Ipilimumab alone or ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 therapy in patients with metastatic melanoma resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 monotherapy: a multicentre, retrospective, cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Anti-PD-1 therapy (hereafter referred to as anti-PD-1) induces long-term disease control in approximately 30% of patients with metastatic melanoma; however, two-thirds of patients are resistant and will require further treatment. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (pembrolizumab or nivolumab) compared with ipilimumab monotherapy in patients who are resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 therapy (hereafter referred to as anti-PD-[L]1). METHODS: This multicentre, retrospective, cohort study, was done at 15 melanoma centres in Australia, Europe, and the USA. We included adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with metastatic melanoma (unresectable stage III and IV), who were resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 (innate or acquired resistance) and who then received either ipilimumab monotherapy or ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (pembrolizumab or nivolumab), based on availability of therapies or clinical factors determined by the physician, or both. Tumour response was assessed as per standard of care (CT or PET-CT scans every 3 months). The study endpoints were objective response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety of ipilimumab compared with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1. FINDINGS: We included 355 patients with metastatic melanoma, resistant to anti-PD-(L)1 (nivolumab, pembrolizumab, or atezolizumab), who had been treated with ipilimumab monotherapy (n=162 [46%]) or ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (n=193 [54%]) between Feb 1, 2011, and Feb 6, 2020. At a median follow-up of 22·1 months (IQR 9·5-30·9), the objective response rate was higher with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (60 [31%] of 193 patients) than with ipilimumab monotherapy (21 [13%] of 162 patients; p<0·0001). Overall survival was longer in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group (median overall survival 20·4 months [95% CI 12·7-34·8]) than with ipilimumab monotherapy (8·8 months [6·1-11·3]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·50, 95% CI 0·38-0·66; p<0·0001). Progression-free survival was also longer with ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 (median 3·0 months [95% CI 2·6-3·6]) than with ipilimumab (2·6 months [2·4-2·9]; HR 0·69, 95% CI 0·55-0·87; p=0·0019). Similar proportions of patients reported grade 3-5 adverse events in both groups (59 [31%] of 193 patients in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group vs 54 [33%] of 162 patients in the ipilimumab group). The most common grade 3-5 adverse events were diarrhoea or colitis (23 [12%] of 193 patients in the ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 group vs 33 [20%] of 162 patients in the ipilimumab group) and increased alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase (24 [12%] vs 15 [9%]). One death occurred with ipilimumab 26 days after the last treatment: a colon perforation due to immune-related pancolitis. INTERPRETATION: In patients who are resistant to anti-PD-(L)1, ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 seemed to yield higher efficacy than ipilimumab with a higher objective response rate, longer progression-free, and longer overall survival, with a similar rate of grade 3-5 toxicity. Ipilimumab plus anti-PD-1 should be favoured over ipilimumab alone as a second-line immunotherapy for these patients with advanced melanoma. FUNDING: None.

The role of nivolumab in melanoma.

The incidence of melanoma continues to rise worldwide. Prior to 2010, there had been no progress in the treatment of advanced melanoma in living memory. Since then, immunotherapy has become a standard of care in the treatment of advanced melanoma. Nivolumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody against PD-1, which is a negative regulatory checkpoint in the T cells. The clinical benefit of nivolumab as a single agent is well established, with response rates of ≥40%, durable responses and a favorable tolerability profile. The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab has also become a standard of care and the role of nivolumab in the adjuvant setting for high-risk patients has been recently confirmed.

Anti-PD-1 alone or in combination with anti-CTLA-4 for advanced melanoma patients with liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: The combination of anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 has been associated with improvement in response and survival over anti-PD-1 monotherapy in unselected patients with advanced melanoma. Whether patients with liver metastases also benefit from the combination of anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 over anti-PD-1, is unclear. In this study, we sought to assess whether the combination of anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 leads to better response, progression-free survival and overall survival, compared with anti-PD-1 monotherapy for patients with liver metastases. METHODS: We have conducted an international multicentre retrospective study. Patients with advanced melanoma with liver metastases treated with 1st line anti-PD1 monotherapy or with anti-CTLA-4 were included. The endpoints of this study were: objective response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: With a median follow-up from commencement of anti-PD-1 monotherapy or in combination with anti-CTLA-4 of 47 months (95% CI, 42-51), objective response rate was higher with combination therapy (47%) versus anti-PD-1 monotherapy (35%) (p = 0.0027), while progression-free survival and overall survival were not statistically different between both treatment groups. However, on multivariable analysis with multiple imputation for missing values and adjusting for predefined variables, combination of anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA-4 was associated with higher objective response (OR 2.21, 1.46 - 3.36; p < 0.001), progression-free survival (HR 0.73, 0.57 - 0.92; p = 0.009) and overall survival (HR 0.71, 0.54 - 0.94; p = 0.018) compared to anti-PD1 monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study will help guide treatment selection for patients who present with liver metastases, suggesting that combination therapy should be considered for this group of patients.

Longitudinal gut microbiome changes in immune checkpoint blockade-treated advanced melanoma.

Multiple clinical trials targeting the gut microbiome are being conducted to optimize treatment outcomes for immune checkpoint blockade (ICB). To improve the success of these interventions, understanding gut microbiome changes during ICB is urgently needed. Here through longitudinal microbiome profiling of 175 patients treated with ICB for advanced melanoma, we show that several microbial species-level genome bins (SGBs) and pathways exhibit distinct patterns from baseline in patients achieving progression-free survival (PFS) of 12 months or longer (PFS ≥12) versus patients with PFS shorter than 12 months (PFS <12). Out of 99 SGBs that could discriminate between these two groups, 20 were differentially abundant only at baseline, while 42 were differentially abundant only after treatment initiation. We identify five and four SGBs that had consistently higher abundances in patients with PFS ≥12 and <12 months, respectively. Constructing a log ratio of these SGBs, we find an association with overall survival. Finally, we find different microbial dynamics in different clinical contexts including the type of ICB regimen, development of immune-related adverse events and concomitant medication use. Insights into the longitudinal dynamics of the gut microbiome in association with host factors and treatment regimens will be critical for guiding rational microbiome-targeted therapies aimed at enhancing ICB efficacy.

Efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitors in young adults with metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: The integration of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) for the treatment of melanoma has resulted in remarkable and durable responses. Given the potential role of immunosenescence, age may contribute to differential ICI efficacy and toxicity. While older patients have been studied in detail, outcomes from ICI in young patients (≤40 years) are not well characterised. METHODS: We performed a multi-institutional, retrospective study of patients with advanced melanoma treated with anti-PD-1 monotherapy or ICI combination (ipilimumab and anti-PD-1). Response rates, survival, and toxicities were examined based on age comparing those under 40 years of age with older patients (age 41-70 and ≥ 71 years). RESULTS: A total of 676 patients were included: 190 patients (28%) aged ≤40 years, 313 (46%) between ages 41-70, and 173 patients (26%) aged ≥71. Patients ≤40 years had higher response rates (53% vs 38%, p = 0.035) and improved progression-free survival (median 13.7 vs 4.0 months, p = 0.032) with combination ICI compared to monotherapy. Progression-free survival was similar among groups while overall survival was inferior in patients >70 years, who had low response rates to combination therapy (28%). ICIs had a similar incidence of severe toxicities, though hepatotoxicity was particularly common in younger patients vs. patients >40 with monotherapy (9% vs. 2%, p = 0.007) or combination ICI (37% vs. 10%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ICIs had comparable efficacy between younger and older patients, although outcomes were superior with combination ICI compared to monotherapy in patients aged ≤40 years. Toxicity incidence was similar across age groups, though organs affected were substantially different.

Patient and treatment characteristics of emergency presentations due to immune-mediated toxicities.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of immune-mediated toxicities from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is well described. However, the characteristics and treatment patterns for patients with emergency presentations owing to immune-mediated toxicity are less well known. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study reviews all emergency presentations in patients treated with ICI at a single centre between May 2018 and March 2020. The aims were to describe and quantify patient and treatment characteristics, toxicity type and outcomes. RESULTS: 1165 patients were treated with ICI, and there were 597 emergency presentations in 370 patients. Of these, 191/597 (32%) were owing to an immune-mediated toxicity, median age was 64 years, and 127/191 (67%) were men. The most common tumour types were melanoma (53%) and lung cancer (22%), and the most common ICI received was ipilimumab + nivolumab combination immunotherapy (42%), followed by pembrolizumab monotherapy (21%) and nivolumab monotherapy (20%). The median number of cycles received was three (range 1-54), and 75/191 (39%) had previous ≥ grade 2 immune-mediated toxicity. 29% patients required second-line immunosuppression. The median time in the hospital was four days. There was a rising number of emergency presentations reflecting overall increasing use of ICI. CONCLUSIONS: Over a quarter of patients treated with ICI had an emergency presentation, and immune-mediated toxicity accounted for 32% of these. A diagnosis of melanoma, treatment with combination immunotherapy and previous ≥ grade 2 immune-mediated toxicity were common in patients with immune-mediated toxicity. These data allow better identification of patients likely to require admission and forward planning for acute oncology services.

Tumour infiltrating B cells discriminate checkpoint blockade-induced responses.

BACKGROUND: Immune cell-driven anti-cancer activity is paramount for effective responses to checkpoint inhibitors (ICB). However, the contribution of the different immune cell subsets in the circulation and within the tumour is poorly understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS: To elucidate the role of the different cell subsets in anti-tumour responses elicited by ICB, we performed single-cell analysis of the transcriptome and surface proteome of paired pre- and early on-treatment metastatic melanoma tumour biopsies and matched peripheral blood mononuclear cell samples. We next compared the survival of metastatic melanoma patients treated with ICB according to the abundance of pre-treatment tumour-infiltrating B cell clonotypes. RESULTS: We identified cell clusters associated with disease control or progression, defined differential expression of biological pathways likely involved in the immune awakening against the tumour and examined how cell-cell communication patterns between the tumour cell subsets change during treatment. Furthermore, we discovered that B cells (immunoglobulin expression and abundance of B cell clonotypes) discriminate the clinical response after ICB and propose that B cells likely contribute to anti-tumour immunity by antigen presentation through major histocompatibility complex molecules. Finally, we demonstrated that the abundance of tumour-infiltrating B cell clonotypes at baseline identifies two distinct risk groups, a finding that we confirmed in an independent cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Our exploratory translational study provides new insights on the mechanistic role of B cells in anti-melanoma immunity during treatment with ICB. Additionally, we support pre-treatment B cell tumour infiltration as a promising prognostic biomarker to be further validated as a tool for clinical risk stratification.

Real-world outcomes with ipilimumab and nivolumab in advanced melanoma: a multicentre retrospective study.

PURPOSE: To assess efficacy and toxicity of combination immunotherapy with ipilimumab plus nivolumab in routine practice in a retrospective multicentre cohort of patients with advanced melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective analysis included patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab between October 2015 and January 2020 at six centres in Australia, Europe and the United States of America. We describe efficacy outcomes (overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS] and objective response rate [ORR]) in treatment-naïve and pre-treated patients, with and without brain metastases, plus treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) in all patients treated. RESULTS: A total of 697 patients were identified; 472 were treatment-naïve of which 138 (29.2%) had brain metastases, and 225 were previously treated of which 102 (45.3%) had brain metastases. At baseline, 32.3% had stage M1c and 34.4% stage M1d disease. Lactate dehydrogenase was high in 280 patients (40.2%). With a median follow-up of 25.9 months, median OS in the 334 treatment-naïve patients without brain metastases was 53.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 40.8-NR) and 38.7 months (95% CI 18.6-NR) for the 138 treatment-naïve patients with brain metastases. For the entire cohort the ORR was 48%, for treatment-naïve patients without brain metastases ORR was 56.6% with a median PFS of was 13.7 months (95% CI 9.6-26.5). Median PFS was 7.9 months (95% CI 5.8-10.4) and OS 38 months (95% CI 31-NR) for the entire cohort. Grade 3-4 trAE were reported in 44% of patients, and 4 (0.7%) treatment-related deaths (1 pneumonitis, 2 myocarditis and 1 colitis) were recorded. CONCLUSION: The outcome and toxicity of combination immunotherapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab in a real-world patient population are similar to those reported in pivotal trials.

Clinical Models to Define Response and Survival With Anti-PD-1 Antibodies Alone or Combined With Ipilimumab in Metastatic Melanoma.

PURPOSE: Currently, there are no robust biomarkers that predict immunotherapy outcomes in metastatic melanoma. We sought to build multivariable predictive models for response and survival to anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti-PD-1) monotherapy or in combination with anticytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 (ipilimumab [IPI]; anti-PD-1 ± IPI) by including routine clinical data available at the point of treatment initiation. METHODS: One thousand six hundred forty-four patients with metastatic melanoma treated with anti-PD-1 ± IPI at 16 centers from Australia, the United States, and Europe were included. Demographics, disease characteristics, and baseline blood parameters were analyzed. The end points of this study were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The final predictive models for ORR, PFS, and OS were determined through penalized regression methodology (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator method) to select the most significant predictors for all three outcomes (discovery cohort, N = 633). Each model was validated internally and externally in two independent cohorts (validation-1 [N = 419] and validation-2 [N = 592]) and nomograms were created. RESULTS: The final model for predicting ORR (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.71) in immunotherapy-treated patients included the following clinical parameters: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, presence/absence of liver and lung metastases, serum lactate dehydrogenase, blood neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, therapy (monotherapy/combination), and line of treatment. The final predictive models for PFS (AUC = 0.68) and OS (AUC = 0.77) included the same variables as those in the ORR model (except for presence/absence of lung metastases), and included presence/absence of brain metastases and blood hemoglobin. Nomogram calculators were developed from the clinical models to predict outcomes for patients with metastatic melanoma treated with anti-PD-1 ± IPI. CONCLUSION: Newly developed combinations of routinely collected baseline clinical factors predict the response and survival outcomes of patients with metastatic melanoma treated with immunotherapy and may serve as valuable tools for clinical decision making.

Cross-cohort gut microbiome associations with immune checkpoint inhibitor response in advanced melanoma.

The composition of the gut microbiome has been associated with clinical responses to immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment, but there is limited consensus on the specific microbiome characteristics linked to the clinical benefits of ICIs. We performed shotgun metagenomic sequencing of stool samples collected before ICI initiation from five observational cohorts recruiting ICI-naive patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma (n = 165). Integrating the dataset with 147 metagenomic samples from previously published studies, we found that the gut microbiome has a relevant, but cohort-dependent, association with the response to ICIs. A machine learning analysis confirmed the link between the microbiome and overall response rates (ORRs) and progression-free survival (PFS) with ICIs but also revealed limited reproducibility of microbiome-based signatures across cohorts. Accordingly, a panel of species, including Bifidobacterium pseudocatenulatum, Roseburia spp. and Akkermansia muciniphila, associated with responders was identified, but no single species could be regarded as a fully consistent biomarker across studies. Overall, the role of the human gut microbiome in ICI response appears more complex than previously thought, extending beyond differing microbial species simply present or absent in responders and nonresponders. Future studies should adopt larger sample sizes and take into account the complex interplay of clinical factors with the gut microbiome over the treatment course.