Epigenetic remodeling to improve the efficacy of immunotherapy in human glioblastoma: pre-clinical evidence for development of new immunotherapy approaches.

BACKGROUND: Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a highly aggressive primary brain tumor, that is refractory to standard treatment and to immunotherapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Noteworthy, melanoma brain metastases (MM-BM), that share the same niche as GBM, frequently respond to current ICI therapies. Epigenetic modifications regulate GBM cellular proliferation, invasion, and prognosis and may negatively regulate the cross-talk between malignant cells and immune cells in the tumor milieu, likely contributing to limit the efficacy of ICI therapy of GBM. Thus, manipulating the tumor epigenome can be considered a therapeutic opportunity in GBM. METHODS: Microarray transcriptional and methylation profiles, followed by gene set enrichment and IPA analyses, were performed to study the differences in the constitutive expression profiles of GBM vs MM-BM cells, compared to the extracranial MM cells and to investigate the modulatory effects of the DNA hypomethylating agent (DHA) guadecitabine among the different tumor cells. The prognostic relevance of DHA-modulated genes was tested by Cox analysis in a TCGA GBM patients' cohort. RESULTS: The most striking differences between GBM and MM-BM cells were found to be the enrichment of biological processes associated with tumor growth, invasion, and extravasation with the inhibition of MHC class II antigen processing/presentation in GBM cells. Treatment with guadecitabine reduced these biological differences, shaping GBM cells towards a more immunogenic phenotype. Indeed, in GBM cells, promoter hypomethylation by guadecitabine led to the up-regulation of genes mainly associated with activation, proliferation, and migration of T and B cells and with MHC class II antigen processing/presentation. Among DHA-modulated genes in GBM, 7.6% showed a significant prognostic relevance. Moreover, a large set of immune-related upstream-regulators (URs) were commonly modulated by DHA in GBM, MM-BM, and MM cells: DHA-activated URs enriched for biological processes mainly involved in the regulation of cytokines and chemokines production, inflammatory response, and in Type I/II/III IFN-mediated signaling; conversely, DHA-inhibited URs were involved in metabolic and proliferative pathways. CONCLUSIONS: Epigenetic remodeling by guadecitabine represents a promising strategy to increase the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy of GBM, supporting the rationale to develop new epigenetic-based immunotherapeutic approaches for the treatment of this still highly deadly disease.

Basal and one-month differed neutrophil, lymphocyte and platelet values and their ratios strongly predict the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors immunotherapy in patients with advanced BRAF wild-type melanoma.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the capability of basal and one-month differed white blood cells (WBC), neutrophil, lymphocyte and platelet values and their ratios (neutrophils-to-lymphocytes ratio, NLR, and platelets-to-lymphocytes ratio, PLR) in predicting the response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in metastatic melanoma (MM). METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 272 BRAF wild-type MM patients treated with first line ICI. Bivariable analysis was used to correlate patient/tumor characteristics with clinical outcomes. Variations between time 1 and time 0 (Δ) of blood parameters were also calculated and dichotomized using cut-off values assessed by ROC curve. RESULTS: At baseline, higher neutrophils and NLR negatively correlated with PFS, OS and disease control rate (DCR). Higher PLR was also associated with worse OS. In multivariable analysis, neutrophils (p = 0.003), WBC (p = 0.069) and LDH (p = 0.07) maintained their impact on PFS, while OS was affected by LDH (p < 0.001), neutrophils (p < 0.001) and PLR (p = 0.022), while DCR by LDH (p = 0.03) and neutrophils (p = 0.004). In the longitudinal analysis, PFS negatively correlated with higher Δplatelets (p = 0.039), ΔWBC (p < 0.001), and Δneutrophils (p = 0.020), and with lower Δlymphocytes (p < 0.001). Moreover, higher ΔNLR and ΔPLR identified patients with worse PFS, OS and DCR. In the multivariable model, only ΔNLR influenced PFS (p = 0.004), while OS resulted affected by higher ΔWBC (p < 0.001) and lower Δlymphocytes (p = 0.038). Higher ΔWBC also affected the DCR (p = 0.003). When clustering patients in 4 categories using basal LDH and ΔNLR, normal LDH/lower ΔNLR showed a higher PFS than high LDH/higher ΔNLR (20 vs 5 months). Moreover, normal LDH/higher Δlymphocytes had a higher OS than high LDH/lower Δlymphocytes (50 vs. 10 months). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline and early variations of blood cells, together with basal LDH, strongly predict the efficacy of ICI in MM. Our findings propose simple, inexpensive biomarkers for a better selection of patient treatments. Prospective multicenter studies are warranted to confirm these data.

A novel microRNA signature for the detection of melanoma by liquid biopsy.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer and metastatic disease is associated with a significant survival rate drop. There is an urgent need for consistent tumor biomarkers to scale precision medicine and reduce cancer mortality. Here, we aimed to identify a melanoma-specific circulating microRNA signature and assess its value as a diagnostic tool. METHODS: The study consisted of a discovery phase and two validation phases. Circulating plasma extracellular vesicles (pEV) associated microRNA profiles were obtained from a discovery cohort of metastatic melanoma patients and normal subjects as controls. A pEV-microRNA signature was obtained using a LASSO penalized logistic regression model. The pEV-microRNA signature was subsequently validated both in a publicly available dataset and in an independent internal cohort. RESULTS: We identified and validated in three independent cohorts a panel of melanoma-specific circulating microRNAs that showed high accuracy in differentiating melanoma patients from healthy subjects with an area under the curve (AUC) of 1.00, 0.94 and 0.75 respectively. Investigation of the function of the pEV-microRNA signature evidenced their possible immune suppressive role in melanoma patients. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that a blood test based on circulating microRNAs can non-invasively detect melanoma, offering a novel diagnostic tool for improving standard care. Moreover, we revealed an immune suppressive role for melanoma pEV-microRNAs.

Adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected stage III melanoma (EORTC 1325-MG/KEYNOTE-054): distant metastasis-free survival results from a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 1325/KEYNOTE-054 trial assessed pembrolizumab versus placebo in patients with resected high-risk stage III melanoma. At 15-month median follow-up, pembrolizumab improved recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57 [98·4% CI 0·43-0·74], p<0·0001) compared with placebo, leading to its approval in the USA and Europe. This report provides the final results for the secondary efficacy endpoint, distant metastasis-free survival and an update of the recurrence-free survival results. METHODS: This double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was done at 123 academic centres and community hospitals across 23 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with complete resection of cutaneous melanoma metastatic to lymph node, classified as American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system, seventh edition (AJCC-7) stage IIIA (at least one lymph node metastasis >1 mm), IIIB, or IIIC (without in-transit metastasis), and with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a central interactive voice response system to receive intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks for up to 18 doses or until disease recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified according to disease stage and region, using a minimisation technique, and clinical investigators, patients, and those collecting or analysing the data were masked to treatment assignment. The two coprimary endpoints were recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population and in patients with PD-L1-positive tumours. The secondary endpoint reported here was distant metastasis-free survival in the ITT and PD-L1-positive populations. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02362594, and EudraCT, 2014-004944-37. FINDINGS: Between Aug 26, 2015, and Nov 14, 2016, 1019 patients were assigned to receive either pembrolizumab (n=514) or placebo (n=505). At an overall median follow-up of 42·3 months (IQR 40·5-45·9), 3·5-year distant metastasis-free survival was higher in the pembrolizumab group than in the placebo group in the ITT population (65·3% [95% CI 60·9-69·5] in the pembrolizumab group vs 49·4% [44·8-53·8] in the placebo group; HR 0·60 [95% CI 0·49-0·73]; p<0·0001). In the 853 patients with PD-L1-positive tumours, 3·5-year distant metastasis-free survival was 66·7% (95% CI 61·8-71·2) in the pembrolizumab group and 51·6% (46·6-56·4) in the placebo group (HR 0·61 [95% CI 0·49-0·76]; p<0·0001). Recurrence-free survival remained longer in the pembrolizumab group 59·8% (95% CI 55·3-64·1) than the placebo group 41·4% (37·0-45·8) at this 3·5-year follow-up in the ITT population (HR 0·59 [95% CI 0·49-0·70]) and in those with PD-L1-positive tumours 61·4% (56·3-66·1) in the pembrolizumab group and 44·1% (39·2-48·8) in the placebo group (HR 0·59 [95% CI 0·49-0·73]). INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab adjuvant therapy provided a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in distant metastasis-free survival at a 3·5-year median follow-up, which was consistent with the improvement in recurrence-free survival. Therefore, the results of this trial support the indication to use adjuvant pembrolizumab therapy in patients with resected high risk stage III cutaneous melanoma. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Adjuvant pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected stage III melanoma (EORTC 1325-MG/KEYNOTE-054): health-related quality-of-life results from a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 1325-MG/KEYNOTE-054 trial in patients with resected, high-risk stage III melanoma demonstrated improved recurrence-free survival with adjuvant pembrolizumab compared with placebo (hazard ratio 0·57 [98·4% CI 0·43-0·74]; p<0·0001). This study reports the results from the health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) exploratory endpoint. METHODS: This double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial was done at 123 academic centres and community hospitals across 23 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated histologically confirmed stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC resected cutaneous melanoma, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 1 or 0 were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a central interactive voice-response system on the basis of a minimisation technique stratified for stage and geographic region to receive intravenously 200 mg pembrolizumab or placebo. Treatment was administered every 3 weeks for 1 year, or until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint of the trial was recurrence-free survival (reported elsewhere). HRQOL was a prespecified exploratory endpoint, with global health/quality of life (GHQ) over 2 years measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30 as the primary analysis. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02362594, and EudraCT, 2014-004944-37, and long-term follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Aug 26, 2015, and Nov 14, 2016, 1019 patients were assigned to pembrolizumab (n=514) or placebo (n=505). Median follow-up was 15·1 months (IQR 12·8-16·9) at the time of this analysis. HRQOL compliance was greater than 90% at baseline, greater than 70% during the first year, and greater than 60% thereafter for both groups. Because of low absolute compliance numbers at later follow-up, the analysis was truncated to week 84. Baseline GHQ scores were similar between groups (77·55 [SD 18·20] in the pembrolizumab group and 76·54 [17·81] in the placebo group) and remained stable over time. The difference in average GHQ score between the two groups over the 2 years was -2·2 points (95% CI -4·3 to -0·2). The difference in average score during treatment was -1·1 points (95% CI -3·2 to 0·9) and the difference in average score after treatment was -2·2 points (-4·8 to 0·4). These differences are within the 5-point clinical relevance threshold for the QLQ-C30 and are therefore clinically non-significant. INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab does not result in a clinically significant decrease in HRQOL compared with placebo when given as adjuvant therapy for patients with resected, high-risk stage III melanoma. These results support the use of adjuvant pembrolizumab in this setting. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme.

The Italian Network for Tumor Bio-Immunotherapy (NIBIT) Foundation: ongoing and prospective activities in immuno-oncology.

The ongoing revolution in cancer immunotherapy stems from the knowledge that distinct immune-checkpoints regulate the physiological crosstalk between and among immune cells by delivering inhibitory or activating signals. These notions, and the availability of mAb directed to diverse immune-checkpoint molecules, have led to a significant clinical improvement in cancer treatment. In this scenario, further achievements are undoubtedly to be expected from the contribution of novel, proof-of-principle clinical trials designed to explore the therapeutic efficacy of new immunotherapy-based combinations and treatment sequences. Along these lines, the clinical translation of pre-clinical evidence generated by non-profit research entities is likely to provide a significant contribution to gaining new insights that will further boost the field of cancer immunotherapy. To pursue this goal, and to provide comprehensive educational programs in immune-oncology (I-O), several national and global networks have been revitalized or newly established in recent years. This rapidly evolving scenario led the Board of Directors of the Italian Network of Tumor Bio-Immunotherapy (NIBIT) to establish the NIBIT Foundation. This Focused Research Review summarizes the main ongoing and prospective I-O activities of the NIBIT Foundation.

Binimetinib versus dacarbazine in patients with advanced NRAS-mutant melanoma (NEMO): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: There are no established therapies specific for NRAS-mutant melanoma despite the emergence of immunotherapy. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the MEK inhibitor binimetinib versus that of dacarbazine in patients with advanced NRAS-mutant melanoma. METHODS: NEMO is an ongoing, randomised, open-label phase 3 study done at 118 hospitals in 26 countries. Patients with advanced, unresectable, American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IIIC or stage IV NRAS-mutant melanoma who were previously untreated or had progressed on or after previous immunotherapy were randomised (2:1) to receive either binimetinib 45 mg orally twice daily or dacarbazine 1000 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by stage, performance status, and previous immunotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by blinded central review in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in the safety population, consisting of all patients who received at least one study drug dose and one post-baseline safety assessment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01763164 and with EudraCT, number 2012-003593-51. FINDINGS: Between Aug 19, 2013, and April 28, 2015, 402 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 269 to binimetinib and 133 to dacarbazine. Median follow-up was 1·7 months (IQR 1·4-4·1). Median progression-free survival was 2·8 months (95% CI 2·8-3·6) in the binimetinib group and 1·5 months (1·5-1·7) in the dacarbazine group (hazard ratio 0·62 [95% CI 0·47-0·80]; one-sided p<0·001). Grade 3-4 adverse events seen in at least 5% of patients the safety population in either group were increased creatine phosphokinase (52 [19%] of 269 patients in the binimetinib group vs none of 114 in the dacarbazine group), hypertension (20 [7%] vs two [2%]), anaemia (five [2%] vs six [5%]), and neutropenia (two [1%] vs ten [9%]). Serious adverse events (all grades) occurred in 91 (34%) patients in the binimetinib group and 25 (22%) patients in the dacarbazine group. INTERPRETATION: Binimetinib improved progression-free survival compared with dacarbazine and was tolerable. Binimetinib might represent a new treatment option for patients with NRAS-mutant melanoma after failure of immunotherapy. FUNDING: Array BioPharma and Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib in advanced BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma (coBRIM): updated efficacy results from a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The combination of cobimetinib with vemurafenib improves progression-free survival compared with placebo and vemurafenib in previously untreated patients with BRAF(V600)-mutant advanced melanoma, as previously reported in the coBRIM study. In this Article, we report updated efficacy results, including overall survival and safety after longer follow-up, and selected biomarker correlative studies. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre study, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed BRAF(V600) mutation-positive unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive response system to receive cobimetinib (60 mg once daily for 21 days followed by a 7-day rest period in each 28-day cycle) or placebo, in combination with oral vemurafenib (960 mg twice daily). Progression-free and overall survival were primary and secondary endpoints, respectively; all analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01689519, and is ongoing but no longer recruiting participants. FINDINGS: Between Jan 8, 2013, and Jan 31, 2014, 495 eligible adult patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the cobimetinib plus vemurafenib group (n=247) or placebo plus vemurafenib group (n=248). At a median follow-up of 14·2 months (IQR 8·5-17·3), the updated investigator-assessed median progression-free survival was 12·3 months (95% CI 9·5-13·4) for cobimetinib and vemurafenib versus 7·2 months (5·6-7·5) for placebo and vemurafenib (HR 0·58 [95% CI 0·46-0·72], p<0·0001). The final analysis for overall survival occurred when 255 (52%) patients had died (Aug 28, 2015). Median overall survival was 22·3 months (95% CI 20·3-not estimable) for cobimetinib and vemurafenib versus 17·4 months (95% CI 15·0-19·8) for placebo and vemurafenib (HR 0·70, 95% CI 0·55-0·90; p=0·005). The safety profile for cobimetinib and vemurafenib was tolerable and manageable, and no new safety signals were observed with longer follow-up. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events occurring at a higher frequency in patients in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group compared with the vemurafenib group were γ-glutamyl transferase increase (36 [15%] in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group vs 25 [10%] in the placebo and vemurafenib group), blood creatine phosphokinase increase (30 [12%] vs one [<1%]), and alanine transaminase increase (28 [11%] vs 15 [6%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 92 patients (37%) in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 69 patients (28%) in the vemurafenib group. Pyrexia (six patients [2%]) and dehydration (five patients [2%]) were the most common serious adverse events reported in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group. A total of 259 patients have died: 117 (47%) in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 142 (58%) in the vemurafenib group. The primary cause of death was disease progression in most patients: 109 (93%) of 117 in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 133 (94%) of 142 in the vemurafenib group. INTERPRETATION: These data confirm the clinical benefit of cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib and support the use of the combination as a standard first-line approach to improve survival in patients with advanced BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche-Genentech.

Intralesional administration of L19-IL2/L19-TNF in stage III or stage IVM1a melanoma patients: results of a phase II study.

The intratumoral injection of cytokines, in particular IL2, has shown promise for cutaneous melanoma patients with unresectable disease or continuous recurrence despite surgery. We recently reported that the intralesional injection of L19-IL2, an immunocytokine combining IL2 and the human monoclonal antibody fragment L19, resulted in efficient regional control of disease progression, increased time to distant metastasis and evidence of effect on circulating immune cell populations. We have also shown in preclinical models of cancer a remarkable synergistic effect of the combination of L19-IL2 with L19-TNF, a second clinical-stage immunocytokine, based on the same L19 antibody fused to TNF. Here, we describe the results of a phase II clinical trial based on the intralesional administration of L19-IL2 and L19-TNF in patients with stage IIIC and IVM1a metastatic melanoma, who were not candidate to surgery. In 20 efficacy-evaluable patients, 32 melanoma lesions exhibited complete responses upon intralesional administration of the two products, with mild side effects mainly limited to injection site reactions. Importantly, we observed complete responses in 7/13 (53.8 %) non-injected lesions (4 cutaneous, 3 lymph nodes), indicating a systemic activity of the intralesional immunostimulatory treatment. The intralesional administration of L19-IL2 and L19-TNF represents a simple and effective method for the local control of inoperable melanoma lesions, with a potential to eradicate them or make them suitable for a facile surgical removal of the residual mass.

Efficacy and safety of ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma and brain metastases.

Patients with melanoma brain metastases have a poor prognosis and historically have been excluded from clinical trials. The Expanded Access Program (EAP) provided an opportunity to evaluate the feasibility of ipilimumab (3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses) in patients with stage 3 (unresectable) or 4 melanoma and asymptomatic brain metastases, who had failed or did not tolerate previous treatments and had no other therapeutic option available. Tumor assessments were conducted at baseline and week 12 using immune-related response criteria and patients were monitored for adverse events (AEs). Of 855 patients participating in the EAP in Italy, 146 had asymptomatic brain metastases. With a median follow-up of 4 months, the global disease control rate was 27%, including 4 patients with a complete response and 13 with a partial response. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 2.8 and 4.3 months, respectively and approximately one-fifth of patients were alive 1 year after starting ipilimumab. In total, 29% of patients reported a treatment-related AE of any grade, which were grade 3/4 in 6% of patients. AEs were generally reversible with treatment as per protocol-specific guidelines. Ipilimumab shows durable benefits in some patients with advanced melanoma metastatic to the brain, with safety results consistent with those previously reported in clinical trials.

Tremelimumab for patients with chemotherapy-resistant advanced malignant mesothelioma: an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal antibodies to cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA4) have therapeutic activity in different tumour types. We aimed to investigate the efficacy, safety, and immunological activity of the anti-CTLA4 monoclonal antibody, tremelimumab, in advanced malignant mesothelioma. METHODS: In our open-label, single-arm, phase 2 study, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with measurable, unresectable malignant mesothelioma and progressive disease after a first-line platinum-based regimen. Eligible patients had to have a life expectancy of 3 months or more, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, and no history of autoimmune disease. Patients received tremelimumab 15 mg/kg intravenously once every 90 days until progressive disease or severe toxicity. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response (complete or partial response), with a target response rate of 17% according to the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) for pleural malignant mesothelioma or standard RECIST 1.0 for peritoneal malignant mesothelioma. Analyses were done according to intention to treat. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2008-005171-95, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01649024. FINDINGS: Between May 27, 2009, and Jan 10, 2012, we enrolled 29 patients. All patients received at least one dose of tremelimumab (median two doses, range one to nine). No patients had a complete response and two patients (7%) had a durable partial response (one lasting 6 months and one lasting 18 months); one partial response occurred after initial progressive disease. Thus, the study did not reach its primary endpoint. However, we noted disease control in nine (31%) patients and a median progression-free survival of 6·2 months (95% CI 1·3-11·1) and a median overall survival of 10·7 months (0·0-21·9). 27 patients (93%) had at least one grade 1-2 treatment-emergent adverse event (mainly cutaneous rash, pruritus, colitis, or diarrhoea), and four patients (14%) had at least one grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse event (two gastrointestinal, one neurological, two hepatic, and one pancreatic). INTERPRETATION: Although the effect size was small in our phase 2 trial, tremelimumab seemed to have encouraging clinical activity and an acceptable safety and tolerability profile in previously treated patients with advanced malignant mesothelioma. FUNDING: Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro, Istituto Toscano Tumori, Pfizer, and Fondazione Buzzi Unicem.

Immunotherapy in melanoma: Can we predict response to treatment with circulating biomarkers?

Melanoma is the most aggressive form of skin cancer, representing approximately 4% of all cutaneous neoplasms and accounting for up to 80% of deaths. Advanced stages of melanoma involve metastatic processes and are associated with high mortality and morbidity, mainly due to the rapid dissemination and heterogeneous responses to current therapies, including immunotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are currently used in the treatment of metastatic melanoma (MM) and despite being linked to an increase in patient survival, a high percentage of them still do not benefit from it. Accordingly, the number of therapeutic regimens for MM patients using ICIs either alone or in combination with other therapies has increased, together with the need for reliable biomarkers that can both predict and monitor response to ICIs. In this context, circulating biomarkers, such as DNA, RNA, proteins, and cells, have emerged due to their ability to reflect disease status. Moreover, blood tests are minimally invasive and provide an attractive option to detect biomarkers, avoiding stressful medical procedures. This systematic review aims to evaluate the possibility of a non-invasive biomarker signature that can guide therapeutic decisions. The studies reported here offer valuable insight into how circulating biomarkers can have a role in personalized treatments for melanoma patients receiving ICIs therapy, emphasizing the need for rigorous clinical trials to confirm findings and establish standardized procedures.

The future of targeting cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein-4: Is there a role?

The 2022 yearly Think Tank Meeting in Siena, Tuscany (Italy), organized by the Italian Network for Tumor Biotherapy (NIBIT) Foundation, the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy and the World Immunotherapy Council, included a focus on the future of integrating and expanding the use of targeting cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4). The conference members exchanged their views on the lessons from targeting CTLA-4 and compared the effect to the impact of blocking Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1) or its ligand (PDL1). The increasing experience with both therapeutic approaches and their combination suggests that targeting CTLA-4 may lead to more durable responses for a sizeable proportion of patients, though the specific mechanism is not entirely understood. Overcoming toxicity of blocking CTLA-4 is currently being addressed with different doses and dose regimens, especially when combined with PD1/PDL1 blocking antibodies. Novel therapeutics targeting CTLA-4 hold the promise to reduce toxicities and thus allow different combination strategies in the future. On the whole, the consent was that targeting CTLA-4 remains an important strategy to improve the efficacy of cancer immunotherapies.

Immunotherapy in cutaneous melanoma and biologics in psoriatic disease: similarities and differences from a clinical multidisciplinary perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Immunomodulating therapies harness the power of the immune system to combat disease. In advanced melanoma, immune checkpoint inhibitors have significantly improved survival outcomes by activating the immune system to recognize and eliminate cancer cells. In psoriasis, interleukin inhibitors effectively suppress inflammation and improve disease symptoms. AREAS COVERED: We provide a meta-opinion-based consensus paper on the analogies and differences in treatment mechanisms, duration, frequency between immunotherapy for advanced melanoma and biologics for psoriasis. Combining the current scientific evidence with expert insights, we provide valuable guidance for future research and decision-making processes. EXPERT OPINION: The development of immunological treatments in melanoma and psoriasis has revolutionized dermatology, but the quest for tailored therapies that maximize efficacy continues. Managing cutaneous exacerbations during melanoma immunotherapy in psoriatic patients remains challenging. Similarly, treating oncologic psoriasis patients resistant to traditional therapies requires individualized approaches. Research is needed to identify response predictors in both conditions and address the sustainability of healthcare systems due to the high cost of biologics. Drug delay studies for psoriasis and longer follow-up evaluations after immunotherapy discontinuation in melanoma are essential for optimizing treatment outcomes and resource allocation.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases: 7-year outcomes and quality of life from the multicenter phase III NIBIT-M2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The primary analysis of the phase III NIBIT-M2 study showed a 41% 4-year overall survival (OS) of melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab. METHODS: Here, we report the 7-year efficacy outcomes and the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) analyses of the NIBIT-M2 study. RESULTS: As of May 1, 2023, at a median follow-up of 67 months (mo), the median OS was 8.5 (95% CI: 6.6-10.3), 8.2 (95% CI: 2.1-14.3) and 29.2 (95% CI: 0-69.9) mo for the fotemustine (F) Arm A, ipilimumab plus fotemustine Arm B, and ipilimumab plus nivolumab Arm C, respectively. The 7-year OS rate was 10.0% (95% CI: 0-22.5) in Arm A, 10.3% (95% CI: 0-22.6) in Arm B, and 42.8% (95% CI: 23.4-62.2) in Arm C. HRQoL was preserved in all treatment arms. Most functional scales evaluated from baseline to W12 were preserved, with a lower mean score decrease for EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and an increase for EORTC QLQ-Brain neoplasm (BN20) in patients receiving ipilimumab plus nivolumab. CONCLUSIONS: With the longest follow-up available to date in melanoma patients with asymptomatic brain metastases, the NIBIT-M2 study continues to show persistent therapeutic efficacy of I ipilimumab plus nivolumab while preserving HRQoL.

Combined immunotherapy in melanoma patients with brain metastases: A multicenter international study.

BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab plus nivolumab (COMBO) is the standard treatment in asymptomatic patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBM). We report a retrospective study aiming to assess the outcome of patients with MBM treated with COMBO outside clinical trials. METHODS: Consecutive patients treated with COMBO have been included. Demographics, steroid treatment, Central Nervous System (CNS)-related symptoms, BRAF status, radiotherapy or surgery, response rate (RR), progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) have been analyzed. RESULTS: 376 patients were included: 262 received COMBO as first-line and 114 as a subsequent line of therapy, respectively. In multivariate analysis, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) (≥1 vs 0) [HR 1.97 (1.46-2.66)], extracerebral metastases [HR 1.92 (1.09-3.40)], steroid use at the start of COMBO [HR 1.59 (1.08-2.38)], CNS-related symptoms [HR 1.59 (1.08-2.34)], SRS (Stereotactic radiosurgery) [HR 0.63 (0.45-0.88)] and surgery [HR 0.63 (0.43-0.91)] were associated with OS. At a median follow-up of 30 months, the median OS (mOS) in the overall population was 21.3 months (18.1-24.5), whilst OS was not yet reached in treatment-naive patients, steroid-free at baseline. In patients receiving COMBO after BRAF/MEK inhibitors(i) PFS at 1-year was 15.7%. The dose of steroids (dexamethasone < vs ≥ 4 mg/day) was not prognostic. SRS alongside COMBO vs COMBO alone in asymptomatic patients prolonged survival. (p = 0.013). Toxicities were consistent with previous studies. An independent validation cohort (n = 51) confirmed the findings. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate remarkable long-term survival in treatment-naïve, asymptomatic, steroid-free patients, as well as in those receiving SRS plus COMBO. PFS and OS were poor in patients receiving COMBO after progressing to BRAF/MEKi.

Long-term survival and immunological parameters in metastatic melanoma patients who responded to ipilimumab 10 mg/kg within an expanded access programme.

BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab can result in durable clinical responses among patients with advanced melanoma. However, no predictive marker of clinical activity has yet been identified. We provide preliminary data describing the correlation between immunological parameters and response/survival among patients with advanced melanoma who received ipilimumab 10 mg/kg in an expanded access programme. METHODS: Patients received ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks (Q3W) for four doses (induction) and Q12W from week 24 (W24) as maintenance therapy. Tumor assessments were conducted Q12W. Expression of inducible T cell costimulator (ICOS) on CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells was assessed at baseline, W7, W12 and W24, and the ratio between absolute neutrophils (N) and lymphocytes (L) determined at baseline, W4, W7 and W10. RESULTS: Median overall survival among 27 patients was 9.6 months (95 % CI 3.2-16.1), with 3- and 4-year survival rates of 20.4 %. Five patients survived >4 years. Patients with an increase in the number of circulating ICOS(+) T cells at W7 were more likely to experience disease control and have improved survival. An N/L ratio below the median at W7 and W10 was also associated with better survival compared with an N/L ratio above the median. CONCLUSIONS: Ipilimumab can induce long-term survival benefits in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic melanoma. Changes in the number of circulating ICOS(+) T cells or N/L ratio during ipilimumab treatment may represent early markers of response. However, given the limited sample size, further investigation is required.

Ipilimumab and fotemustine in patients with advanced melanoma (NIBIT-M1): an open-label, single-arm phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab improves survival of patients with metastatic melanoma, many of whom develop brain metastases. Chemotherapy-induced release of tumour antigens might amplify ipilimumab's antitumour activity. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab plus fotemustine in patients with metastatic melanoma with or without asymptomatic brain metastases. METHODS: In our open-label, single-arm phase 2 trial, we enrolled patients 18 years or older with measurable, locally advanced, unresectable stage III or stage IV melanoma between July 6, 2010, and April 14, 2011. Eligible patients had a life expectancy of 16 weeks or more and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 1 or less, and could have received a maximum of one previous line of chemotherapy. Participants received induction treatment of 10 mg/kg intravenous ipilimumab every 3 weeks to a total of four doses, and 100 mg/m(2) intravenous fotemustine weekly for 3 weeks and then every 3 weeks from week 9 to week 24. Patients with a confirmed clinical response were eligible for maintenance treatment from week 24, with ipilimumab every 12 weeks and fotemustine every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with immune-related disease control as established with immune-related response criteria. Analyses were done per protocol. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2010-019356-50, and with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01654692. FINDINGS: 86 patients were eligible for treatment, of whom 20 had asymptomatic brain metastases at baseline. 40 patients in the study population achieved disease control (46·5%, 95% CI 35·7-57·6), as did ten with brain metastases (50·0%, 27·2-72·8). 47 patients (55%) had grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events, of which the most common was myelotoxicity (thrombocytopenia in 21 [24%] patients and neutropenia in 16 [19%]). The most common grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events were hepatic: 21 patients (24%) had grade 3 or 4 increases in concentrations of alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase. INTERPRETATION: The combination of ipilimumab plus fotemustine has clinical activity in patients with metastatic melanoma, including those with brain metastases. FUNDING: Bristol-Myers Squibb.

From Co-Stimulation to Co-Inhibition: A Continuum of Immunotherapy Care Toward Long-Term Survival in Melanoma.

Harnessing the immune system with immune-checkpoint(s) blockade (ICB) has dramatically changed the treatment landscape of advanced melanoma patients in the last decade. Indeed, durable clinical responses and long-term survival can be achieved with anti-Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen-4 (CTLA-4) and anti-Programmed cell Death-1 (PD-1) monoclonal antibodies (mAb) either alone or in combination. Despite these unprecedented results, due to intrinsic or acquired resistance to ICB-based immunotherapy, about half of metastatic melanoma (MM) patients neither respond to therapy nor experience durable clinical benefit or long-term survival. To improve the efficacy of ICB therapy among a larger proportion of MM patients, in addition to the targeting of immune-checkpoint(s) inhibitors (ICI) such as CTLA-4 or PD-1, several co-stimulatory molecules, such as Inducible T-cell COStimulator (ICOS), CD137 and OX40, have been investigated in MM, with initial signs of activity. Thus, a number of MM patients have been exposed to co-inhibitory and co-stimulatory mAb in the course of their disease. Being aware of the clinical outcome of such patients may pave the way to novel and more effective clinical approaches and therapeutic sequences for MM patients. Here we report a paradigmatic clinical case of a cutaneous MM patient who achieved multiple and durable complete responses, leading to an extraordinary long-term survival with sequential ICB therapies, suggesting the possibility to build a highly effective continuum of care with co-inhibitory and co-stimulatory therapeutic mAb.