Histopathologic regression in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy is associated with favorable survival and, after metastasis, with improved progression-free survival on immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy: A single-institutional cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Histopathologic regression of cutaneous melanoma is considered a favorable prognostic factor, but its significance in clinical practice remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prognostic importance of regression in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma undergoing sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy and to assess its significance in patients progressing to an unresectable stage requiring systemic therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with newly diagnosed melanoma undergoing SLN biopsy between 2010 and 2015 and available information on histopathologic regression (n = 1179). Survival data and associations of clinical variables with SLN status were assessed. RESULTS: Patients with regressive melanoma showed favorable relapse-free (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; P = .00013), distant metastasis-free (HR, 0.56; P = .0020), and melanoma-specific survival (HR, 0.35; P = .00053). Regression was associated with negative SLN (odds ratio, 0.48; P = .0077). In patients who progressed to an unresectable stage, regression was associated with favorable progression-free survival under immune checkpoint inhibition (HR, 0.43; P = .031) but not under targeted therapy (HR, 1.14; P = .73) or chemotherapy (HR, 3.65; P = .0095). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective, single-institutional design. CONCLUSIONS: Regression of cutaneous melanoma is associated with improved prognosis in patients eligible for SLN biopsy as well as in patients with unresectable disease receiving systemic therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy for lentigo maligna melanoma under local anaesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Lentigo maligna melanoma is mainly localized in the head and neck region in elderly patients. Due to its slow horizontal growth, it has a good prognosis compared to other melanoma subtypes, but specific data are rare. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate sentinel lymph node biopsy in lentigo maligna melanoma under local anaesthesia and to discuss the benefit. METHODS: Investigation of patients with lentigo maligna melanoma and tumour thickness ≥1 mm treated at the Department of Dermatology, University Medical Centre Tuebingen, between January 2008 and October 2019. RESULTS: In total, 204 patients (126 SLNB, 78 non-SLNB) with a median age of 75.7 years (SLNB: 73.3 years, non-SLNB: 79.7 years) could be included. Sixteen of 126 (12.7%) sentinel lymph nodes were positive. Five-year overall survival was 87.9% (88.5% SLNB; 87.4% non-SLNB) and 5-year distant metastasis-free survival was 85.8% (85.4% SLNB; 86.7% non-SLNB). There was no significant difference for distant metastasis-free survival (p = 0.861) and overall survival (p = 0.247) between patients with and without sentinel lymph node biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Sentinel lymph node biopsy in lentigo maligna melanoma under local anaesthesia is a safe and simple method, even in very old patients. However, LMM has a very good 5-year overall survival. In high-risk patients with high tumour thickness and/or ulceration, adjuvant immunotherapy can now be offered without the need to perform this procedure.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy is unreliable in predicting melanoma mortality for both younger and older patients.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma disease patterns vary with patient age. AIM: To evaluate sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in managing melanoma at differing patient ages. METHODS: Online prediction tools were applied to compare SLNB positivity (SLNB+) and survival risk at patient ages 20-80. Tübingen melanoma data were used to determine variations in the hazard ratio of SLNB+ for mortality at different patient ages. RESULTS: Regardless of tumour thickness, predicted SLNB+ rates were markedly higher than mortality rates for 20-year-old patients. For 80-year-old patients, it is the opposite. DISCUSSION: If 1000 20-year-olds with a 0.4 mm thickness non-ulcerated melanoma underwent SLNB, 100 would likely be positive. If all 100 were to be offered adjuvant drug therapy (ADT), fewer than three more melanoma deaths in those 1000 patients would be avoided. In total, 97 patients would have received medication they may never have needed. If 1000 80-year-olds with a 3 mm thickness non-ulcerated melanoma underwent SLNB, only 40 would likely be positive. In total, 274 patients would be predicted to die of melanoma, 245 being SLNB negative and 29 SLNB+. ADT linked to SLNB+ could deny treatment to 89% of these high-risk patients. LIMITATIONS: The authors relied on published risk data. CONCLUSION: SLNB has poor specificity at predicting mortality in young melanoma patients and poor sensitivity in older patients. SLNB is not indicated in managing cutaneous melanoma for patients under 40 or over 60 years of age. Many such patients could be managed with wide local excision alone in their clinician's office-based practice. For all cutaneous melanoma patients at all ages, linking ADT to BAUSSS biomarker, (an algorithm of Breslow thickness, age, ulceration, subtype, sex and Site) rather than SLNB+ is likely more appropriate. BAUSSS provides a more accurate melanoma-specific mortality risk assessment for patients without burdening them with added surgery, hospitalization, costs or morbidity risk.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for diagnosis, treatment and prevention of actinic keratoses, epithelial UV-induced dysplasia and field cancerization on behalf of European Association of Dermato-Oncology, European Dermatology Forum, European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology and Union of Medical Specialists (Union Européenne des Médecins Spécialistes).

A collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Association of Dermato-Oncology, the European Dermatology Forum, the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, and the European Union of Medical Specialists was formed to develop European recommendations on AK diagnosis and treatment, based on current literature and expert consensus. This guideline addresses the epidemiology, diagnostics, risk stratification and treatments in immunocompetent as well as immunosuppressed patients. Actinic keratoses (AK) are potential precursors of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) and display typical histopathologic and immunohistochemical features of this malignancy in an early stage. They can develop into cSSC in situ and become invasive in a low percentage of cases. AK is the most frequent neoplasia in white populations, frequently occurring within a cancerous field induced by ultraviolet radiation. Since it cannot be predicted, which lesion will progress to cSCC and when treatment is usually recommended. The diagnosis of AK and field cancerization is made by clinical examination. Dermatoscopy, confocal microscopy, optical coherence tomography or line-field confocal-OCT can help in the differential diagnosis of AK and other skin neoplasms. A biopsy is indicated in clinically and/or dermatoscopically suspicious and/or treatment-refractory lesions. The choice of treatment depends on patients' and lesion characteristics. For single non-hyperkeratotic lesions, the treatment can be started upon patient's request with destructive treatments or topical treatments. For multiple lesions, field cancerization treatment is advised with topical treatments and photodynamic therapy. Preventive measures such as sun protection, self-examination and repeated field cancerization treatments of previously affected skin areas in high-risk patients are advised.

Tumescent local anesthesia in geriatric patients with head and neck skin cancer - a retrospective study of 782 patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Due to frailty, dermatosurgery in the elderly is preferably performed under tumescent local anesthesia, but data is limited. The aim was to evaluate tumescent local anesthesia for skin cancer surgery in the elderly with focus on clinical benefits (treatment processes, pain management) and local postoperative complication risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Investigation of patients ≥ 75 years with inpatient head and neck skin cancer surgery under tumescent local anesthesia. RESULTS: 2,940 procedures in 782 patients (mean age 83.3 years) were performed with the aim of complete tumor resection during the inpatient stay. 3.8 (range: 1-20) interventions were done over an average of 4.9 days (range: 1-28). 43.2% did not require any postoperative analgesia. 53.5% received NSAIDs, 3.3% opioids. Infection (13.6%) was the most common local postoperative complication. Surgical intervention due to bleeding was required in 2.8%. None was hemoglobin relevant or life-threatening. Suture dehiscence and necrosis were rare (0.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Tumescent local anesthesia is an effective method for skin cancer surgery in the elderly. By avoiding general anesthesia, treatment processes can be optimized and anesthesiologic risks minimized. Local postoperative complications are still low and well treatable. The long-lasting analgesia results in a reduced need for analgesics and drug interactions.

Adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone versus placebo in patients with resected stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease (IMMUNED): final results of a randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The IMMUNED trial previously showed significant improvements in recurrence-free survival for adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab as well as for adjuvant nivolumab alone in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after resection or radiotherapy. Here, we report the final analysis, including overall survival data. METHODS: IMMUNED was an investigator-sponsored, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-arm, phase 2 trial conducted in 20 academic medical centres in Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18-80 years with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after surgery or radiotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to either nivolumab plus ipilimumab (nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks), nivolumab monotherapy (nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks), or matching placebo, for up to 1 year. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints were time-to-recurrence, overall survival, progression-free survival or recurrence-free survival 2 (in patients in the placebo group who crossed over to nivolumab monotherapy after experiencing disease recurrence), and safety endpoints. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02523313), and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 2, 2015, and Nov 20, 2018, 175 patients were enrolled in the study, and 167 were randomly assigned to receive either nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=56), nivolumab plus ipilimumab-matching placebo (n=59), or double placebo control (n=52). At a median follow-up of 49·2 months (IQR 34·9-58·1), 4-year recurrence-free survival was 64·2% (95% CI 49·2-75·9) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 31·4% (19·7-43·8) in the nivolumab alone group, and 15·0% (6·7-26·6) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence for the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo was 0·25 (97·5% CI 0·13-0·48; p<0·0001), and for the nivolumab group versus placebo was 0·60 (0·36-1·00; p=0·024). Median overall survival was not reached in any treatment group. The HR for overall survival was significantly in favour of the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo (HR 0·41; 95% CI 0·17-0·99; p=0·040), but not for the nivolumab group versus placebo (HR 0·75; 0·36-1·56; p=0·44). 4-year overall survival was 83·8% (95% CI 68·8-91·9) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 72·6% (57·4-83·2) in the nivolumab alone group, and 63·1% (46·9-75·6) in the placebo group. The median progression-free survival or recurrence-free survival 2 of patients in the placebo group who crossed over to nivolumab monotherapy after experiencing disease recurrence was not reached (95% CI 21·2 months to not reached). Rates of grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events remained largely unchanged compared with our previous report, occurring in 71% (95% CI 57-82) of the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, and 29% (95% CI 17-42) of patients receiving nivolumab alone. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: Both active regimens continued to show significantly improved recurrence-free survival compared with placebo in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease who were at high risk of recurrence. Overall survival was significantly improved for patients receiving nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared with placebo. Use of subsequent anti-PD-1-based therapy was high in patients in the placebo group after recurrence and most likely impacted the overall survival comparison of nivolumab alone versus placebo. The recurrence-free and overall survival benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab over placebo reinforces the change of practice already initiated for the treatment of patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

The "Great Debate" at Melanoma Bridge 2022, Naples, December 1st-3rd, 2022.

The Great Debate session at the 2022 Melanoma Bridge congress (December 1-3) featured counterpoint views from leading experts on five contemporary topics of debate in the management of melanoma. The debates considered the choice of anti-lymphocyte-activation gene (LAG)-3 therapy or ipilimumab in combination with anti-programmed death (PD)-1 therapy, whether anti-PD-1 monotherapy is still acceptable as a comparator arm in clinical trials, whether adjuvant treatment of melanoma is still a useful treatment option, the role of adjuvant therapy in stage II melanoma, what role surgery will continue to have in the treatment of melanoma. As is customary in the Melanoma Bridge Great Debates, the speakers are invited by the meeting Chairs to express one side of the assigned debate and the opinions given may not fully reflect personal views. Audiences voted in favour of either side of the argument both before and after each debate.

Perspectives in Melanoma: meeting report from the Melanoma Bridge (December 1st-3rd, 2022-Naples, Italy).

Outcomes for patients with melanoma have improved over the past decade with the clinical development and approval of immunotherapies targeting immune checkpoint receptors such as programmed death-1 (PD-1), programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) or cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4). Combinations of these checkpoint therapies with other agents are now being explored to improve outcomes and enhance benefit-risk profiles of treatment. Alternative inhibitory receptors have been identified that may be targeted for anti-tumor immune therapy, such as lymphocyte-activation gene-3 (LAG-3), as have several potential target oncogenes for molecularly targeted therapy, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Unfortunately, many patients still progress and acquire resistance to immunotherapy and molecularly targeted therapies. To bypass resistance, combination treatment with immunotherapies and single or multiple TKIs have been shown to improve prognosis compared to monotherapy. The number of new combinations treatment under development for melanoma provides options for the number of patients to achieve a therapeutic benefit. Many diagnostic and prognostic assays have begun to show clinical applicability providing additional tools to optimize and individualize treatments. However, the question on the optimal algorithm of first- and later-line therapies and the search for biomarkers to guide these decisions are still under investigation. This year, the Melanoma Bridge Congress (Dec 1st-3rd, 2022, Naples, Italy) addressed the latest advances in melanoma research, focusing on themes of paramount importance for melanoma prevention, diagnosis and treatment. This included sessions dedicated to systems biology on immunotherapy, immunogenicity and gene expression profiling, biomarkers, and combination treatment strategies.

COLUMBUS 5-year update: a randomized, open-label, phase III trial of encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib or encorafenib in patients with BRAF.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: Here, we summarize the 5-year results from part 1 of the COLUMBUS clinical study, which looked at the combination treatment of encorafenib plus binimetinib in people with a specific type of skin cancer called melanoma. Encorafenib (BRAFTOVI®) and binimetinib (MEKTOVI®) are medicines used to treat a type of melanoma that has a change in the BRAF gene, called advanced or metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma. Participants with advanced or metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma took either encorafenib plus binimetinib together (COMBO group), compared with encorafenib alone (ENCO group) or vemurafenib (ZELBORAF®) alone (VEMU group). WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: In this 5-year update, more participants in the COMBO group were alive for longer without their disease getting worse after 5 years than those in the VEMU and ENCO groups. Patients in the COMBO group were alive for longer without their disease getting worse when they: Had less advanced cancer Were able to do more daily activities Had normal lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels Had fewer organs with tumors before treatment After treatment, fewer participants in the COMBO group received additional anticancer treatment than participants in the VEMU and ENCO groups. The number of participants who reported severe side effects was similar for each treatment. The side effects caused by the drugs in the COMBO group decreased over time. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: Overall, this 5-year update confirmed that people with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma that has spread to other parts of the body and who took encorafenib plus binimetinib were alive for longer without their disease getting worse than those who took vemurafenib or encorafenib alone. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01909453 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Proteogenomics Reveals Perturbed Signaling Networks in Malignant Melanoma Cells Resistant to BRAF Inhibition.

Analysis of nucleotide variants is a cornerstone of cancer medicine. Although only 2% of the genomic sequence is protein coding, mutations occurring in these regions have the potential to influence protein structure or modification status and may have severe impact on disease aetiology. Proteogenomics enables the analysis of sample-specific nonsynonymous nucleotide variants with regard to their effect at the proteome and phosphoproteome levels. Here, we developed a proof-of-concept proteogenomics workflow and applied it to the malignant melanoma cell line A375. Initially, we studied the resistance to serine/threonine-protein kinase B-raf (BRAF) inhibitor (BRAFi) vemurafenib in A375 cells. This allowed identification of several oncogenic nonsynonymous nucleotide variants, including a gain-of-function variant on aurora kinase A (AURKA) at F31I. We also detected significant changes in abundance among (phospho)proteins, which led to reactivation of the MAPK signaling pathway in BRAFi-resistant A375 cells. Upon reconstruction of the multiomic integrated signaling networks, we predicted drug therapies with the potential to disrupt BRAFi resistance mechanism in A375 cells. Notably, we showed that AURKA inhibition is effective and specific against BRAFi-resistant A375 cells. Subsequently, we investigated amino acid variants that interfere with protein posttranslational modification (PTM) status and potentially influence A375 cell signaling irrespective of BRAFi resistance. Mass spectrometry (MS) measurements confirmed variant-driven PTM changes in 12 proteins. Among them was the runt-related transcription factor 1 (RUNX1) displaying a variant on a known phosphorylation site S(Ph)276L. We confirmed the loss of phosphorylation site by MS and demonstrated the impact of this variant on RUNX1 interactome.

Risk analysis of systemic side effects of tumescent local anaesthesia in the surgical treatment of geriatric and multimorbid patients with skin cancer.

BACKGROUND: Due to demographic change and increased UV exposure, the number of dermatosurgical procedures in the elderly is increasing. Data on the occurrence of systemic side effects during and after treatment with tumescent local anaesthesia are limited and do not refer to details such as volume and composition of local anaesthetics or epinephrine additive. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the risk of systemic side effects in elderly patients undergoing skin tumour surgery with tumescent local anaesthesia. METHODS: Investigation of systemic complications in patients (≥75 years) who underwent head and neck skin tumour surgery under tumescent local anaesthesia at the Department of Dermatology, University Medical Centre Tübingen, between October 2018 and March 2020. RESULTS: In total 782 patients (479 males, 303 females) with a mean age of 83.3 years (range: 75.1-102.2 years) could be included. A total of 2940 procedures were performed. Patients were assigned to two groups. The old-old group (≥75-84 years) included 491 patients and the oldest-old group (≥85 years) included 291 patients. The total inpatient stay and thus mean follow-up period was 4.9 days (range 1-28 days). 92.0% (719/782) suffered from pre-existing comorbidities. Systemic complications occurred in 10.2% (80/782; old-olds: 8.6%, oldest-olds: 13.1%). Hypertensive crisis (>180/120 mmHg) requiring intervention (6.7%) that occurred intraoperatively or during the inpatient stay was the most frequent systemic complication. Cardiac arrhythmias occurred postoperatively in 0.8% of cases. No life-threatening complications directly related to tumescent local anaesthesia were found. CONCLUSIONS: Skin tumour surgery in tumescent local anaesthesia for the elderly is safe, and complications caused by general anaesthesia can be avoided. Systemic complications can occur, but are usually mild, are caused by pre-existing diseases and perioperative excitement, and can be rapidly detected and well treated by monitoring. There is no direct correlation of complications to high-tumescent concentrations or volume quantities.

S3 guideline "actinic keratosis and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma" - update 2023, part 2: epidemiology and etiology, diagnostics, surgical and systemic treatment of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), surveillance and prevention.

Actinic keratosis (AK) are common lesions in light-skinned individuals that can potentially progress to cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). Both conditions may be associated with significant morbidity and constitute a major disease burden, especially among the elderly. To establish an evidence-based framework for clinical decision making, the guideline "actinic keratosis and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma" was updated and expanded by the topics cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma in situ (Bowen's disease) and actinic cheilitis. The guideline is aimed at dermatologists, general practitioners, ear nose and throat specialists, surgeons, oncologists, radiologists and radiation oncologists in hospitals and office-based settings, as well as other medical specialties, policy makers and insurance funds involved in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with AK and cSCC. A separate guideline exists for patients and their relatives. In this part, we will address aspects relating to epidemiology and etiology, diagnostics, surgical and systemic treatment of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), surveillance and prevention.

Five-Year Outcomes with Dabrafenib plus Trametinib in Metastatic Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Patients who have unresectable or metastatic melanoma with a BRAF V600E or V600K mutation have prolonged progression-free survival and overall survival when receiving treatment with BRAF inhibitors plus MEK inhibitors. However, long-term clinical outcomes in these patients remain undefined. To determine 5-year survival rates and clinical characteristics of the patients with durable benefit, we sought to review long-term data from randomized trials of combination therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors. METHODS: We analyzed pooled extended-survival data from two trials involving previously untreated patients who had received BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib (at a dose of 150 mg twice daily) plus MEK inhibitor trametinib (2 mg once daily) in the COMBI-d and COMBI-v trials. The median duration of follow-up was 22 months (range, 0 to 76). The primary end points in the COMBI-d and COMBI-v trials were progression-free survival and overall survival, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 563 patients were randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib (211 in the COMBI-d trial and 352 in the COMBI-v trial). The progression-free survival rates were 21% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17 to 24) at 4 years and 19% (95% CI, 15 to 22) at 5 years. The overall survival rates were 37% (95% CI, 33 to 42) at 4 years and 34% (95% CI, 30 to 38) at 5 years. In multivariate analysis, several baseline factors (e.g., performance status, age, sex, number of organ sites with metastasis, and lactate dehydrogenase level) were significantly associated with both progression-free survival and overall survival. A complete response occurred in 109 patients (19%) and was associated with an improved long-term outcome, with an overall survival rate of 71% (95% CI, 62 to 79) at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: First-line treatment with dabrafenib plus trametinib led to long-term benefit in approximately one third of the patients who had unresectable or metastatic melanoma with a BRAF V600E or V600K mutation. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis; COMBI-d ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01584648; COMBI-v ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01597908.).

Perspectives in Melanoma: meeting report from the Melanoma Bridge (December 2nd - 4th, 2021, Italy).

Advances in immune checkpoint and combination therapy have led to improvement in overall survival for patients with advanced melanoma. Improved understanding of the tumor, tumor microenvironment and tumor immune-evasion mechanisms has resulted in new approaches to targeting and harnessing the host immune response. Combination modalities with other immunotherapy agents, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, electrochemotherapy are also being explored to overcome resistance and to potentiate the immune response. In addition, novel approaches such as adoptive cell therapy, oncogenic viruses, vaccines and different strategies of drug administration including sequential, or combination treatment are being tested. Despite the progress in diagnosis of melanocytic lesions, correct classification of patients, selection of appropriate adjuvant and systemic theràapies, and prediction of response to therapy remain real challenges in melanoma. Improved understanding of the tumor microenvironment, tumor immunity and response to therapy has prompted extensive translational and clinical research in melanoma. There is a growing evidence that genomic and immune features of pre-treatment tumor biopsies may correlate with response in patients with melanoma and other cancers, but they have yet to be fully characterized and implemented clinically. Development of novel biomarker platforms may help to improve diagnostics and predictive accuracy for selection of patients for specific treatment. Overall, the future research efforts in melanoma therapeutics and translational research should focus on several aspects including: (a) developing robust biomarkers to predict efficacy of therapeutic modalities to guide clinical decision-making and optimize treatment regimens, (b) identifying mechanisms of therapeutic resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors that are potentially actionable, (c) identifying biomarkers to predict therapy-induced adverse events, and (d) studying mechanism of actions of therapeutic agents and developing algorithms to optimize combination treatments. During the Melanoma Bridge meeting (December 2nd-4th, 2021, Naples, Italy) discussions focused on the currently approved systemic and local therapies for advanced melanoma and discussed novel biomarker strategies and advances in precision medicine as well as the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on management of melanoma patients.

Real-world Treatment Patterns and Outcomes with Systemic Therapies in Unresectable Locally Advanced and Metastatic Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma in Germany.

Advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma is a challenge to treat. Conventional systemic treatment options include chemotherapy and epidermal growth factor receptor-inhibitors. The aim of this study was to assess clinical outcomes with systemic treatments in advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Patients receiving systemic treatment at the Tübingen Dermato-Oncology centre between 2007 and 2017 were identified (n = 59). Median age was 76 years (interquartile range (IQR) 71-80 years), 83.1% of patients were male, 72.9% had metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, and 27.1% had unresectable locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. During median follow-up of 52 weeks (IQR 27-97 weeks), overall response rate was 14.3%, and disease control rate was 53.6%. Median progression-free survival was 15 weeks (IQR 8-42 weeks), and median overall survival was 52 weeks (IQR 27-97 weeks). Patients receiving chemoradiation vs chemotherapy alone showed better overall survival (hazard ratio 0.41, p = 0.014,) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio 0.42, p = 0.009); no differences were observed for metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma vs locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma patients. Although chemotherapy and/or cetuximab showed limited outcomes in advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, such therapy may still be an option when anti-PD-1 treatment is contraindicated.

The role of stereotactic radiotherapy in addition to immunotherapy in the management of melanoma brain metastases: results of a systematic review.

Aim of this study was to systematically review the literature to assess efficacy and safety of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) in combination with immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma brain metastases (MBM). The literature was searched using PubMed, Scopus, and Embase. Studies comparing SRT plus immunotherapy versus SRT or immunotherapy alone were deemed eligible for inclusion. Two studies showed improved overall survival after SRT plus immunotherapy in melanoma cancer patients with brain metastases. Three studies reported data on LC and DFS showing as SRT plus immunotherapy did not improve local control and DFS rates. G3-G4 toxicity was reported in only one study (20% in the SRT plus immunotherapy group versus 23% in the immunotherapy group). Despite SRT plus concurrent immunotherapy seems associated with possible survival advantage and low ≥ G3 late toxicity rates, the quality of evidence is very low. Therefore, in patients with brain metastases from melanoma, SRT plus immunotherapy should be evaluated on an individual basis after discussion by a multidisciplinary team.

Adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab monotherapy versus placebo in patients with resected stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease (IMMUNED): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab and ipilimumab, alone or in combination, are widely used immunotherapeutic treatment options for patients with advanced-ie, unresectable or metastatic-melanoma. This criterion, however, excludes patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. We therefore aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab monotherapy versus a placebo in this patient population. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial in 20 German academic medical centres. Eligible patients were aged 18-80 years with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after surgery or radiotherapy. Key exclusion criteria included uveal or mucosal melanoma, previous therapy with checkpoint inhibitors, and any previous immunosuppressive therapy within the 30 days before study drug administration. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a central, interactive, online system, to the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group (1 mg/kg of intravenous nivolumab every 3 weeks plus 3 mg/kg of intravenous ipilimumab every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by 3 mg/kg of nivolumab every 2 weeks), nivolumab monotherapy group (3 mg/kg of intravenous nivolumab every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab-matching placebo during weeks 1-12), or double-matching placebo group. The primary endpoint was the recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. The results presented in this report reflect the prespecified interim analysis of recurrence-free survival after 90 events had been reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02523313, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Sept 2, 2015, and Nov 20, 2018, 167 patients were randomly assigned to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=56), nivolumab (n=59), or placebo (n=52). As of July 2, 2019, at a median follow-up of 28·4 months (IQR 17·7-36·8), median recurrence-free survival was not reached in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, whereas median recurrence-free survival was 12·4 months (95% CI 5·3-33·3) in the nivolumab group and 6·4 months (3·3-9·6) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio for recurrence for the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo group was 0·23 (97·5% CI 0·12-0·45; p<0·0001), and for the nivolumab group versus placebo group was 0·56 (0·33-0·94; p=0·011). In the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, recurrence-free survival at 1 year was 75% (95% CI 61·0-84·9) and at 2 years was 70% (55·1-81·0); in the nivolumab group, 1-year recurrence-free survival was 52% (38·1-63·9) and at 2 years was 42% (28·6-54·5); and in the placebo group, this rate was 32% (19·8-45·3) at 1 year and 14% (5·9-25·7) at 2 years. Treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 71% (95% CI 57-82) of patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and in 27% (16-40) of those in the nivolumab group. Treatment-related adverse events of any grade led to treatment discontinuation in 34 (62%) of 55 patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and seven (13%) of 56 in the nivolumab group. Three deaths from adverse events were reported but were considered unrelated to the study treatment. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant therapy with nivolumab alone or in combination with ipilimumab increased recurrence-free survival significantly compared with placebo in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. The rates of grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events in both active treatment groups were higher than the rates reported in previous pivotal trials done in advanced melanoma with measurable disease. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Prognostic role of gamma-glutamyl transferase in metastatic melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Hepatic immune-related adverse events (irAE) including elevated liver function tests (transaminases) occur in 1.4-22.3% of melanoma patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPI) and constitute a potentially serious toxicity that is challenging to treat. In contrast to the liver transaminases alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST), only little is known about the frequency and impact of gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) elevations. METHODS: GGT determined prior to and during therapy of metastatic melanoma patients treated with ICPI were retrospectively assessed in two independent cohorts (PD-1: n = 218, Ipi + Nivo: n = 148). Overall survival (OS) and best objective response were analyzed according to baseline and immune-related GGT (irGGT) elevations during treatment. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, OS was reduced in patients with elevated baseline GGT (PD-1 group: hazard ratio [HR] 1.76, p = .0073; Ipi + Nivo group: HR 1.77, p = .032). Immune-related GGT elevation was recorded in 17% (PD-1 group) and 38.5% (Ipi + Nivo group). Of these patients, the majority (81 and 68%, respectively) had normal ALT and AST and showed no clinical signs of hepatotoxicity. Patients who experienced irGGT elevation had superior response (PD-1 group: odds ratio [OR] 3.57, p = .00072; Ipi + Nivo group: OR 1.74, p = .12) and OS (PD-1 group: HR 0.37, p = .0016; Ipi + Nivo group: HR 0.33, p = .00050). CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of hepatic irAE is currently underestimated. The addition of the sensitive enzyme GGT to the laboratory panel before and during therapy with ICPI allows to detect two to three times more patients developing hepatic or hepatobiliary toxicity than known so far. Immune-related GGT elevations correlate with response and favorable survival. Precis for use in the Table of Contents The frequency of hepatotoxicity under immune checkpoint blockade is currently underestimated. We suggest the addition of gamma-glutamyl transferase to the laboratory panel in checkpoint inhibitor patients for the detection of hepatobiliary toxicity.

Perspectives in Melanoma: meeting report from the Melanoma Bridge (December 3rd-5th, 2020, Italy).

Advances in immune checkpoint therapy and targeted therapy have led to improvement in overall survival for patients with advanced melanoma. Single agent checkpoint PD-1 blockade and combination with BRAF/MEK targeted therapy demonstrated benefit in overall survival (OS). Superior response rates have been demonstrated with combined PD-1/CTLA-4 blockade, with a significant OS benefit compared with single-agent PD-1 blockade. Despite the progress in diagnosis of melanocytic lesions, correct classification of patients, selection of appropriate adjuvant and systemic therapies, and prediction of response to therapy remain real challenges in melanoma. Improved understanding of the tumor microenvironment, tumor immunity and response to therapy has prompted extensive translational and clinical research in melanoma. Development of novel biomarker platforms may help to improve diagnostics and predictive accuracy for selection of patients for specific treatment. There is a growing evidence that genomic and immune features of pre-treatment tumor biopsies may correlate with response in patients with melanoma and other cancers but they have yet to be fully characterized and implemented clinically. Overall, the progress in melanoma therapeutics and translational research will help to optimize treatment regimens to overcome resistance and develop robust biomarkers to guide clinical decision-making. During the Melanoma Bridge meeting (December 3rd-5th, 2020, Italy) we reviewed the currently approved systemic and local therapies for advanced melanoma and discussed novel biomarker strategies and advances in precision medicine.

Expression of DNA Methyltransferase 1 Is a Hallmark of Melanoma, Correlating with Proliferation and Response to B-Raf and Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Inhibition in Melanocytic Tumors.

Aberrant DNA methylation is an epigenetic hallmark of melanoma, but the expression of DNA methyltransferase (Dnmt)-1 in melanocytic tumors is unknown. Dnmt1 expression was analyzed in primary melanocytes, melanoma cell lines, and 83 melanocytic tumors, and its associations with proliferation, mutational status, and response to B-Raf and mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibition were explored. Dnmt1 expression was increased incrementally from nevi [mean fluorescence intensity (MFI), 48.1; interquartile range, 41.7 to 59.6] to primary melanomas (MFI, 68.8; interquartile range, 58.4 to 77.0) and metastatic melanomas (MFI, 87.5; interquartile range, 77.1 to 114.5) (P < 0.001). Dnmt1 expression was correlated with Ki-67 expression (Spearman correlation, 0.483; P < 0.001) and was independent of BRAF mutation status (P = 0.55). In BRAF-mutant melanoma, Dnmt1 was down-regulated during response to B-Raf and MEK inhibition and was again up-regulated on drug resistance in vitro and in vivo. Degradation of Dnmt1 by the histone deacetylase inhibitor suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid was associated with decreased cell viability in B-Raf inhibitor-sensitive and -resistant cell lines. This study demonstrates that Dnmt1 expression is correlated with proliferation in melanocytic tumors, is increased with melanoma progression, and is associated with response to B-Raf and MEK inhibition. Given its strong expression in metastatic melanoma, Dnmt1 may be a promising target for combined epigenetic and immunotherapy.