POLARIS: A phase 2 trial of encorafenib plus binimetinib evaluating high-dose and standard-dose regimens in patients with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma with brain metastasis.

Background: POLARIS (phase 2 [ph2]; NCT03911869) evaluated encorafenib (BRAF inhibitor) in combination with binimetinib (MEK1/2 inhibitor) in BRAF/MEK inhibitor-naïve patients with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma with asymptomatic brain metastases. Methods: The safety lead-in (SLI) assessed tolerability for high-dose encorafenib 300 mg twice daily (BID) plus binimetinib 45 mg BID. If the high dose was tolerable in ph2, patients would be randomized to receive high or standard dose (encorafenib 450 mg once daily [QD] plus binimetinib 45 mg BID). Otherwise, standard dose was evaluated as the recommended ph2 dose (RP2D). Patients who tolerated standard dosing during Cycle 1 could be dose escalated to encorafenib 600 mg QD plus binimetinib 45 mg BID in Cycle 2. Safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics were examined. Results: RP2D was standard encorafenib dosing, as >33% of evaluable SLI patients (3/9) had dose-limiting toxicities. Overall, of 13 safety-evaluable patients (10 SLI, 3 ph2), 9 had prior immunotherapy. There were 9 treatment-related adverse events in the SLI and 3 in ph2. Of the SLI efficacy-evaluable patients (n = 10), 1 achieved complete response and 5 achieved partial responses (PR); the brain metastasis response rate (BMRR) was 60% (95% CI: 26.2, 87.8). In ph2, 2 of 3 patients achieved PR (BMRR, 67% [95% CI: 9.4, 99.2]). Repeated encorafenib 300 mg BID dosing did not increase steady-state exposure compared with historical 450 mg QD data. Conclusions: Despite small patient numbers due to early trial termination, BMRR appeared similar between the SLI and ph2, and the ph2 safety profile appeared consistent with previous reports of standard-dose encorafenib in combination with binimetinib.

Targeted DNA Sequencing of Cutaneous Melanoma Identifies Prognostic and Predictive Alterations.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous melanoma (CM) can be molecularly classified into four groups: BRAF mutant, NRAS mutant, NF1 mutant and triple wild-type (TWT) tumors lacking any of these three alterations. In the era of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) and targeted molecular therapy, the clinical significance of these groups remains unclear. Here, we integrate targeted DNA sequencing with comprehensive clinical follow-up in CM patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study that assessed clinical and molecular features from patients with localized or metastatic CM who underwent targeted next-generation sequencing as part of routine clinical care. A total of 254 patients with CM who had a CLIA-certified targeted sequencing assay performed on their tumor tissue were included. RESULTS: Of the 254 patients with cutaneous melanoma, 77 were BRAF mutant (30.3%), 77 were NRAS mutant (30.3%), 47 were NF1 mutant (18.5%), 33 were TWT (13.0%) and the remaining 20 (7.9%) carried mutations in multiple driver genes (BRAF/NRAS/NF1 co-mutated). The majority of this co-mutation group carried mutations in NF1 (n = 19 or 90%) with co-occurring mutations in BRAF or NRAS, often with a weaker oncogenic variant. Consistently, NF1 mutant tumors harbored numerous significantly co-altered genes compared to BRAF or NRAS mutant tumors. The majority of TWT tumors (n = 29, 87.9%) harbor a pathogenic mutation within a known Ras/MAPK signaling pathway component. Of the 154 cases with available TMB data, the median TMB was 20 (range 0.7-266 mutations/Mb). A total of 14 cases (9.1%) were classified as having a low TMB (≤5 mutations/Mb), 64 of 154 (41.6%) had an intermediate TMB (>5 and ≤20 mutations/Mb), 40 of 154 (26.0%) had a high TMB (>20 and ≤50 mutations/Mb) and 36 of 154 (23.4%) were classified as having a very high TMB (>50 mutations/Mb). NRAS mutant melanoma demonstrated significantly decreased overall survival on multivariable analysis (HR for death 2.95, 95% CI 1.13-7.69, p = 0.027, log-rank test) compared with other TCGA molecular subgroups. Of the 116 patients in our cohort with available treatment data, 36 received a combination of dual ICI with anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1 inhibition as first-line therapy. Elevated TMB was associated with significantly longer progression-free survival following dual-agent ICI (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.90, p = 0.033, log-rank test). CONCLUSIONS: NRAS mutation in CMs correlated with significantly worse overall survival. Elevated TMB was associated with increased progression-free survival for patients treated with a combination of dual ICI, supporting the potential utility of TMB as a predictive biomarker for ICI response in melanoma.

Metastatic melanoma to small bowel: metastasectomy is supported in the era of immunotherapy and checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic melanoma to the small bowel is an aggressive disease often accompanied by obstruction, abdominal pain, and gastrointestinal bleeding. With advancements in melanoma treatment, the role for metastasectomy continues to evolve. Inclusion of novel immunotherapeutic agents, such as checkpoint inhibitors, into standard treatment regimens presents potential survival benefits for patients receiving metastasectomy. CASE PRESENTATION: We report an institutional experience of 15 patients (12 male, 3 female) between 2014-2022 that underwent small bowel metastasectomy for metastatic melanoma and received perioperative systemic treatment. Median age of patients was 64 years (range: 35-83 years). No patients died within 30 days of their surgery, and the median hospital length of stay was 5 days. Median overall survival in these patients was 30.1 months (range: 2-115 months). Five patients died from disease (67 days, 252 days, 426 days, 572 days, 692 days postoperatively), one patient died of non-disease related causes (1312 days postoperatively), six patients are alive with disease, and three remain disease free. CONCLUSIONS: This case series presents an updated perspective of the utility of metastasectomy for small bowel metastasis in the age of novel immunotherapeutic agents as standard systemic treatment. Small bowel metastasectomy for advanced melanoma performed in conjunction with perioperative systemic therapy is safe and appears to promote long-term survival and enhanced quality of life.

Risk Factors for a Higher Symptom Burden in Patients With Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate for subgroups of patients with distinct symptom profiles and differences in demographic and clinical characteristics and stress and resilience among these subgroups. SAMPLE & SETTING: 1,145 patients with cancer aged 18 years or older completed a survey online. Data were collected between May 2020 and February 2021. METHODS & VARIABLES: Patients completed measures for depression, state anxiety, cognitive function, morning fatigue, evening fatigue, morning energy, evening energy, sleep disturbance, pain, stress, and resilience. Latent class profile analysis was used to identify subgroups of patients with distinct symptom profiles. Differences among the subgroups on study measures were evaluated using parametric and nonparametric tests. RESULTS: Four distinct profiles were identified (none, low, high, and very high). Patients in the high and very high classes reported clinically meaningful levels of all nine symptoms. Differences among the four profiles for stress and resilience exhibited a dose-response effect. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Findings can serve as benchmark data of the symptom burden of patients with cancer following the COVID-19 pandemic.

Systemic Therapy for Melanoma: ASCO Guideline Update.

PURPOSE: To provide guidance to clinicians regarding the use of systemic therapy for melanoma. METHODS: American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel and conducted an updated systematic review of the literature. RESULTS: The updated review identified 21 additional randomized trials. UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS: Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab was newly recommended for patients with resectable stage IIIB to IV cutaneous melanoma. For patients with resected cutaneous melanoma, adjuvant nivolumab or pembrolizumab was newly recommended for stage IIB-C disease and adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab was added as a potential option for stage IV disease. For patients with unresectable or metastatic cutaneous melanoma, nivolumab plus relatlimab was added as a potential option regardless of BRAF mutation status and nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab was preferred over BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy. Talimogene laherparepvec is no longer recommended as an option for patients with BRAF wild-type disease who have progressed on anti-PD-1 therapy. Ipilimumab- and ipilimumab-containing regimens are no longer recommended for patients with BRAF-mutated disease after progression on other therapies.This full update incorporates the new recommendations for uveal melanoma published in the 2022 Rapid Recommendation Update.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/melanoma-guidelines.

Mutational Status and Clinical Outcomes Following Systemic Therapy with or without Focal Radiation for Resected Melanoma Brain Metastases.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases occur frequently in advanced melanoma and traditionally require surgery and radiation therapy. New evidence demonstrates that systemic therapies are effective for controlling metastatic melanoma brain metastases. This study evaluated outcomes after resection of melanoma brain metastases treated with systemic therapy, with or without focal radiotherapy. METHODS: All patients received immunotherapy or BRAF/MEK inhibitors preoperatively or in the immediate 3 months postoperatively. Resection cavity failure, distant central nervous system progression, and adverse radiation effects were reported in the presence and absence of focal radiotherapy using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2020, 37 resection cavities in 29 patients met criteria for analysis. Of lesions, 22 (59%) were treated with focal radiotherapy, and 15 (41%) were treated with targeted therapy or immunotherapy alone. The 12- and 24-month freedom from local recurrence was 64.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 42.1%-99.8%) and 46.3% (95% CI 24.5%-87.5%), respectively, for systemic therapy alone and 93.3% (95% CI 81.5%-100%) at both time points for focal radiotherapy (P = 0.01). On univariate analysis, focal radiotherapy was the only significant factor associated with reduction of local recurrence risk (hazard ratio 0.10, 95% CI 0.01-0.85; P = 0.04). There were no significant differences in central nervous system progression-free survival or overall survival between patients who received systemic therapy plus focal radiotherapy compared with systemic therapy alone. BRAF mutation status was reviewed for either the brain metastasis (n = 9 patients, 31%) or the primary site (n = 20 patients, 69%), and patients harboring BRAFV600E mutations had worse progression-free survival (P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Focal radiotherapy with systemic therapy for resected melanoma brain metastases significantly decreased resection cavity recurrence compared with systemic therapy alone. BRAF mutation status correlated with poorer outcomes.

Re-induction ipilimumab following acquired resistance to combination ipilimumab and anti-PD-1 therapy.

PURPOSE: Combination immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab has a high initial response rate in advanced melanoma; however, up to 55% of patients later progress. The efficacy and safety of ipilimumab re-induction in the setting of acquired resistance (AR) to combination immunotherapy is unknown. METHODS: Patients with advanced melanoma who initially achieved a complete response, partial response or sustained stable disease to induction combination immunotherapy then progressed and were reinduced with ipilimumab (alone or in combination with anti-PD-1) and were analysed retrospectively. Demographics, disease characteristics, efficacy and toxicity were examined. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were identified from 12 centres. The response rate to reinduction therapy was 12/47 (26%), and disease control rate was 21/47 (45%). Responses appeared more frequent in patients who developed AR after ceasing induction immunotherapy (30% vs. 18%, P = 0.655). Time to AR was 11 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8-15 months). After a median follow-up of 16 months (95% CI, 10-25 months), responders to reinduction had a median progression-free survival of 14 months (95% CI, 13, NR months), and in the whole cohort, the median overall survival from reinduction was 17 months (95% CI, 12-NR months). Twenty-seven (58%) immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were reported; 18 (38%) were grade 3/4, and in 11 of 27 (40%), the same irAE observed during induction therapy recurred. CONCLUSIONS: Reinduction with ipilimumab ± anti-PD-1 has modest clinical activity. Clinicians should be attentive to the risk of irAEs, including recurrence of irAEs that occurred during induction therapy. Future studies are necessary to determine best management after resistance to combination immunotherapy.

Mechanisms of Cardiovascular Toxicities Associated With Immunotherapies.

Immune-based therapies have revolutionized cancer treatments. Cardiovascular sequelae from these treatments, however, have emerged as critical complications, representing new challenges in cardio-oncology. Immune therapies include a broad range of novel drugs, from antibodies and other biologics, including immune checkpoint inhibitors and bispecific T-cell engagers, to cell-based therapies, such as chimeric-antigen receptor T-cell therapies. The recognition of immunotherapy-associated cardiovascular side effects has also catapulted new research questions revolving around the interactions between the immune and cardiovascular systems, and the signaling cascades affected by T cell activation, cytokine release, and immune system dysregulation. Here, we review the specific mechanisms of immune activation from immunotherapies and the resulting cardiovascular toxicities associated with immune activation and excess cytokine production.

Loneliness and symptom burden in oncology patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Loneliness and social isolation are significant public health problems that are being exacerbated during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Little is known about the associations between loneliness and symptom burden in oncology patients before and during the pandemic. Study purposes include determining the prevalence of loneliness in a sample of oncology patients; evaluating for differences in demographic, clinical, and symptom characteristics between lonely and nonlonely patients; and determining which demographic, clinical, and symptom characteristics were associated with membership in the lonely group. METHODS: A convenience sample (n = 606) completed online surveys that evaluated the severity of loneliness, social isolation, and common symptoms (ie, anxiety, depression, fatigue, sleep disturbance, cognitive dysfunction, and pain) in oncology patients. Parametric and nonparametric tests were used to evaluate for differences in scores between the lonely and nonlonely groups. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine risk factors for membership in the loneliness group. RESULTS: Of the 606 patients, 53.0% were categorized in the lonely group. The lonely group reported higher levels of social isolation, as well as higher symptom severity scores for all of the symptoms evaluated. In the multivariate model, being unmarried, having higher levels of social isolation, as well as higher levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms were associated with membership in the lonely group. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings suggest that a significant number of oncology patients are experiencing loneliness, most likely as a result of mandate social distancing and isolation procedures. The symptom burden of these patients is extremely high and warrants clinical evaluation and interventions.

Mechanisms and clinical manifestations of cardiovascular toxicities associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Immunotherapies have greatly expanded the armamentarium of cancer-directed therapies in the past decade, allowing the immune system to recognize and fight cancer. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), in particular, have revolutionized cancer treatment and have demonstrated survival benefit in numerous types of cancer. These monoclonal antibodies increase anti-cancer immunity by blocking down-regulators of adaptive immunity, including cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), and its ligand (PD-L1), resulting in anti-tumor activity. As ICIs increase immune system activation, they can cause a wide range of inflammatory side effects, termed immune-released adverse events. Though these toxicities can affect nearly any organ, the most fatal toxicity is myocarditis. Here, we discuss the diverse spectrum of cardiovascular toxicities associated with ICI use. In addition, we provide insight and future directions on mechanisms and treatments for immune-related adverse events (irAEs) involving the myocardium, pericardium, vasculature, and conduction system.

Single-cell analyses identify circulating anti-tumor CD8 T cells and markers for their enrichment.

The ability to monitor anti-tumor CD8+ T cell responses in the blood has tremendous therapeutic potential. Here, we used paired single-cell RNA and TCR sequencing to detect and characterize "tumor-matching" (TM) CD8+ T cells in the blood of mice with MC38 tumors or melanoma patients using the TCR as a molecular barcode. TM cells showed increased activation compared with nonmatching T cells in blood and were less exhausted than matching cells in tumors. Importantly, PD-1, which has been used to identify putative circulating anti-tumor CD8+ T cells, showed poor sensitivity for identifying TM cells. By leveraging the transcriptome, we identified candidate cell surface markers for TM cells in mice and patients and validated NKG2D, CD39, and CX3CR1 in mice. These data show that the TCR can be used to identify tumor-relevant cells for characterization, reveal unique transcriptional properties of TM cells, and develop marker panels for tracking and analysis of these cells.

Oncology patients' perceptions of and experiences with COVID-19.

PURPOSE: No information is available on cancer patients' knowledge of and experiences with COVID-19. We undertook an evaluation of differences in COVID-19 symptom occurrence rates, COVID-19 testing rates, clinical care activities, knowledge of COVID-19, and use of mitigation procedures between patients who were and were not receiving active cancer treatment. METHODS: Patients enrolled were > 18 years of age; had a diagnosis of cancer; and were able to complete the emailed study survey online. RESULTS: Of the 174 patients who participated, 27.6% (n = 48) were receiving active treatment, 13.6% were unemployed because of COVID-19, 12.2% had been tested for COVID-19, and 0.6% had been hospitalized for COVID-19. Patients who were not on active treatment reported a higher mean number of COVID-19 symptoms (3.1 (± 4.2) versus 1.9 (± 2.6)), and patients who reported a higher number of COVID-19 symptoms were more likely to be tested. Over 55% of the patients were confident that their primary care provider could diagnose COVID-19, and the majority of the patients had high levels of adherence with the use of precautionary measures (e.g., social distancing, use of face coverings). CONCLUSION: The high level of COVID-19 symptoms and the significant overlap of COVID-19 and cancer-related symptoms pose challenges for clinicians who are assessing and triaging oncology patients for COVID-19 testing. For patients on active treatment, clinicians face challenges with how to assess and manage symptoms that, prior to COVID-19, would be ascribed to acute toxicities associated with cancer treatments or persistent symptoms in cancer survivors.

Multidisciplinary Management of Cancer During Pregnancy.

Cancer during pregnancy is relatively rare but is increasing in frequency in countries in which the maternal child-bearing age continues to rise. The complexities of medical decision making are underscored by the need to weigh the potential benefits of any intervention for the mother against the risks to the fetus. A majority of diagnostic evaluations can be performed safely in the setting of pregnancy and should not be delayed. Noninvasive prenatal testing that shows discordance with fetal karyotype can be a clue to an underlying maternal malignancy. After diagnosis, a multidisciplinary team should formulate a care plan for both the mother and the fetus. Key topics for discussion should include the mother's prognosis, standard treatment plan, and predictions of how modifications for a continuing pregnancy will affect the treatment plan and overall prognosis. In the context of this knowledge, frank discussions about pregnancy termination should be addressed with the patient, if appropriate. Selection of a plan for oncologic management in the case of a pregnant woman is based on the type of cancer, the tumor biology, and the tumor stage. Additional complexities for pregnant patients are typically related to the gestational age of the fetus, the dynamic physiologic changes of pregnancy, and the limited safety data for administration of most anticancer therapies during pregnancy. In this article, we summarize data related to different classes of anticancer therapies as well as considerations for the management of selected cancers. Finally, we provide some key principles that should be considered in the management of patients with cancer during pregnancy.

Tumor Immune Profiling-Based Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy for Locally Advanced Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of "exhausted" or checkpoint-positive (PD-1+CTLA-4+) cytotoxic lymphocytes (Tex) in the tumor microenvironment is associated with response to anti-PD-1 therapy in metastatic melanoma. The current study determined whether pretreatment Tex cells in locally advanced melanoma predicted response to neoadjuvant anti-PD-1 blockade. METHODS: Pretreatment tumor samples from 17 patients with locally advanced melanoma underwent flow cytometric analysis of pretreatment Tex and regulatory T cell frequency. Patients who met the criteria for neoadjuvant checkpoint blockade were treated with either PD-1 monotherapy or PD-1/CTLA-4 combination therapy. Best overall response was evaluated by response evaluation criteria in solid tumors version 1.1, with recurrence-free survival (RFS) calculated by the Kaplan-Meier test. The incidence and severity of adverse events were tabulated by clinicians using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4. RESULTS: Of the neoadjuvant treated patients, 10 received anti-PD-1 monotherapy and 7 received anti-CTLA-4/PD-1 combination therapy. Of these 17 patients, 12 achieved a complete response, 4 achieved partial responses, and 1 exhibited stable disease. Surgery was subsequently performed for 11 of the 17 patients, and 8 attained a complete pathologic response. Median RFS and overall survival (OS) were not reached. Immune-related adverse events comprised four grade 3 or 4 events, including pneumonitis, transaminitis, and anaphylaxis. CONCLUSION: The results showed high rates of objective response, RFS, and OS for patients undergoing immune profile-directed neoadjuvant immunotherapy for locally advanced melanoma. Furthermore, the study showed that treatment stratification based upon Tex frequency can potentially limit the adverse events associated with combination immunotherapy. These data merit further investigation with a larger validation study.

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.

Systemic Therapy for Melanoma: ASCO Guideline.

PURPOSE: To provide guidance to clinicians regarding the use of systemic therapy for melanoma. METHODS: ASCO convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the literature. RESULTS: A systematic review, one meta-analysis, and 34 additional randomized trials were identified. The published studies included a wide range of systemic therapies in cutaneous and noncutaneous melanoma. RECOMMENDATIONS: In the adjuvant setting, nivolumab or pembrolizumab should be offered to patients with resected stage IIIA/B/C/D BRAF wild-type cutaneous melanoma, while either of those two agents or the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib should be offered in BRAF-mutant disease. No recommendation could be made for or against the use of neoadjuvant therapy in cutaneous melanoma. In the unresectable/metastatic setting, ipilimumab plus nivolumab, nivolumab alone, or pembrolizumab alone should be offered to patients with BRAF wild-type cutaneous melanoma, while those three regimens or combination BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy with dabrafenib/trametinib, encorafenib/binimetinib, or vemurafenib/cobimetinib should be offered in BRAF-mutant disease. Patients with mucosal melanoma may be offered the same therapies recommended for cutaneous melanoma. No recommendation could be made for or against specific therapy for uveal melanoma. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/melanoma-guidelines.

Intratumoral Plasmid IL12 Electroporation Therapy in Patients with Advanced Melanoma Induces Systemic and Intratumoral T-cell Responses.

Whereas systemic IL12 is associated with potentially life-threatening toxicity, intratumoral delivery of IL12 through tavokinogene telseplasmid electroporation (tavo) is safe and can induce tumor regression at distant sites. The mechanism by which these responses are mediated is unknown but is presumed to result from a cellular immune response. In a phase II clinical trial of tavo (NCT01502293), samples from 29 patients with cutaneous melanoma with in-transit disease were assessed for immune responses induced with this treatment. Within the blood circulating immune cell population, we found that the frequencies of circulating PD-1+ CD4+ and CD8+ T cells declined with treatment. Circulating immune responses to gp100 were also detected following treatment as measured by IFNγ ELISpot. Patients with a greater antigen-specific circulating immune response also had higher numbers of CD8+ T cells within the tumor. Clinical response was also associated with increased intratumoral CD3+ T cells. Finally, intratumoral T-cell clonality and convergence were increased after treatment, indicating a focusing of the T-cell receptor repertoire. These results indicated that local treatment with tavo can induce a systemic T-cell response and recruit T cells to the tumor microenvironment.

PTCH1 Mutation in a Patient With Metastatic Undifferentiated Carcinoma With Clear Cell Change.

Clear cell basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is an unusual variant of BCC. Its pathogenesis, prognosis, and optimal management remain poorly described due to its rarity. This report presents a 51-year-old man with a history of excised BCC and cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas of the face, with multiple recurrent poorly differentiated carcinomas with clear cell changes of the shoulder for which further classification using conventional histologic means was not possible. His tumor tissue was sent to Foundation Medicine for testing, which revealed a high number of pathogenic genomic alterations, including a mutation in PTCH1. He was diagnosed with dedifferentiated BCC and started on vismodegib. He developed lung metastases while receiving vismodegib, and his disease continued to progress while he was undergoing treatment in a phase I clinical trial. Given the high number of pathogenic alterations suggestive of high tumor mutational burden, immunotherapy was considered and off-label authorization was obtained for treatment with a PD-1 antibody (pembrolizumab). He had a dramatic disease response after 4 infusions of pembrolizumab. Molecular testing was instrumental in determining the correct diagnosis and formulating appropriate treatment options for this patient. Molecular profiling of metastatic BCCs and its subtypes is essential to the development of effective targeted therapies and combination approaches.

Systemic therapy for advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.

The incidence of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is increasing; of the 1.3 million nonmelanoma skin cancers that arise each year, approximately 20% are cSCC, and between 2-5% of these cases ultimately metastasize. However, there is no established consensus on first-line systemic treatment for those patients who have locally advanced or metastatic disease. Major classes of systemic agents include chemotherapy, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted therapy, and immunotherapy; each is associated with a distinct set of adverse effects, and availability of data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to definitively guide treatment are limited. While several chemotherapeutic agents have been described in case studies or small patient cohorts, only one RCT has been conducted, demonstrating a 34% overall response rate for a cisplatin-based regimen. EGFR-inhibitors evaluated for use in cSCC by RCT include cetuximab, panitumumab, and gefitinib; response rates ranged from 15-31% for these agents. Inhibitors of the immune checkpoint programmed death-1 (PD-1) have yielded promising outcomes in advanced cSCC; indeed, the PD-1 inhibitor cemiplimab recently received FDA approval for use in advanced cSCC. Despite these advances, the preferred regimen for systemic treatment of cSCC remains unclear, particularly in immunocompromised populations. Herein we provide a review of the literature supporting the use of these modalities and a discussion of their clinical utility.

Clonal Deletion of Tumor-Specific T Cells by Interferon-γ Confers Therapeutic Resistance to Combination Immune Checkpoint Blockade.

Resistance to checkpoint-blockade treatments is a challenge in the clinic. We found that although treatment with combined anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 improved control of established tumors, this combination compromised anti-tumor immunity in the low tumor burden (LTB) state in pre-clinical models as well as in melanoma patients. Activated tumor-specific T cells expressed higher amounts of interferon-γ (IFN-γ) receptor and were more susceptible to apoptosis than naive T cells. Combination treatment induced deletion of tumor-specific T cells and altered the T cell repertoire landscape, skewing the distribution of T cells toward lower-frequency clonotypes. Additionally, combination therapy induced higher IFN-γ production in the LTB state than in the high tumor burden (HTB) state on a per-cell basis, reflecting a less exhausted immune status in the LTB state. Thus, elevated IFN-γ secretion in the LTB state contributes to the development of an immune-intrinsic mechanism of resistance to combination checkpoint blockade, highlighting the importance of achieving the optimal magnitude of immune stimulation for successful combination immunotherapy strategies.