Proton Craniospinal Irradiation with Immunotherapy in Two Patients with Leptomeningeal Disease from Melanoma.

Introduction: Proton craniospinal irradiation (pCSI) is a treatment option for leptomeningeal disease (LMD), which permits whole neuroaxis treatment while minimizing toxicity. Despite this, patients inevitably experience progression. Adding systemic therapy to pCSI may improve outcomes. Methods: In this single-institution retrospective case series, we present the feasibility of treatment with pCSI (30Gy, 10 fractions) and an immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in two sequential patients with LMD from melanoma. Results: The first patient developed LMD related to BRAF V600E-mutant melanoma after prior ICI and BRAF-targeted therapy. After pCSI with concurrent nivolumab, the addition of relatlimab, and BRAF-targeted therapy, he remained alive 7 months after LMD diagnosis despite central nervous system progression. The second patient developed LMD related to BRAF-wildtype melanoma after up-front ICI. He received pCSI with concurrent ipilimumab and nivolumab, then nivolumab maintenance. Though therapy was held for ICI hepatitis, the patient remained progression-free 5 months after LMD diagnosis. Conclusion: Adding an ICI to pCSI is feasible for patients with LMD and demonstrates a tolerable toxicity profile. While prospective evaluation is ultimately warranted, pCSI with ICI may confer survival benefits, even after prior ICI.

Neoadjuvant cobimetinib and atezolizumab with or without vemurafenib for high-risk operable Stage III melanoma: the Phase II NeoACTIVATE trial.

Both targeted therapies and immunotherapies provide benefit in resected Stage III melanoma. We hypothesized that the combination of targeted and immunotherapy given prior to therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND) would be tolerable and drive robust pathologic responses. In NeoACTIVATE (NCT03554083), a Phase II trial, patients with clinically evident resectable Stage III melanoma received either 12 weeks of neoadjuvant vemurafenib, cobimetinib, and atezolizumab (BRAF-mutated, Cohort A, n = 15), or cobimetinib and atezolizumab (BRAF-wild-type, Cohort B, n = 15) followed by TLND and 24 weeks of adjuvant atezolizumab. Here, we report outcomes from the neoadjuvant portion of the trial. Based on intent to treat analysis, pathologic response (≤50% viable tumor) and major pathologic response (complete or near-complete, ≤10% viable tumor) were observed in 86.7% and 66.7% of BRAF-mutated and 53.3% and 33.3% of BRAF-wild-type patients, respectively (primary outcome); these exceeded pre-specified benchmarks of 50% and 30% for major pathologic response. Grade 3 and higher toxicities, primarily dermatologic, occurred in 63% during neoadjuvant treatment (secondary outcome). No surgical delays nor progression to regional unresectability occurred (secondary outcome). Peripheral blood CD8 + TCM cell expansion associated with favorable pathologic responses (exploratory outcome).

A phase I oncolytic virus trial with vesicular stomatitis virus expressing human interferon beta and tyrosinase related protein 1 administered intratumorally and intravenously in uveal melanoma: safety, efficacy, and T cell responses.

Introduction: Metastatic uveal melanoma (MUM) has a poor prognosis and treatment options are limited. These patients do not typically experience durable responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Oncolytic viruses (OV) represent a novel approach to immunotherapy for patients with MUM. Methods: We developed an OV with a Vesicular Stomatitis Virus (VSV) vector modified to express interferon-beta (IFN-ß) and Tyrosinase Related Protein 1 (TYRP1) (VSV-IFNß-TYRP1), and conducted a Phase 1 clinical trial with a 3 + 3 design in patients with MUM. VSV-IFNß-TYRP1 was injected into a liver metastasis, then administered on the same day as a single intravenous (IV) infusion. The primary objective was safety. Efficacy was a secondary objective. Results: 12 patients with previously treated MUM were enrolled. Median follow up was 19.1 months. 4 dose levels (DLs) were evaluated. One patient at DL4 experienced dose limiting toxicities (DLTs), including decreased platelet count (grade 3), increased aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and cytokine release syndrome (CRS). 4 patients had stable disease (SD) and 8 patients had progressive disease (PD). Interferon gamma (IFNγ) ELIspot data showed that more patients developed a T cell response to virus encoded TYRP1 at higher DLs, and a subset of patients also had a response to other melanoma antigens, including gp100, suggesting epitope spreading. 3 of the patients who responded to additional melanoma antigens were next treated with ICIs, and 2 of these patients experienced durable responses. Discussion: Our study found that VSV-IFNß -TYRP1 can be safely administered via intratumoral (IT) and IV routes in a previously treated population of patients with MUM. Although there were no clear objective radiographic responses to VSV-IFNß-TYRP1, dose-dependent immunogenicity to TYRP1 and other melanoma antigens was seen.

Dietary supplement use and recommendations for discontinuation in an integrative oncology clinic.

PURPOSE: This project evaluated the dietary supplement (DS) use of patients referred to an integrative oncology program and documented the frequency and reasons for recommending stopping DS. Many patients with cancer are taking dietary supplements and may not disclose such to their care teams. There is potential for harm in several ways: (1) interactions with their medications that may increase side effects, (2) interactions with their treatment that may lead to decreased efficacy, and 3) direct toxicity from the supplement. METHODS: Patient data (N = 100) were collected prospectively from an Integrative Oncology Clinic. The number and type of DS were documented. Using the Natural Medicines Database, we determined whether supplements interacted with the patient's other medications or cancer therapies. We calculated the percentage of patients in which a recommendation for discontinuation (DC) of DS was provided, along with the supporting reasons. RESULTS: We found that 91% of patients took DS, averaging 5.5 per patient (range 0-20). In 35% of patients, we recommended stopping some of their DS or other therapies, the reasons being: DC antioxidants, vitamin B12/iron while on chemo/RT (unless deficient or part of protocol) 32%; DC due to taking excess amounts (i.e., fat-soluble vitamins, calcium, iron) 13.5%; DC supplements with known toxicity (i.e., laetrile, Miracle mineral solution) 13.5%; DC due to interactions with other medications (i.e., anticoagulants) 13.5%; DC DS with potential to increase cancer growth (i.e., estrogenic potential in those with hormone-sensitive cancers, glutamine) 11%; DC due to potential for increased toxicity with chemotherapy (i.e., increased risk of bleeding, CIPN) 11%; DC probiotics, immune stimulants, and cannabis while on immunotherapy 5.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cancer referred to an integrative oncology clinic use large numbers of DS with the potential for adverse effects and/or decreasing efficacy of treatments. This study highlights the prevalence of DS usage in cancer patients referred to an integrative oncology clinic and demonstrates the need for counseling about safe supplement use.