Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocyte Therapy or Ipilimumab in Advanced Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies have dramatically improved outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma, but approximately half these patients will not have a durable benefit. Phase 1-2 trials of adoptive cell therapy with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have shown promising responses, but data from phase 3 trials are lacking to determine the role of TILs in treating advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients with unresectable stage IIIC or IV melanoma in a 1:1 ratio to receive TIL or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 therapy (ipilimumab at 3 mg per kilogram of body weight). Infusion of at least 5×109 TILs was preceded by nonmyeloablative, lymphodepleting chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide plus fludarabine) and followed by high-dose interleukin-2. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 168 patients (86% with disease refractory to anti-programmed death 1 treatment) were assigned to receive TILs (84 patients) or ipilimumab (84 patients). In the intention-to-treat population, median progression-free survival was 7.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2 to 13.1) in the TIL group and 3.1 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 4.3) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.72; P<0.001); 49% (95% CI, 38 to 60) and 21% (95% CI, 13 to 32) of the patients, respectively, had an objective response. Median overall survival was 25.8 months (95% CI, 18.2 to not reached) in the TIL group and 18.9 months (95% CI, 13.8 to 32.6) in the ipilimumab group. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in all patients who received TILs and in 57% of those who received ipilimumab; in the TIL group, these events were mainly chemotherapy-related myelosuppression. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced melanoma, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received TIL therapy than among those who received ipilimumab. (Funded by the Dutch Cancer Society and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02278887.).

Development and validation of a novel model to predict recurrence-free survival and melanoma-specific survival after sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with melanoma: an international, retrospective, multicentre analysis.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of adjuvant systemic treatment for patients with high-risk melanomas necessitates accurate staging of disease. However, inconsistencies in outcomes exist between disease stages as defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (8th edition). We aimed to develop a tool to predict patient-specific outcomes in people with melanoma rather than grouping patients according to disease stage. METHODS: Patients older than 13 years with confirmed primary melanoma who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) between Oct 29, 1997, and Nov 11, 2013, at four European melanoma centres (based in Berlin, Germany; Amsterdam and Rotterdam, the Netherlands; and Warsaw, Poland) were included in the development cohort. Potential predictors of recurrence-free and melanoma-specific survival assessed were sex, age, presence of ulceration, primary tumour location, histological subtype, Breslow thickness, sentinel node status, number of sentinel nodes removed, maximum diameter of the largest sentinel node metastasis, and Dewar classification. A prognostic model and nomogram were developed to predict 5-year recurrence-free survival on a continuous scale in patients with stage pT1b or higher melanomas. This model was also calibrated to predict melanoma-specific survival. Model performance was assessed by discrimination (area under the time-dependent receiver operating characteristics curve [AUC]) and calibration. External validation was done in a cohort of patients with primary melanomas who underwent SLNB between Jan 30, 1997, and Dec 12, 2013, at the Melanoma Institute Australia (Sydney, NSW, Australia). FINDINGS: The development cohort consisted of 4071 patients, of whom 2075 (51%) were female and 1996 (49%) were male. 889 (22%) had sentinel node-positive disease and 3182 (78%) had sentinel node-negative disease. The validation cohort comprised 4822 patients, of whom 1965 (41%) were female and 2857 (59%) were male. 891 (18%) had sentinel node-positive disease and 3931 (82%) had sentinel node-negative disease. Median follow-up was 4·8 years (IQR 2·3-7·8) in the development cohort and 5·0 years (2·2-8·9) in the validation cohort. In the development cohort, 5-year recurrence-free survival was 73·5% (95% CI 72·0-75·1) and 5-year melanoma-specific survival was 86·5% (85·3-87·8). In the validation cohort, the corresponding estimates were 66·1% (64·6-67·7) and 83·3% (82·0-84·6), respectively. The final model contained six prognostic factors: sentinel node status, Breslow thickness, presence of ulceration, age at SLNB, primary tumour location, and maximum diameter of the largest sentinel node metastasis. In the development cohort, for the model's prediction of recurrence-free survival, the AUC was 0·80 (95% CI 0·78-0·81); for prediction of melanoma-specific survival, the AUC was 0·81 (0·79-0·84). External validation showed good calibration for both outcomes, with AUCs of 0·73 (0·71-0·75) and 0·76 (0·74-0·78), respectively. INTERPRETATION: Our prediction model and nomogram accurately predicted patient-specific risk probabilities for 5-year recurrence-free and melanoma-specific survival. These tools could have important implications for clinical decision making when considering adjuvant treatments in patients with high-risk melanomas. FUNDING: Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute.

The development of brain metastases in patients with different therapeutic strategies for metastatic renal cell cancer.

A diagnosis of brain metastasis (BM) significantly affects quality of life in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Although systemic treatments have shown efficacy in mRCC, active surveillance (AS) is still commonly used in clinical practice. In this single-center cohort study, we assessed the impact of different initial treatment strategies for metastatic RCC (mRCC) on the development of BM. All consecutive patients diagnosed with mRCC between 2011 and 2022 were included at the Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, the Netherlands, and a subgroup of patients with BM was selected. In total, 381 patients with mRCC (ECM, BM, or both) were identified. Forty-six patients had BM of whom 39 had metachronous BM (diagnosed ≥1 month after ECM). Twenty-five (64.1%) of these 39 patients with metachronous BM had received prior systemic treatment for ECM and 14 (35.9%) patients were treatment naive at BM diagnosis. The median BM-free survival since ECM diagnosis was significantly longer (p = .02) in previously treated patients (29.0 [IQR 12.6-57.0] months) compared to treatment naive patients (6.8 [IQR 1.0-7.0] months). In conclusion, patients with mRCC who received systemic treatment for ECM prior to BM diagnosis had a longer BM-free survival as compared to treatment naïve patients. These results emphasize the need for careful evaluation of treatment strategies, and especially AS, for patients with mRCC.

Adjuvant treatment with anti-PD-1 in acral melanoma: A nationwide study.

Previous studies demonstrated limited efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in unresectable acral melanoma (AM); it remains unclear how this translates to the adjuvant setting. This study investigates clinical outcomes of acral compared to cutaneous melanoma (CM) patients treated with adjuvant anti-PD-1 after complete resection. All stages III-IV AM and CM patients receiving adjuvant anti-PD-1 after complete resection between 2018 and 2022 were included from the prospective nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. We analyzed recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS). A multivariable Cox regression analysis of RFS was performed to adjust for potential confounders. We included 1958 (86 AM and 1872 CM) patients. At baseline, AM patients more frequently had KIT mutations, higher disease stages, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, and fewer BRAF and NRAS mutations. Median RFS was 14.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.5-29.3) in AM and 37.4 months (95% CI: 34.6 to not reached) in CM (p = .002). After correcting for potential confounders, AM remained associated with a higher risk of recurrence (HRadj 1.53; 95% CI: 1.07-2.17; p = .019). Two-year DMFS tended to be worse for AM than for CM: 64.5% versus 79.7% (p = .050). Two-year OS was significantly lower in AM (71.5% vs. 84.3%; p = .027). The results of this study suggest a poorer outcome of adjuvant-treated AM compared to CM. Studies assessing the added value of adjuvant treatment in AM are needed. Future research should investigate alternative treatment strategies to improve outcomes of high-risk AM.

A prediction model for response to immune checkpoint inhibition in advanced melanoma.

Predicting who will benefit from treatment with immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) in patients with advanced melanoma is challenging. We developed a multivariable prediction model for response to ICI, using routinely available clinical data including primary melanoma characteristics. We used a population-based cohort of 3525 patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma treated with anti-PD-1-based therapy. Our prediction model for predicting response within 6 months after ICI initiation was internally validated with bootstrap resampling. Performance evaluation included calibration, discrimination and internal-external cross-validation. Included patients received anti-PD-1 monotherapy (n = 2366) or ipilimumab plus nivolumab (n = 1159) in any treatment line. The model included serum lactate dehydrogenase, World Health Organization performance score, type and line of ICI, disease stage and time to first distant recurrence-all at start of ICI-, and location and type of primary melanoma, the presence of satellites and/or in-transit metastases at primary diagnosis and sex. The over-optimism adjusted area under the receiver operating characteristic was 0.66 (95% CI: 0.64-0.66). The range of predicted response probabilities was 7%-81%. Based on these probabilities, patients were categorized into quartiles. Compared to the lowest response quartile, patients in the highest quartile had a significantly longer median progression-free survival (20.0 vs 2.8 months; P < .001) and median overall survival (62.0 vs 8.0 months; P < .001). Our prediction model, based on routinely available clinical variables and primary melanoma characteristics, predicts response to ICI in patients with advanced melanoma and discriminates well between treated patients with a very good and very poor prognosis.

BRAF/MEK inhibitor rechallenge in advanced melanoma patients.

BACKGROUND: Effectivity of BRAF(/MEK) inhibitor rechallenge has been described in prior studies. However, structured data are largely lacking. METHODS: Data from all advanced melanoma patients treated with BRAFi(/MEKi) rechallenge were retrieved from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. The authors analyzed objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) for both first treatment and rechallenge. They performed a multivariable logistic regression and a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model to assess factors associated with response and survival. RESULTS: The authors included 468 patients in the largest cohort to date who underwent at least two treatment episodes of BRAFi(/MEKi). Following rechallenge, ORR was 43%, median PFS was 4.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1-5.2), and median OS was 8.2 months (95% CI, 7.2-9.4). Median PFS after rechallenge for patients who discontinued first BRAFi(/MEKi) treatment due to progression was 3.1 months (95% CI, 2.7-4.0) versus 5.2 months (95% CI, 4.5-5.9) for patients who discontinued treatment for other reasons. Discontinuing first treatment due to progression and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels greater than two times the upper limit of normal were associated with lower odds of response and worse PFS and OS. Symptomatic brain metastases were associated with worse survival, whereas a longer treatment interval between first treatment and rechallenge was associated with better survival. Responding to the first BRAFi(/MEKi) treatment was not associated with response or survival. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that patients benefit from rechallenge. Elevated LDH levels, symptomatic brain metastases, and discontinuing first BRAFi(/MEKi) treatment due to progression are associated with less benefit from rechallenge. A prolonged treatment interval is associated with more benefit from rechallenge.

Evaluation of the tolerability and safety of [225Ac]Ac-PSMA-I&T in patients with metastatic prostate cancer: a phase I dose escalation study.

BACKGROUND: Life expectancy of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is still limited despite several systemic treatments. Within five years after diagnosis of primary prostate cancer, 10-20% of the patients have mCRPC and curation is not an option. Radionuclide therapy (RNT) targeted against prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) emerged as a new treatment option and showed effective results in patients with mCRPC. Survival benefit after [177Lu]Lu-PSMA RNT has already been demonstrated in several clinical trials. However, [225Ac]Ac-PSMA (225Ac-PSMA) appears to be an even more promising radiopharmaceutical for the treatment of mCRPC. The use of alpha emitting radionuclides offers advantages over beta emitting radionuclides due to the high linear energy transfer effective for killing tumor cells and the limited range to reduce the radiation effects on the healthy tissue. However, these results are based on retrospective data and safety data of 225Ac-PSMA are still limited. Therefore, a prospective trial is needed to determine the optimal amount of activity that can be administered. METHODS: The 225Ac-PSMA-Imaging & Therapy (I&T) trial is an investigator-initiated phase I, single-center, open label, repeated dose-escalation and expansion trial. Patient with PSMA-positive mCRPC after at least one line of chemotherapy and/or one line of nonsteroidal antiandrogen will be treated with 225Ac-PSMA-I&T in increasing amount of activity per cycle. Dose-escalation following an accelerated 3 + 3 design which allows to open the next dose-level cohort in the absence of dose limiting toxicity while the previous one is still ongoing. Up to 4 treatment cohorts will be explored including up to 3 dose-escalation cohorts and one expansion cohort where patients will be administered with the recommended dose. A total of up to 30 patients will be enrolled in this trial. All patients will be evaluated for safety. Additionally, dosimetry was performed for the patients in the dose-escalation cohorts after the first 225Ac-PSMA-I&T administration. DISCUSSION: This trial will assess the safety and tolerability of 225Ac-PSMA-I&T in patients with mCRPC to recommend the optimal dose for the phase II trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, (NCT05902247). Retrospectively registered 13 June 2023.

From decision to reflection: understanding the experiences and unmet care needs of patients treated with immunotherapy for melanoma in the adjuvant or metastatic setting.

BACKGROUND: Despite increased use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with advanced melanoma, little is known about patient experiences during this treatment. This study aimed to gain an in-depth understanding of experiences and unmet care needs of patients treated in the adjuvant or metastatic setting for advanced melanoma regarding their ICI treatment trajectory. METHODS: Interviews and focus groups were conducted among 35 patients treated with ICIs in the adjuvant setting for completely resected stage III (n = 14), or in the metastatic setting for irresectable stage IV (n = 21) melanoma. A thorough thematic content analysis was conducted. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified. When (1) dealing with uncertainty in the decision-making process, adjuvant patients explored the pros and cons, whereas metastatic patients considered immunotherapy their only viable option. Both groups expressed the need for additional guidance. In (2) navigating the immunotherapy course, both perceived the trajectory as intense, experienced a major impact on their and their (close) relatives' lives, and felt the need to (re)gain control. When (3) looking back on the immunotherapy experience, metastatic patients generally felt relieved, while among adjuvant patients, feelings of doubt regarding their choice for ICIs were also reported. CONCLUSIONS: ICI treatment is perceived as intensive for both patient groups, facing both comparable and distinct challenges throughout the treatment trajectory, underscoring the need for stage-specific, individualised guidance. Options regarding flexible follow-ups, low-threshold contact and psychosocial support throughout the treatment trajectory should be explored.

Safe Stop IPI-NIVO trial: early discontinuation of nivolumab upon achieving a complete or partial response in patients with irresectable stage III or metastatic melanoma treated with first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab - study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Patients with irresectable stage III or metastatic melanoma presenting with poor prognostic factors are usually treated with a combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), consisting of ipilimumab and nivolumab. This combination therapy is associated with severe immune related adverse events (irAEs) in about 60% of patients. In current clinical practice, patients are usually treated with ICIs for up to two years or until disease progression or the occurrence of unacceptable AEs. The incidence of irAEs gradually increases with duration of treatment. While durable tumour responses have been observed after early discontinuation of treatment, no consensus has been reached on optimal treatment duration. The objective of the Safe Stop IPI-NIVO trial is to evaluate whether early discontinuation of ICIs is safe in patients with irresectable stage III or metastatic melanoma who are treated with combination therapy. METHODS: The Safe Stop IPI-NIVO trial is a nationwide, multicentre, prospective, single-arm, interventional study in the Netherlands. A total of 80 patients with irresectable stage III or metastatic melanoma who are treated with combination therapy of ipilimumab-nivolumab and have a complete or partial response (CR/PR) according to RECIST v1.1 will be included to early discontinue maintenance therapy with anti-PD-1. The primary endpoint is the rate of ongoing response at 12 months after start of ICI. Secondary endpoints include ongoing response at 24 months, disease control at different time points, melanoma specific and overall survival, the incidence of irAEs and health-related quality of life. DISCUSSION: From a medical, healthcare and economic perspective, overtreatment should be prevented and shorter treatment duration of ICIs is preferred. If early discontinuation of ICIs is safe for patients who are treated with the combination of ipilimumab-nivolumab, the treatment duration of nivolumab could be shortened in patients with a favourable tumour response. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05652673, registration date: 08-12-2022.

Adjuvant treatment of in-transit melanoma: Narrowing the knowledge gap left by clinical trials.

Few clinical trials address efficacy of adjuvant systemic treatment in patients with in-transit melanoma (ITM). This study describes adjuvant systemic therapy of ITM patients beyond clinical trials. In this study, we included stage III adjuvant-treated melanoma patients registered in the nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry between July 2018 and December 2020. Patients were divided into three groups: nodal disease only, ITM only and ITM and nodal disease. Recurrence patterns, recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) at 12-months were analyzed. In our study population of 1037 patients, 66.8% had nodal disease only, 16.7% had ITM only and 16.2% had ITM with nodal disease. RFS at 12-months was comparable in the nodal only and ITM only group (72.2% vs70.1%, P = .97) but lower in ITM and nodal disease patients (57.8%; P = .01, P < .01). Locoregional metastases occurred as first recurrence in 38.9% nodal disease only, 71.9% of ITM-only and 44.0% of ITM and nodal disease patients. Distant recurrences occurred in 42.3%, 18.8% and 36.0%, respectively (P = .02). 12-months OS was not significantly different for nodal disease only patients compared with ITM-only (94.4% vs 97.6%, P = .06) but was significantly higher for ITM-only compared with ITM and nodal disease patients (97.6% vs 91.0%, P < .01). In conclusion, we showed that in the adjuvant setting, RFS rates in ITM-only patients are similar to non-ITM, though better than in ITM and nodal disease patients. Adjuvant-treated ITM-only patients less often experience distant recurrences and have a superior OS compared with ITM and nodal disease patients.

Time interval from primary melanoma to first distant recurrence in relation to patient outcomes in advanced melanoma.

Since the introduction of BRAF(/MEK) inhibition and immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI), the prognosis of advanced melanoma has greatly improved. Melanoma is known for its remarkably long time to first distant recurrence (TFDR), which can be decades in some patients and is partly attributed to immune-surveillance. We investigated the relationship between TFDR and patient outcomes after systemic treatment for advanced melanoma. We selected patients undergoing first-line systemic therapy for advanced melanoma from the nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. The association between TFDR and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed by Cox proportional hazard regression models. The TFDR was modeled categorically, linearly, and flexibly using restricted cubic splines. Patients received anti-PD-1-based treatment (n = 1844) or BRAF(/MEK) inhibition (n = 1618). For ICI-treated patients with a TFDR <2 years, median OS was 25.0 months, compared to 37.3 months for a TFDR >5 years (P = .014). Patients treated with BRAF(/MEK) inhibition with a longer TFDR also had a significantly longer median OS (8.6 months for TFDR <2 years compared to 11.1 months for >5 years, P = .004). The hazard of dying rapidly decreased with increasing TFDR until approximately 5 years (HR 0.87), after which the hazard of dying further decreased with increasing TFDR, but less strongly (HR 0.82 for a TFDR of 10 years and HR 0.79 for a TFDR of 15 years). Results were similar when stratifying for type of treatment. Advanced melanoma patients with longer TFDR have a prolonged PFS and OS, irrespective of being treated with first-line ICI or targeted therapy.

A blood-based immune marker for resistance to pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer.

PD1 inhibition is effective in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer (mUC), yet a large fraction of patients does not respond. In this study, we aimed to identify a blood-based immune marker associated with non-response to facilitate patient selection for anti-PD1. To this end, we quantified 18 immune cell populations using multiplex flow cytometry in blood samples from 71 patients with mUC (as part of a biomarker discovery trial; NCT03263039, registration date 28-08-2017). Patients were classified as responder (ongoing complete or partial response, or stable disease; n = 25) or non-responder (progressive disease; n = 46) according to RECIST v1.1 at 6 months of treatment with pembrolizumab. We observed no differences in numbers of lymphocytes, T-cells, granulocytes, monocytes or their subsets between responders and non-responders at baseline. In contrast, analysis of ratios of immune cell populations revealed that a high mature neutrophil-to-T-cell ratio (MNTR) exclusively identified non-responders. In addition, the survival of patients with high versus low MNTR was poor: median overall survival (OS) 2.2 vs 8.9 months (hazard ratio (HR) 6.6; p < 0.00001), and median progression-free survival (PFS) 1.5 vs 5.2 months (HR 5.6; p < 0.0001). The associations with therapy response, OS, and PFS for the MNTR were stronger than for the classical neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (HR for OS 3.5, and PFS 3) and the PD-L1 combined positivity score (HR for OS 1.9, and PFS 2.1). In conclusion, the MNTR distinctly and uniquely identified non-responders to treatment and may represent a novel pre-treatment blood-based immune metric to select patients with mUC for treatment with pembrolizumab.

Is a History of Optimal Staging by Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in the Era Prior to Adjuvant Therapy Associated with Improved Outcome Once Melanoma Patients have Progressed to Advanced Disease?

INTRODUCTION: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is important for staging in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma. Did having previously undergone SLNB also affect outcomes in patients once they have progressed to metastatic melanoma in the era prior to adjuvant therapy? METHODS: Data were retrieved from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry, a prospectively collected, nationwide database of patients with unresectable stage IIIC or IV (advanced) melanoma between 2012 and 2018. Melanoma-specific survival (MSS) was compared between patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma, previously treated with a wide local excision (WLE) or WLE combined with SLNB as initial treatment of their primary tumor. Cox regression analyses were used to analyze the influence of different variables on MSS. RESULTS: In total, 2581 patients were included, of whom 1412 were treated with a WLE of the primary tumor alone and 1169 in whom this was combined with SLNB. At a median follow-up of 44 months from diagnosis of advanced melanoma, MSS was significantly longer in patients who had previously undergone SLNB {median 23 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 19-29) vs. 18 months (95% CI 15-20) for patients treated with WLE alone; p = 0.002}. However, multivariate Cox regression did not identify SLNB as an independent favorable prognostic factor for MSS after diagnosis of advanced melanoma. CONCLUSION: Prior to the availability of adjuvant systemic therapy, once patients have unresectable stage IIIC or IV (advanced) melanoma, there was no difference in disease outcome for patients who were or were not previously staged with SLNB.

Oncological healthcare providers' perspectives on appropriate melanoma survivorship care: a qualitative focus group study.

BACKGROUND: The increasing group of melanoma survivors reports multiple unmet needs regarding survivorship care (SSC). To optimise melanoma SSC, it is crucial to take into account the perspectives of oncological healthcare providers (HCPs) in addition to those of patients. The aim of this study is to gain an in-depth understanding of HCPs' perspectives on appropriate melanoma SSC. METHODS: Four online focus groups were conducted with mixed samples of oncological HCPs (dermatologists, surgeons, oncologists, oncological nurse practitioners, support counsellors and general practitioners) (total n = 23). A topic guide was used to structure the discussions, focusing on perspectives on both SSC and survivorship care plans (SCPs). All focus groups were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and subjected to an elaborate thematic content analysis. RESULTS: Regarding SSC, HCPs considered the current offer minimal and stressed the need for broader personalised SSC from diagnosis onwards. Although hardly anyone was familiar with SCPs, they perceived various potential benefits of SCPs, such as an increase in the patients' self-management and providing HCPs with an up-to-date overview of the patient's situation. Perceived preconditions for successful implementation included adequate personalisation, integration in the electronic health record and ensuring adequate funding to activate and provide timely updates. CONCLUSIONS: According to HCPs there is considerable room for improvement in terms of melanoma SSC. SCPs can assist in offering personalised and broader i.e., including psychosocial SSC. Aside from personalisation, efforts should be focused on SCPs' integration in clinical practice, and their long-term maintenance.

Alternative dosing strategies for immune checkpoint inhibitors to improve cost-effectiveness: a special focus on nivolumab and pembrolizumab.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionised cancer treatment by offering durable responses to many patients with solid and haematological cancers. The high prices and increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors put considerable strain on health-care budgets globally. This financial strain could jeopardise patients' access to these anti-cancer therapies. However, substantial evidence suggests that immune checkpoint inhibitors are being administered at doses that exceed the minimum dose required for maximum anti-tumour efficacy. Therefore, investigating and implementing the most cost-effective dosing strategies for immune checkpoint inhibitors are urgently necessary. This Personal View provides an overview of existing data on immune checkpoint inhibitor pharmacology and (novel) dosing strategies for anti-PD-1 therapy with nivolumab and pembrolizumab, with a special focus on cost-effectiveness and saving potential. Furthermore, specific recommendations to guide health-care professionals are provided, through the process of prescribing, rounding, preparing, and administering nivolumab and pembrolizumab in the most practical and cost-effective way possible.

Discontinuation of anti-PD-1 monotherapy in advanced melanoma-Outcomes of daily clinical practice.

There is no consensus on the optimal treatment duration of anti-PD-1 for advanced melanoma. The aim of our study was to gain insight into the outcomes of anti-PD-1 discontinuation, the association of treatment duration with progression and anti-PD-1 re-treatment in relapsing patients. Analyses were performed on advanced melanoma patients in the Netherlands who discontinued first-line anti-PD-1 monotherapy in the absence of progressive disease (n = 324). Survival was estimated after anti-PD-1 discontinuation and with a Cox model the association of treatment duration with progression was assessed. At the time of anti-PD-1 discontinuation, 90 (28%) patients had a complete response (CR), 190 (59%) a partial response (PR) and 44 (14%) stable disease (SD). Median treatment duration for patients with CR, PR and SD was 11.2, 11.5 and 7.2 months, respectively. The 24-month progression-free survival and overall survival probabilities for patients with a CR, PR and SD were, respectively, 64% and 88%, 53% and 82%, 31% and 64%. Survival outcomes of patients with a PR and CR were similar when anti-PD-1 discontinuation was not due to adverse events. Having a PR at anti-PD-1 discontinuation and longer time to first response were associated with progression [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.81 (95% confidence interval, CI = 1.11-2.97) and HR = 1.10 (95% CI = 1.02-1.19; per month increase)]. In 17 of the 27 anti-PD-1 re-treated patients (63%), a response was observed. Advanced melanoma patients can have durable remissions after (elective) anti-PD-1 discontinuation.

The unfavorable effects of COVID-19 on Dutch advanced melanoma care.

The COVID-19 pandemic had a severe impact on medical care. Our study aims to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on advanced melanoma care in the Netherlands. We selected patients diagnosed with irresectable stage IIIc and IV melanoma during the first and second COVID-19 wave and compared them with patients diagnosed within the same time frame in 2018 and 2019. Patients were divided into three geographical regions. We investigated baseline characteristics, time from diagnosis until start of systemic therapy and postponement of anti-PD-1 courses. During both waves, fewer patients were diagnosed compared to the control groups. During the first wave, time between diagnosis and start of treatment was significantly longer in the southern region compared to other regions (33 vs 9 and 15 days, P-value <.05). Anti-PD-1 courses were postponed in 20.0% vs 3.0% of patients in the first wave compared to the control period. Significantly more patients had courses postponed in the south during the first wave compared to other regions (34.8% vs 11.5% vs 22.3%, P-value <.001). Significantly more patients diagnosed during the second wave had brain metastases and worse performance status compared to the control period. In conclusion, advanced melanoma care in the Netherlands was severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. In the south, the start of systemic treatment for advanced melanoma was more often delayed, and treatment courses were more frequently postponed. During the second wave, patients were diagnosed with poorer patient and tumor characteristics. Longer follow-up is needed to establish the impact on patient outcomes.

Experiences of resuming life after immunotherapy and associated survivorship care needs: a qualitative study among patients with metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have significantly improved the overall survival of patients with metastatic melanoma. It is unclear how the growing group of metastatic melanoma survivors resume their lives after treatment, and which needs they have regarding survivorship care (SSC). OBJECTIVES: To gain an in-depth understanding of metastatic melanoma survivors' experiences of resuming life after ICIs and their associated SSC needs. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted among 20 patients with metastatic melanoma in whom ICIs had been discontinued after ongoing tumour response. One focus group (n = 9) was held, which was complemented by 11 individual interviews. Purposive sampling was used to select a variable sample in terms of sex, age, time since discontinuation of ICIs, and perceived impact of the disease. A topic guide was used to structure the (group) interviews, which were transcribed verbatim and analysed in a thematic content analysis, using several phases of coding. RESULTS: In resuming life after ICIs, the prognosis switch often caused mixed feelings among patients, mainly because of the uncertainty about the future. Demands and expectations from self and others, persistent complaints and new problems in different life domains often make it challenging to proceed with life as it was prior to metastatic cancer. Patients indicated they needed to find a new balance, which included learning to cope with uncertainty and a changed perspective on life and close relationships. In terms of SSC needs, patients particularly stressed the need for more tailored patient information, available at one location. In addition, they emphasized the need to know who to turn to in case of questions and indicated the need for psychosocial support, also for their close relatives. CONCLUSIONS: Metastatic melanoma survivors face various challenges in resuming life after ICIs and are left with several unmet SSC needs. Efforts should be focused on offering psychosocial supportive care in addition to medical care, from diagnosis onwards, taking into account the patient's close relatives. A single point of contact and personalized survivorship care plan (SCP) could be of added value in guiding them through the patient journey, which is, given its multidisciplinary nature, particularly important in melanoma care. What is already known about this topic? Since the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) the overall survival of patients with metastatic melanoma has improved significantly, leading to a growing group of melanoma survivors. Melanoma survivors may face various problems and challenges in resuming life after treatment, which may be associated with unmet survivorship care (SSC) needs. An in-depth understanding of their experiences with resuming life and the associated SSC needs is currently lacking. What does this study add? Metastatic melanoma survivors experience various challenges after immunotherapy, from the uncertain prognosis switch to the struggle of finding a new balance in life. Besides negative aspects, such as complaints in different life domains, the patient journey is often accompanied by positive outcomes, for example a changed perspective on life. They stress the need for tailored patient information and broader supportive care, also for their close relatives. What are the clinical implications of this work? In addition to medical care, efforts should be focused on offering psychosocial supportive care, including return-to-work issues, from diagnosis onwards, ideally taking into account the patient's close relatives. To guide them through the patient journey, a single point of contact and a personalized survivorship care plan (SCP) could be of added value. The latter is particularly important in melanoma care, given its multidisciplinary nature.

Safety and Efficacy of Checkpoint Inhibition in Patients With Melanoma and Preexisting Autoimmune Disease : A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Because immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) can cause immune-related adverse events (irAEs) mimicking immunologic diseases, patients with preexisting autoimmune disease (AID) have been excluded from clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of ICI in patients with advanced melanoma with and without AID. DESIGN: Nationwide cohort study. SETTING: The Netherlands. PATIENTS: 4367 patients with advanced melanoma enrolled in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR) between July 2013 and July 2018 and followed through February 2019. MEASUREMENTS: Patient, clinical, and treatment characteristics; irAEs of grade 3 or higher; treatment response; and survival. RESULTS: A total of 415 patients (9.5%) had AID, categorized as rheumatologic AID (n = 227), endocrine AID (n = 143), inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (n = 55), or "other" (n = 8). Of these, 228 patients (55%) were treated with ICI (vs. 2546 [58%] without AID); 87 were treated with anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4), 187 with anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1), and 34 with the combination. The incidences of irAEs of grade 3 or higher in patients with AID were 30% (95% CI, 21% to 41%) with anti-CTLA-4, 17% (CI, 12% to 23%) with anti-PD-1, and 44% (CI, 27% to 62%) with combination therapy; for patients without AID, the incidences were 30% (CI, 27% to 33%) (n = 916), 13% (CI, 12% to 15%) (n = 1540), and 48% (CI, 43% to 53%) (n = 388), respectively. Patients with AID more often discontinued anti-PD-1 treatment because of toxicity than patients without AID (17% [CI, 12% to 23%] vs. 9% [CI, 8% to 11%]). Patients with IBD were more prone to anti-PD-1-induced colitis (6/31 = 19% [CI, 7% to 37%]) than patients with other AIDs (3% [CI, 0% to 6%]) and patients without AID (2% [CI, 2% to 3%]).The objective response rate was similar in patients with versus without AID who were treated with anti-CTLA-4 (10% [CI, 5% to 19%] vs. 16% [CI, 14% to 19%]), anti-PD-1 (40% [CI, 33% to 47%] vs. 44% [CI, 41% to 46%]), or the combination (39% [CI, 20% to 59%] vs. 43% [CI, 38% to 49%]). Survival did not differ between patients with and those without AID (median, 13 months [CI, 10 to 16 months] vs. 14 months [CI, 13 to 15 months]). LIMITATION: Information was limited on AID severity and immunosuppressive treatment. CONCLUSION: Response to ICI with anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, or their combination for advanced melanoma and overall incidence of any irAEs of grade 3 or higher were similar in patients with and without preexisting AID. However, severe colitis and toxicity requiring early discontinuation of treatment occurred more frequently among patients with preexisting IBD, warranting close follow-up. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development.

Mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) immunoreactivity in positive sentinel nodes from patients with melanoma.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with cutaneous melanoma and a positive sentinel node (SN) are currently eligible for adjuvant treatment with targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence imaging could be an alternative and less invasive tool for SN biopsy to select patients for adjuvant treatment. One potential target for NIR is the mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET). This study aimed to assess MET immunoreactivity in positive SNs and to evaluate its potential diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic value. METHODS: In this retrospective study, positive SN samples from patients with primary cutaneous melanoma were collected to assess MET immunoreactivity. To this end, paraffin-embedded SNs were stained for MET (monoclonal antibody D1C2). A 4-point Histoscore was used to determine cytoplasmic and membranous immunoreactivity (0 negative/1 weak/2 moderate/3 strong). Samples were considered positive when ≥10% of the cancer cells showed MET expression (staining intensity ≥1). Patient and clinicopathological characteristics were used for descriptive statistics, binary logistic regression, and survival analyses. RESULTS: Positive MET immunohistochemistry was observed in 24 out of 37 samples (65%). No statistically significant associations were found between MET positivity and the following prognostic factors: Breslow thickness (P = 0.961), ulceration (P = 1.000), and SN tumor burden (P = 0.792). According to MET positivity, Kaplan-Meier curves showed no significant differences in survival. CONCLUSION: This exploratory study found no evidence to support MET immunoreactivity in positive SNs as a possible diagnostic or prognostic indicator in patients with melanoma.