIL therapy compared to the current standard of care, we have provided patient-centered recommendations that will further enhance the quality of TIL therapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: As more patients with advanced melanoma are expected to receive TIL therapy in the future, our findings could be incorporated into survivorship care plans for this novel group of advanced melanoma survivors treated with TIL.