Second-line therapies for steroid-refractory immune-related adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) induce adverse events (irAEs) that do not respond to steroids, i.e. steroid-refractory (sr) irAEs, and irAEs in which steroids cannot be tapered, i.e. steroid-dependent (sd) irAEs, in about 10% of cases. An evidence-based analysis of the effectiveness of second-line immunosuppressive agents with regard to irAE and tumor control is lacking. METHODS: The international web-based Side Effect Registry Immuno-Oncology (SERIO; http://serio-registry.org) is a collaborative initiative with the Paul-Ehrlich-Institute to document rare, severe, complex or therapy-refractory immunotherapy-induced side effects. The registry was queried on August 1, 2023 for cases of irAEs which were treated with second-line therapies. RESULTS: From a total of 1330 cases, 217 patients (16.3%) received 249 second-line therapies. A total of 19 different second-line therapies were employed, including TNF-alpha antagonists (46.5%), intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG; 19.1%), mycophenolate mofetil (15.9%), and methotrexate (3.6%). Therapy choices were determined by the type of irAE. The time to onset of sr-/sd-irAEs after ICI initiation did not consistently differ from steroid-responsive irAEs. While 74.3% of sr-/sd-irAEs resolved and 13.1% had improved, 4.3% persisted, 3.9% resulted in permanent sequelae, and 4.3% in death with ongoing symptoms. Infliximab exhibited potential for earlier symptom improvement compared to mycophenolate mofetil or IVIG. Tumor response in patients with second-line treated sd-/sr-irAE was similar to patients with irAEs treated with steroids only. CONCLUSION: Several second-line therapies are effective against sr-/sd-irAEs, the second-line therapies show no clear negative impact on tumor response, and infliximab shows potential for faster improvement of symptoms. However, prospective comparative data are needed.

Patterns of care and follow-up care of patients with uveal melanoma in German-speaking countries: a multinational survey of the German Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group (DeCOG).

PURPOSE: Uveal melanoma (UM) is an orphan cancer of high unmet medical need. Current patterns of care and surveillance remain unclear as they are situated in an interdisciplinary setting. METHODS: A questionnaire addressing the patterns of care and surveillance in the management of patients with uveal melanoma was distributed to 70 skin cancer centers in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Frequency distributions of responses for each item of the questionnaire were calculated. RESULTS: 44 of 70 (62.9%) skin cancer centers completed the questionnaire. Thirty-nine hospitals were located in Germany (88.6%), three in Switzerland (6.8%) and two in Austria (4.5%). The majority (68.2%) represented university hospitals. Most patients with metastatic disease were treated in certified skin cancer centers (70.7%, 29/41). Besides, the majority of patients with UM were referred to the respective skin cancer center by ophthalmologists (87.2%, 34/39). Treatment and organization of follow-up of patients varied across the different centers. 35.1% (14/37) of the centers stated to not perform any screening measures. CONCLUSION: Treatment patterns of patients with uveal melanoma in Germany, Austria and Switzerland remain extremely heterogeneous. A guideline for the treatment and surveillance is urgently needed.

Combined immune checkpoint blockade for metastatic uveal melanoma: a retrospective, multi-center study.

BACKGROUND: Uveal melanoma (UM) is highly refractory to treatment with dismal prognosis in advanced stages. The value of the combined checkpoint blockade with CTLA-4 and PD-1 inhibition in metastatic UM is currently unclear. METHODS: Patients with metastatic or unresectable UM treated with ipilimumab in combination with a PD-1 inhibitor were collected from 16 German skin cancer centers. Patient records of 64 cases were analyzed for response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Clinical parameters and serum biomarkers associated with OS and treatment response were determined with Cox regression modelling and logistic regression. RESULTS: The best overall response rate to combined checkpoint blockade was 15.6% with 3.1 and 12.5% complete and partial response, respectively. The median duration of response was 25.5 months (range 9.0-65.0). Stable disease was achieved in 21.9%, resulting in a disease control rate of 37.5% with a median duration of the clinical benefit of 28.0 months (range 7.0-65.0). The median PFS was 3.0 months (95% CI 2.4-3.6). The median OS was estimated to 16.1 months (95% CI 12.9-19.3). Regarding safety, 39.1% of treated patients experienced a severe, treatment-related adverse event according to the CTCAE criteria (grade 3: 37.5%; grade 4: 1.6%). The most common toxicities were colitis (20.3%), hepatitis (20.3%), thyreoiditis (15.6%), and hypophysitis (7.8%). A poor ECOG performance status was an independent risk factor for decreased OS (p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: The tolerability of the combined checkpoint blockade in UM may possibly be better than in trials on cutaneous melanoma. This study implies that combined checkpoint blockade represents the hitherto most effective treatment option available for metastatic UM available outside of clinical trials.

Impact of radiation, systemic therapy and treatment sequencing on survival of patients with melanoma brain metastases.

BACKGROUND: Combining stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and active systemic therapies (STs) achieved favourable survival outcomes in patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) in retrospective analyses. However, several aspects of this treatment strategy remain poorly understood. We report on the overall survival (OS) of patients with MBM treated with a combination of radiotherapy (RT) and ST as well as the impact of the v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B (BRAF)-V600 mutation (BRAFmut) status, types of RT and ST and their sequence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data of 208 patients treated with SRS or whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) and either immunotherapy (IT) or targeted therapy (TT) within a 6-week interval to RT were analysed retrospectively. OS was calculated from RT to death or last follow-up. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses were performed to determine prognostic features associated with OS. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 7.3 months. 139 patients received IT, 67 received TT and 2 received IT and TT within 6 weeks to RT (WBRT 45%; SRS 55%). One-year Kaplan-Meier OS rates were 69%, 65%, 33% and 18% (P < .001) for SRS with IT, SRS with TT, WBRT with IT and WBRT with TT, respectively. Patients with a BRAFmut receiving IT combined with RT experienced higher OS rates (88%, 65%, 50% and 18%). TT following RT or started before and continued thereafter was associated with improved median OS compared with TT solely before RT (12.2 [95% confidence interval {CI} 9.3-15.1]; 9.8 [95% CI 6.9-12.6] versus 5.1 [95% CI 2.7-7.5]; P = .03). CONCLUSION: SRS and IT achieved the highest OS rates. A BRAFmut appears to be a favourable prognostic factor for OS. For the combination of RT and TT, the sequence appears to be crucial. Combinations of WBRT and ST achieved unprecedentedly high OS rates and warrant further studies.