Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) recommendations on intratumoral immunotherapy clinical trials (IICT): from premalignant to metastatic disease.

BACKGROUND: Intratumorally delivered immunotherapies have the potential to favorably alter the local tumor microenvironment and may stimulate systemic host immunity, offering an alternative or adjunct to other local and systemic treatments. Despite their potential, these therapies have had limited success in late-phase trials for advanced cancer resulting in few formal approvals. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to determine how to design clinical trials with the greatest chance of demonstrating the benefits of intratumoral immunotherapy for patients with cancers across all stages of pathogenesis. METHODS: An Intratumoral Immunotherapy Clinical Trials Expert Panel composed of international key stakeholders from academia and industry was assembled. A multiple choice/free response survey was distributed to the panel, and the results of this survey were discussed during a half-day consensus meeting. Key discussion points are summarized in the following manuscript. RESULTS: The panel determined unique clinical trial designs tailored to different stages of cancer development-from premalignant to unresectable/metastatic-that can maximize the chance of capturing the effect of intratumoral immunotherapies. Design elements discussed included study type, patient stratification and exclusion criteria, indications of randomization, study arm determination, endpoints, biological sample collection, and response assessment with biomarkers and imaging. Populations to prioritize for the study of intratumoral immunotherapy, including stage, type of cancer and line of treatment, were also discussed along with common barriers to the development of these local treatments. CONCLUSIONS: The SITC Intratumoral Immunotherapy Clinical Trials Expert Panel has identified key considerations for the design and implementation of studies that have the greatest potential to capture the effect of intratumorally delivered immunotherapies. With more effective and standardized trial designs, the potential of intratumoral immunotherapy can be realized and lead to regulatory approvals that will extend the benefit of these local treatments to the patients who need them the most.

Intratumoral oncolytic virus V937 plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma: the phase 1b MITCI study.

BACKGROUND: Intratumoral administration of V937, a bioselected, genetically unmodified coxsackievirus A21, has previously demonstrated antitumor activity in patients with advanced melanoma as monotherapy and in combination with the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) antibody pembrolizumab. We report results from an open-label, single-arm, phase 1b study (NCT02307149) evaluating V937 plus the cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 inhibitor ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS: Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed metastatic or unresectable stage IIIB/C or IV melanoma received intratumoral V937 on days 1, 3, 5, 8, and 22 and every 3 weeks (Q3W) thereafter for up to 19 sets of injections plus intravenous ipilimumab 3 mg/kg Q3W administered for four doses starting on day 22. Imaging was performed at screening, on days 43 and 106 and every 6 weeks thereafter; response was assessed by immune-related response criteria per investigator assessment. Primary endpoints were safety in all treated patients and objective response rate (ORR) in all treated patients and in patients with disease that progressed on prior anti-PD-1 therapy. RESULTS: Fifty patients were enrolled and treated. ORR was 30% (95% CI 18% to 45%) among all treated patients, 47% (95% CI 23% to 72%) among patients who had not received prior anti-PD-1 therapy, and 21% (95% CI 9% to 39%) among patients who had experienced disease progression on prior anti-PD-1 therapy. Tumor regression occurred in injected and non-injected lesions. Median immune-related progression-free survival was 6.2 months (95% CI 3.5 to 9.0 months), and median overall survival was 45.1 months (95% CI 28.3 months to not reached). The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were pruritus (n=25, 50%), fatigue (n=22, 44%), and diarrhea (n=16, 32%). There were no V937-related dose-limiting toxicities and no treatment-related grade 5 AEs. Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 AEs, all of which were considered related to ipilimumab, occurred in 14% of patients (most commonly dehydration, diarrhea, and hepatotoxicity in 4% each). CONCLUSIONS: Responses associated with intratumoral V937 plus ipilimumab were robust, including in the subgroup of patients who had experienced disease progression on prior anti-PD-1 therapy. Toxicities were manageable and consistent with those of the individual monotherapies.

Mavorixafor, an Orally Bioavailable CXCR4 Antagonist, Increases Immune Cell Infiltration and Inflammatory Status of Tumor Microenvironment in Patients with Melanoma.

Purpose: Mavorixafor is an oral, selective inhibitor of the CXCR4 chemokine receptor that modulates immune cell trafficking. A biomarker-driven phase Ib study (NCT02823405) was conducted in 16 patients with melanoma to investigate the hypothesis that mavorixafor favorably modulates immune cell profiles in the tumor microenvironment (TME) and to evaluate the safety of mavorixafor alone and in combination with pembrolizumab. Experimental Design: Serial biopsies of melanoma lesions were assessed after 3 weeks of mavorixafor monotherapy and after 6 weeks of combination treatment for immune cell markers by NanoString analysis for gene expression and by multiplexed immunofluorescent staining for in situ protein expression. Serum samples taken at biopsy timepoints were evaluated for key chemokine and cytokine alterations using the Myriad Rules Based Medicine multiplex immunoassays. Results: Within the TME, mavorixafor alone increased CD8+ T-cell infiltration, granzyme B signal, antigen presentation machinery, and both tumor inflammatory signature (TIS) and IFNγ gene expression signature scores. Increases in the key serum cytokines CXCL9 and CXCL10 were further enhanced when mavorixafor was combined with pembrolizumab. Adverse events (AE), as assessed by the investigator according to NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (v4.03), related to either mavorixafor or pembrolizumab (≥15%) were diarrhea, fatigue, maculopapular rash, and dry eye. Reported AEs were all ≤ grade 3. Conclusion/Discussion: Treatment with single-agent mavorixafor resulted in enhanced immune cell infiltration and activation in the TME, leading to increases in TIS and IFNγ gene signatures. Mavorixafor as a single agent, and in combination with pembrolizumab, has an acceptable safety profile. These data support further investigation of the use of mavorixafor for patients unresponsive to checkpoint inhibitors. Significance: Despite survival improvements in patients with melanoma treated with checkpoint inhibitor therapy, a significant unmet medical need exists for therapies that enhance effectiveness. We propose that mavorixafor sensitizes the melanoma tumor microenvironment and enhances the activity of checkpoint inhibitors, and thereby may translate to a promising treatment for broader patient populations.

Phase I Dose-Escalation Trial of MIW815 (ADU-S100), an Intratumoral STING Agonist, in Patients with Advanced/Metastatic Solid Tumors or Lymphomas.

PURPOSE: This phase I study assessed the safety, pharmacokinetics (PKs), and efficacy of MIW815 (ADU-S100), a novel synthetic cyclic dinucleotide that activates the stimulator of IFN genes (STING) pathway, in patients with advanced/metastatic cancers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (n = 47) received weekly i.t. injections of MIW815, 50 to 6,400 µg, on a 3-weeks-on/1-week-off schedule. RESULTS: A maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Most common treatment-related adverse events were pyrexia (17%), chills, and injection-site pain (each 15%). MIW815 was rapidly absorbed from the injection site with dose-proportional PK, a rapid terminal plasma half-life (approximately 24 minutes), and high interindividual variability. One patient had a partial response (PR; Merkel cell carcinoma); two patients had unconfirmed PR (parotid cancer, myxofibrosarcoma). Lesion size was stable or decreased in 94% of evaluable, injected lesions. RNA expression and immune infiltration assessments in paired tumor biopsies did not reveal significant on-treatment changes. However, increases in inflammatory cytokines and peripheral blood T-cell clonal expansion suggested systemic immune activation. CONCLUSIONS: MIW815 was well tolerated in patients with advanced/metastatic cancers. Clinical activity of single-agent MIW815 was limited in this first-in-human study; however, evidence of systemic immune activation was seen.

Current strategies for intratumoural immunotherapy - Beyond immune checkpoint inhibition.

Immunotherapy has revolutionised cancer treatment through restoration of host antitumour immune response. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) confer durable responses in only a subset of patients. Mechanisms of ICI resistance to improve durable response rates and overall survival are an area of intense clinical research. Robust clinical development is ongoing to evaluate novel combination therapies to overcome ICI resistance, including targeting immunoregulatory pathways in the tumour microenvironment. Intratumoural (IT) immunotherapies such as toll-like receptor agonists, stimulator of interferon-induced gene agonists, retinoic-inducible gene I-like receptor agonists and oncolytic viruses may represent potential combination treatment options to overcome ICI resistance. Use of IT immunotherapies in combination with ICIs may alter the tumour microenvironment to address resistance mechanisms and improve antitumour response. Optimisation of IT immunotherapy clinical trials will elucidate resistance mechanisms, facilitate clinical trial design, define pharmacodynamic predictors that identify patients who may most benefit and inform clinical development of combination immunotherapy regimens. Here we provide an overview of IT immunotherapy principles, mechanisms of action, categories of IT immunotherapeutics, emerging data, clinical development strategies, response assessment, dose and schedule determination, clinical trial design and translational study design.

Clinical Responses of Oncolytic Coxsackievirus A21 (V937) in Patients With Unresectable Melanoma.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the activity of intratumoral Coxsackievirus A21 (V937) in 57 patients with unresectable stage IIIC or IV melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label, phase II study, patients received up to a total V937 dose of 3 × 108 TCID50 (50% tissue culture infectious dose) in a maximum 4.0-mL volume by intratumoral injection. Ten sets of V937 injections were administered between days 1 and 127 (NCT01227551). Patients who had stable disease or were responding could continue treatment in an extension study (NCT01636882). Response and progression status were based on contrast-enhanced computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or caliper measurement and were categorized using immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (irRECIST). Other evaluations included monitoring of adverse events and serum levels of V937 and anti-V937 antibody titers. The primary efficacy end point was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate per irRECIST. RESULTS: The primary efficacy end point, 6-month PFS rate per irRECIST, was 38.6% (95% CI, 26.0 to 52.4). Durable response rate (partial or complete response for ≥ 6 months) was 21.1% per irRECIST. Best overall response rate (complete plus partial response) was 38.6% (unconfirmed) and 28.1% (confirmed) per irRECIST. Regression of melanoma was observed in noninjected lesions. Based on Kaplan-Meier estimation, 12-month PFS was 32.9% (95% CI, 19.5 to 46.9) per irRECIST and 12-month overall survival was 75.4% (95% CI, 62.1 to 84.7). No treatment-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred. Viral RNA was detected in serum within 30 minutes of administration. Neutralizing antibody titers increased to > 1:16 in all patients after day 22, without effect on clinical or immunologic response. CONCLUSION: V937 was well tolerated and warrants further investigation for treatment of patients with unresectable melanoma. Studies of combination approaches with V937 and immune checkpoint inhibitors are ongoing.

Tilsotolimod with Ipilimumab Drives Tumor Responses in Anti-PD-1 Refractory Melanoma.

Many patients with advanced melanoma are resistant to immune checkpoint inhibition. In the ILLUMINATE-204 phase I/II trial, we assessed intratumoral tilsotolimod, an investigational Toll-like receptor 9 agonist, with systemic ipilimumab in patients with anti-PD-1- resistant advanced melanoma. In all patients, 48.4% experienced grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events. The overall response rate at the recommended phase II dose of 8 mg was 22.4%, and an additional 49% of patients had stable disease. Responses in noninjected lesions and in patients expected to be resistant to ipilimumab monotherapy were observed. Rapid induction of a local IFNα gene signature, dendritic cell maturation and enhanced markers of antigen presentation, and T-cell clonal expansion correlated with clinical response. A phase III clinical trial with this combination (NCT03445533) is ongoing. SIGNIFICANCE: Despite recent developments in advanced melanoma therapies, most patients do not experience durable responses. Intratumoral tilsotolimod injection elicits a rapid, local type 1 IFN response and, in combination with ipilimumab, activates T cells to promote clinical activity, including in distant lesions and patients not expected to respond to ipilimumab alone.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1861.

A Phase IIb Randomized Controlled Trial of the TLPLDC Vaccine as Adjuvant Therapy After Surgical Resection of Stage III/IV Melanoma: A Primary Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma therapy has changed dramatically over the last decade with improvements in immunotherapy, yet many patients do not respond to current therapies. This novel vaccine strategy may prime a patient's immune system against their tumor and work synergistically with immunotherapy against advanced-stage melanoma. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase IIb trial of the tumor lysate, particle-loaded, dendritic cell (TLPLDC) vaccine administered to prevent recurrence in patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma. Patients were enrolled and randomized 2:1 to the TLPLDC vaccine or placebo (empty yeast cell wall particles and autologous dendritic cells). Both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per treatment (PT) analyses were predefined, with PT analysis including patients who remained disease-free through the primary vaccine/placebo series (6 months). RESULTS: A total of 144 patients were randomized (103 vaccine, 41 control). Therapy was well-tolerated with similar toxicity between treatment arms; one patient in each group experienced related serious adverse events. While disease-free survival (DFS) was not different between groups in ITT analysis, in PT analysis the vaccine group showed improved 24-month DFS (62.9% vs. 34.8%, p = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: This phase IIb trial of TLPLDC vaccine administered to patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma shows TLPLDC is well-tolerated and improves DFS in patients who complete the primary vaccine series. This suggests patients who do not recur early benefit from TLPLDC in preventing future recurrence from melanoma. A phase III trial of TLPLDC + checkpoint inhibitor versus checkpoint inhibitor alone in patients with advanced, surgically resected melanoma is under development. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02301611.

Preoperative Ultrasound Assessment of Regional Lymph Nodes in Melanoma Patients Does not Provide Reliable Nodal Staging: Results From a Large Multicenter Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether preoperative ultrasound (US) assessment of regional lymph nodes in patients who present with primary cutaneous melanoma provides accurate staging. BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that preoperative US could avoid the need for sentinel node (SN) biopsy, but in most single-institution reports, the sensitivity of preoperative US has been low. METHODS: Preoperative US data and SNB results were analyzed for patients enrolled at 20 centers participating in the screening phase of the second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial. Excised SNs were histopathologically assessed and considered positive if any melanoma was seen. RESULTS: SNs were identified and removed from 2859 patients who had preoperative US evaluation. Among those patients, 548 had SN metastases. US was positive (abnormal) in 87 patients (3.0%). Among SN-positive patients, 39 (7.1%) had an abnormal US. When analyzed by lymph node basin, 3302 basins were evaluated, and 38 were true positive (1.2%). By basin, the sensitivity of US was 6.6% (95% confidence interval: 4.6-8.7) and the specificity 98.0% (95% CI: 97.5-98.5). Median cross-sectional area of all SN metastases was 0.13 mm2; in US true-positive nodes, it was 6.8 mm2. US sensitivity increased with increasing Breslow thickness of the primary melanoma (0% for ≤1 mm thickness, 11.9% for >4 mm thickness). US sensitivity was not significantly greater with higher trial center volume or with pre-US lymphoscintigraphy. CONCLUSION: In the MSLT-II screening phase population, SN tumor volume was usually too small to be reliably detected by US. For accurate nodal staging to guide the management of melanoma patients, US is not an effective substitute for SN biopsy.

Phase II Trial of IL-12 Plasmid Transfection and PD-1 Blockade in Immunologically Quiescent Melanoma.

PURPOSE: Tumors with low frequencies of checkpoint positive tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (cpTIL) have a low likelihood of response to PD-1 blockade. We conducted a prospective multicenter phase II trial of intratumoral plasmid IL-12 (tavokinogene telseplasmid; "tavo") electroporation combined with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma with low frequencies of checkpoint positive cytotoxic lymphocytes (cpCTL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Tavo was administered intratumorally days 1, 5, and 8 every 6 weeks while pembrolizumab (200 mg, i.v.) was administered every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) by RECIST, secondary endpoints included duration of response, overall survival and progression-free survival. Toxicity was evaluated by the CTCAE v4. Extensive correlative analysis was done. RESULTS: The combination of tavo and pembrolizumab was well tolerated with adverse events similar to those previously reported with pembrolizumab alone. Patients had a 41% ORR (n = 22, RECIST 1.1) with 36% complete responses. Correlative analysis showed that the combination enhanced immune infiltration and sustained the IL-12/IFNγ feed-forward cycle, driving intratumoral cross-presenting dendritic cell subsets with increased TILs, emerging T cell receptor clones and, ultimately, systemic cellular immune responses. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of tavo and pembrolizumab was associated with a higher than expected response rate in this poorly immunogenic population. No new or unexpected toxicities were observed. Correlative analysis showed T cell infiltration with enhanced immunity paralleling the clinical activity in low cpCTL tumors.

Recurrence risk of early-stage melanoma of the external ear: an investigation of surgical approach and sentinel lymph node status.

Surgical management of external ear melanoma presents unique technical challenges based on the unique anatomy and reconstruction concerns. Surgical technique, including preservation of cartilage, is variable and impact on recurrence is unclear. Our goal was to investigate surgical approach, including extent of surgical resection and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), and the impact on recurrence. In this retrospective review of primary clinical stage 1/2 external ear melanoma, demographics, tumor characteristics, surgical resection technique (including cartilage-sparing vs. cartilage removal), and SLNB results were evaluated for recurrence risk. One hundred and fifty-six patients total had an average follow-up of 5.6 years. Twenty-nine (18.6%) patients underwent cartilage-sparing surgery and 99 (63.5%) patients underwent SLNB, 14.1% of whom had micrometastatic disease. Ten (6.4%) patients recurred loco-regionally. Recurrence was associated with Breslow depth, initial stage at diagnosis, and SLNB status. Cartilage-sparing surgery was not associated with increased recurrence. Sentinel lymph node identification rate was 100% based on clinical detection with use of lymphoscintigraphy. In addition to confirming established risk factors for melanoma recurrence, we confirm the feasibility of SLNB in stratifying recurrence risk. Although we did not see an increased recurrence risk with surgical technique and cartilage-sparing approaches, these findings are limited by small sample size.

Biodistribution, shedding, and transmissibility of the oncolytic virus talimogene laherparepvec in patients with melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is an intralesionally delivered, modified herpes simplex virus type-1 oncolytic immunotherapy. The biodistribution, shedding, and potential transmission of T-VEC was systematically evaluated during and after completion of therapy in adults with advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this phase 2, single-arm, open-label study, T-VEC was administered into injectable lesions initially at 106 plaque-forming units (PFU)/mL, 108 PFU/mL 21 days later, and 108 PFU/mL every 14 (±3) days thereafter. Injected lesions were covered with occlusive dressings for ≥1 week. Blood, urine, and swabs from exterior of occlusive dressings, surface of injected lesions, oral mucosa, anogenital area, and suspected herpetic lesions were collected throughout the study. Detectable T-VEC DNA was determined for each sample type; infectivity was determined for all swabs with detectable T-VEC DNA. FINDINGS: Sixty patients received ≥1 dose of T-VEC. During cycles 1-4, T-VEC DNA was detected in blood (98·3% of patients, 36·7% of samples), urine (31·7% of patients, 3·0% of samples) and swabs from injected lesions (100% of patients, 57·6% of samples), exterior of dressings (80% of patients,19·5% of samples), oral mucosa (8·3% of patients, 2·5% of samples), and anogenital area (8·0% of patients, 1·1% of samples). During the safety follow-up period, T-VEC DNA was only detected on swabs from injected lesions (14% of patients, 5.8% of samples). T-VEC DNA was detected in 4/37 swabs (3/19 patients) of suspected herpetic lesions. Among all samples, only those from the surface of injected lesions tested positive for infectivity (8/740 [1·1%]). Three close contacts reported signs and symptoms of suspected herpetic origin; however, no lesions had detectable T-VEC DNA. INTERPRETATION: Using current guidelines, T-VEC can be administered safely to patients with advanced melanoma and is unlikely to be transmitted to close contacts with appropriate use of occlusive dressings. FUND: This study was funded by Amgen Inc.: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02014441.

Final analyses of OPTiM: a randomized phase III trial of talimogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor in unresectable stage III-IV melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Talimogene laherparepvec is an oncolytic immunotherapy approved in the US, Europe, Australia and Switzerland. We report the final planned analysis of OPTiM, a randomized open-label phase III trial in patients with unresectable stage IIIB-IVM1c melanoma. METHODS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive intratumoral talimogene laherparepvec or subcutaneous recombinant GM-CSF. In addition to overall survival (OS), durable response rate (DRR), objective response rate (ORR), complete responses (CR), and safety are also reported. All final analyses are considered to be descriptive and treatment responses were assessed by the investigators. RESULTS: Of 436 patients in the intent-to-treat population, 295 were allocated to talimogene laherparepvec and 141 to GM-CSF. Median follow-up in the final OS analysis was 49 months. Median OS was 23.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 19.5-29.6) and 18.9 months (95% CI, 16.0-23.7) in the talimogene laherparepvec and GM-CSF arms, respectively (unstratified hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62-1.00; p = 0.0494 [descriptive]). DRR was 19.0 and 1.4% (unadjusted odds ratio, 16.6; 95% CI, 4.0-69.2; p < 0.0001); ORR was 31.5 and 6.4%. Fifty (16.9%) and 1 (0.7%) patient in the talimogene laherparepvec and GM-CSF arms, respectively, achieved CR. In talimogene laherparepvec-treated patients, median time to CR was 8.6 months; median CR duration was not reached. Among patients with a CR, 88.5% were estimated to survive at a 5-year landmark analysis. Talimogene laherparepvec efficacy was more pronounced in stage IIIB-IVM1a melanoma as already described in the primary analysis. The safety reporting was consistent with the primary OPTiM analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In this final planned OPTiM analysis, talimogene laherparepvec continued to result in improved longer-term efficacy versus GM-CSF and remained well tolerated. The final analysis also confirms that talimogene laherparepvec was associated with durable CRs that were associated with prolonged survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00769704 .

Routine retrieval of pelvic sentinel lymph nodes for melanoma rarely adds prognostic information or alters management.

Pelvic sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) are commonly identified during inguinal SLN biopsy for melanoma, but retrieval is not uniform among surgeons/centers. Few studies have assessed rates of micrometastases in pelvic versus superficial inguinal SLNs. Previous studies suggested that presence of pelvic SLNs was predicted by aggressive pathologic features and that their presence portended a worse prognosis. The objectives of this study were to examine presurgical predictors of pelvic SLNs among patients undergoing inguinal SLN biopsy, assess rates of micrometastases in superficial inguinal versus pelvic SLNs, and determine whether presence of pelvic SLNs was associated with long-term outcomes. Multivariable regression was used to assess presurgical factors associated with presence of pelvic SLNs. Rates of micrometastases in superficial inguinal versus pelvic SLNs in patients who had a pelvic SLN were compared with McNemar's test. Groin recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and disease-specific survival were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. A multivariable Cox model for DFS was performed. Pelvic SLNs were retrieved in 100/537 (18.6%) superficial inguinal SLN biopsies and no preoperative factors predicted their presence. In patients with a pelvic SLN, micrometastases were present in 3.0% of pelvic versus 34.0% of superficial inguinal SLN biopsies (P<0.001). There were no differences in groin recurrence, DFS, and disease-specific survival for patients with/without pelvic SLNs in univariate analyses (all P>0.2) or in the multivariable Cox model for DFS (hazard ratio: 1.1, 95% confidence interval: 0.6-2.1). In conclusion, pelvic SLNs harbor micrometastases less frequently than superficial inguinal SLNs do, suggesting that omission of pelvic SLN biopsy may be reasonable.

Similar survival of patients with multiple versus single primary melanomas based on Utah Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data (1973-2011).

BACKGROUND: Survival data are mixed comparing patients with multiple primary melanomas (MPM) to those with single primary melanomas (SPM). OBJECTIVES: We compared MPM versus SPM patient survival using a matching method that avoids potential biases associated with other analytic approaches. METHODS: Records of 14,138 individuals obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry of all melanomas diagnosed or treated in Utah between 1973 and 2011 were reviewed. A single matched control patient was selected randomly from the SPM cohort for each MPM patient, with the restriction that they survived at least as long as the interval between the first and second diagnoses for the matched MPM patient. RESULTS: Survival curves (n = 887 for both MPM and SPM groups) without covariates showed a significant survival disadvantage for MPM patients (chi-squared 39.29, P < .001). However, a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model showed no significant survival difference (hazard ratio 1.07, P = .55). Restricting the multivariate analysis to invasive melanomas also showed no significant survival difference (hazard ratio 0.99, P = .96). LIMITATIONS: Breslow depth, ulceration status, and specific cause of death were not available for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MPM had similar survival times as patients with SPM.

Randomized, Open-Label Phase II Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Talimogene Laherparepvec in Combination With Ipilimumab Versus Ipilimumab Alone in Patients With Advanced, Unresectable Melanoma.

Purpose We evaluated the combination of talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced melanoma in a phase II study. To our knowledge, this was the first randomized trial to evaluate addition of an oncolytic virus to a checkpoint inhibitor. Methods Patients with unresectable stages IIIB to IV melanoma, with no more than one prior therapy if BRAF wild-type, no more than two prior therapies if BRAF mutant, measurable/injectable disease, and without symptomatic autoimmunity or clinically significant immunosuppression were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab or ipilimumab alone. Talimogene laherparepvec treatment began in week 1 (first dose, ≤ 4 mL × 106 plaque-forming units/mL; after 3 weeks, ≤ 4 mL × 108 plaque-forming units/mL every 2 weeks). Ipilimumab (3 mg/kg every 3 weeks; up to four doses) began week 1 in the ipilimumab alone arm and week 6 in the combination arm. The primary end point was objective response rate evaluated by investigators per immune-related response criteria. Results One hundred ninety-eight patients were randomly assigned to talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab (n = 98), or ipilimumab alone (n = 100). Thirty-eight patients (39%) in the combination arm and 18 patients (18%) in the ipilimumab arm had an objective response (odds ratio, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.5 to 5.5; P = .002). Responses were not limited to injected lesions; visceral lesion decreases were observed in 52% of patients in the combination arm and 23% of patients in the ipilimumab arm. Frequently occurring adverse events (AEs) included fatigue (combination, 59%; ipilimumab alone, 42%), chills (combination, 53%; ipilimumab alone, 3%), and diarrhea (combination, 42%; ipilimumab alone, 35%). Incidence of grade ≥ 3 AEs was 45% and 35%, respectively. Three patients in the combination arm had fatal AEs; none were treatment related. Conclusion The study met its primary end point; the objective response rate was significantly higher with talimogene laherparepvec plus ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone. These data indicate that the combination has greater antitumor activity without additional safety concerns versus ipilimumab.