Safety of pembrolizumab as adjuvant therapy in a pooled analysis of phase 3 clinical trials of melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The safety profile of adjuvant pembrolizumab was evaluated in a pooled analysis of 4 phase 3 clinical trials. METHODS: Patients had completely resected stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC melanoma per American Joint Committee on Cancer, 7th edition, criteria (AJCC-7; KEYNOTE-054); stage IIB or IIC melanoma per AJCC-8 (KEYNOTE-716); stage IB, II, or IIIA non-small cell lung cancer per AJCC-7 (PEARLS/KEYNOTE-091); or postnephrectomy/metastasectomy clear cell renal cell carcinoma at increased risk of recurrence (KEYNOTE-564). Patients received adjuvant pembrolizumab 200 mg (2 mg/kg up to 200 mg for pediatric patients) or placebo every 3 weeks for approximately 1 year. Adverse events (AEs) were summarized for patients who received ≥ 1 dose of treatment. RESULTS: Data were pooled from 4125 patients treated with pembrolizumab (n = 2060) or placebo (n = 2065). Median (range) duration of treatment was 11.1 months (0.0-18.9) with pembrolizumab and 11.2 months (0.0-18.1) with placebo. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 78.6 % (1620/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 16.3 % [336/2060]) and 58.7 % (1212/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 3.5 % [72/2065]). Immune-mediated AEs (e.g. adrenal insufficiency, hypophysitis, and thyroiditis) occurred in 36.2 % (746/2060) of patients in the pembrolizumab group (grade 3-5, 8.6 % [177/2060]) and 8.4 % (174/2065) in the placebo group (grade 3-5, 1.1 % [23/2065]). Of patients with ≥ 1 immune-mediated AE or infusion reaction, systemic corticosteroids were required for 35.2 % (268/761) and 20.2 % (39/193) of patients in the pembrolizumab and placebo groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant pembrolizumab demonstrated a manageable safety profile that was comparable to prior reports in advanced disease.

The Virtual Child.

SUMMARY: We are building the world's first Virtual Child-a computer model of normal and cancerous human development at the level of each individual cell. The Virtual Child will "develop cancer" that we will subject to unlimited virtual clinical trials that pinpoint, predict, and prioritize potential new treatments, bringing forward the day when no child dies of cancer, giving each one the opportunity to lead a full and healthy life.

Pembrolizumab Versus Placebo as Adjuvant Therapy in Resected Stage IIB or IIC Melanoma: Final Analysis of Distant Metastasis-Free Survival in the Phase III KEYNOTE-716 Study.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Pembrolizumab adjuvant therapy was shown to significantly improve recurrence-free survival (RFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) in patients with resected stage IIB or IIC melanoma in earlier analyses of the randomized, double-blind, phase III KEYNOTE-716 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03553836). We report results of the protocol-specified final analysis of DMFS for KEYNOTE-716. Overall, 976 patients were randomly allocated to pembrolizumab (n = 487) or placebo (n = 489). As of January 4, 2023, median follow-up was 39.4 months (range, 26.0-51.4 months). The median DMFS was not reached in either treatment group, and the estimated 36-month DMFS was 84.4% for pembrolizumab and 74.7% for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.79]). The median RFS was not reached in either treatment group, and the estimated 36-month RFS was 76.2% for pembrolizumab and 63.4% for placebo (HR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.49 to 0.79]). DMFS and RFS results were consistent across most prespecified subgroups, including stage IIB and stage IIC melanoma. The safety profile of pembrolizumab was manageable and consistent with previous reports. These results continue to support the use of pembrolizumab adjuvant therapy in patients with resected stage IIB or IIC melanoma.

Prognostic and predictive value of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 phase III trial of pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected high-risk stage III melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Pain is common in patients with cancer. The World Health Organisation recommends paracetamol or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for mild pain and combined with other agents for moderate/severe pain. This study estimated associations of NSAIDs with recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in high-risk patients with resected melanoma in the EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 phase III clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with AJCC7 stage IIIA, IIIB or IIIC resected melanoma were randomized to receive 200 mg of adjuvant pembrolizumab (N = 514) or placebo (N = 505) 3-weekly for one year or until recurrence. As previously reported, pembrolizumab prolonged RFS and DMFS. NSAID use was defined as administration between 7 days pre-randomization and starting treatment. Multivariable Cox and Fine and Gray models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for associations of NSAIDs with RFS, DMFS and irAEs. RESULTS: Of 1019 patients randomized, 59 and 44 patients in the pembrolizumab and placebo arms, respectively, used NSAIDs. NSAIDs were not associated with RFS (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.58-1.43) or DMFS in the pembrolizumab (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.65-1.66) or placebo arms (for RFS, HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48-1.20; for DMFS, HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.49-1.31). NSAIDs were associated with the incidence of irAEs in the placebo arm (HR 3.06, 95% CI 1.45-6.45) but not in the pembrolizumab arm (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.58-1.53). CONCLUSION: NSAIDs were not associated with efficacy outcomes nor the risk of irAEs in patients with resected high-risk stage III melanoma receiving adjuvant pembrolizumab.

Influence of microbiota-associated metabolic reprogramming on clinical outcome in patients with melanoma from the randomized adjuvant dendritic cell-based MIND-DC trial.

Tumor immunosurveillance plays a major role in melanoma, prompting the development of immunotherapy strategies. The gut microbiota composition, influencing peripheral and tumoral immune tonus, earned its credentials among predictors of survival in melanoma. The MIND-DC phase III trial (NCT02993315) randomized (2:1 ratio) 148 patients with stage IIIB/C melanoma to adjuvant treatment with autologous natural dendritic cell (nDC) or placebo (PL). Overall, 144 patients collected serum and stool samples before and after 2 bimonthly injections to perform metabolomics (MB) and metagenomics (MG) as prespecified exploratory analysis. Clinical outcomes are reported separately. Here we show that different microbes were associated with prognosis, with the health-related Faecalibacterium prausnitzii standing out as the main beneficial taxon for no recurrence at 2 years (p = 0.008 at baseline, nDC arm). Therapy coincided with major MB perturbations (acylcarnitines, carboxylic and fatty acids). Despite randomization, nDC arm exhibited MG and MB bias at baseline: relative under-representation of F. prausnitzii, and perturbations of primary biliary acids (BA). F. prausnitzii anticorrelated with BA, medium- and long-chain acylcarnitines. Combined, these MG and MB biomarkers markedly determined prognosis. Altogether, the host-microbial interaction may play a role in localized melanoma. We value systematic MG and MB profiling in randomized trials to avoid baseline differences attributed to host-microbe interactions.

Clinical and translational attributes of immune-related adverse events.

With immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) becoming the mainstay of treatment for many cancers, managing their immune-related adverse events (irAEs) has become an important part of oncological care. This Review covers the clinical presentation of irAEs and crucial aspects of reversibility, fatality and long-term sequelae, with special attention to irAEs in specific patient populations, such as those with autoimmune diseases. In addition, the genetic basis of irAEs, along with cellular and humoral responses to ICI therapy, are discussed. Detrimental effects of empirically used high-dose steroids and second-line immunosuppression, including impaired ICI effectiveness, call for more tailored irAE-treatment strategies. We discuss open therapeutic challenges and propose potential avenues to accelerate personalized management strategies and optimize outcomes.

Immunosurveillance in clinical cancer management.

The progression of cancer involves a critical step in which malignant cells escape from control by the immune system. Antineoplastic agents are particularly efficient when they succeed in restoring such control (immunosurveillance) or at least establish an equilibrium state that slows down disease progression. This is true not only for immunotherapies, such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), but also for conventional chemotherapy, targeted anticancer agents, and radiation therapy. Thus, therapeutics that stress and kill cancer cells while provoking a tumor-targeting immune response, referred to as immunogenic cell death, are particularly useful in combination with ICIs. Modern oncology regimens are increasingly using such combinations, which are referred to as chemoimmunotherapy, as well as combinations of multiple ICIs. However, the latter are generally associated with severe side effects compared with single-agent ICIs. Of note, the success of these combinatorial strategies against locally advanced or metastatic cancers is now spurring successful attempts to move them past the postoperative (adjuvant) setting to the preoperative (neoadjuvant) setting, even for patients with operable cancers. Here, the authors critically discuss the importance of immunosurveillance in modern clinical cancer management.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: Part 2. Treatment-Update 2023.

In order to update recommendations on treatment, supportive care, education, and follow-up of patients with invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), a multidisciplinary panel of experts from the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS), the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV), and the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed. Recommendations were based on an evidence-based literature review, guidelines, and expert consensus. Treatment recommendations are presented for common primary cSCC (low risk, high risk), locally advanced cSCC, regional metastatic cSCC (operable or inoperable), and distant metastatic cSCC. For common primary cSCC, the first-line treatment is surgical excision with postoperative margin assessment or micrographically controlled surgery. Achieving clear surgical margins is the most important treatment consideration for patients with cSCCs amenable to surgery. Regarding adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with high-risk localised cSCC with clear surgical margins, current evidence has not shown significant benefit for those with at least one high-risk factor. Radiotherapy should be considered as the primary treatment for non-surgical candidates/tumours. For cSCC with cytologically or histologically confirmed regional nodal metastasis, lymph node dissection is recommended. For patients with metastatic or locally advanced cSCC who are not candidates for curative surgery or radiotherapy, anti-PD-1 agents are the first-line systemic treatment, with cemiplimab being the first approved systemic agent for advanced cSCC by the Food and Drugs Administration/European Medicines Agency. Second-line systemic treatments for advanced cSCC, include epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (cetuximab) combined with chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Multidisciplinary board decisions are mandatory for all patients with advanced cSCC, considering the risks of toxicity, the age and frailty of patients, and co-morbidities, including immunosuppression. Patients should be engaged in informed, shared decision-making on management and be provided with the best supportive care to improve symptom management and quality of life. The frequency of follow-up visits and investigations for subsequent new cSCC depends on underlying risk characteristics.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Part 1: Diagnostics and prevention-Update 2023.

Invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is one of the most common cancers in white populations, accounting for 20% of all cutaneous malignancies. Overall, cSCC mostly has very good prognosis after treatment, with 5-year cure rates greater than 90%. Despite the overall favourable prognosis and the proportionally rare deaths, cSCC is associated with a high total number of deaths due to its high incidence. A collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS), the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) and the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), was formed to update recommendations on cSCC, based on current literature and expert consensus. Part 1 of the guidelines addresses the updates on classification, epidemiology, diagnosis, risk stratification, staging and prevention in immunocompetent as well as immunosuppressed patients.

Prognostic and predictive value of metformin in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 1325/KEYNOTE-054 phase III trial of pembrolizumab versus placebo in resected high-risk stage III melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Metformin is a commonly prescribed and well-tolerated medication. In laboratory studies, metformin suppresses BRAF wild-type melanoma cells but accelerates the growth of BRAF-mutated cells. This study investigated the prognostic and predictive value of metformin, including with respect to BRAF mutation status, in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 1325/KEYNOTE-054 randomised controlled trial. METHODS: Patients with resected high-risk stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC melanoma received 200 mg of pembrolizumab (n = 514) or placebo (n = 505) every 3 weeks for twelve months. Pembrolizumab prolonged recurrence-free survival (RFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) at approximately 42 months median follow-up (Eggermont et al., TLO, 2021). Multivariable Cox regression was used to estimate associations of metformin with RFS and DMFS. Interaction terms were used to model effect modification by treatment and BRAF mutation. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients (0.5%) used metformin at baseline. Metformin was not significantly associated with RFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52-1.45) and DMFS (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.47-1.44). The interaction between metformin and the treatment arm was not significant for either RFS (p = 0.92) or DMFS (p = 0.93). Among patients with mutated BRAF, the association of metformin with RFS (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.37-1.33) was greater in magnitude though not significantly different to those without mutated BRAF (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.56-1.69). CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant impact of metformin use on pembrolizumab efficacy in resected high-risk stage III melanoma. However, larger studies or pooled analyses are needed, particularly to explore a possible effect of metformin in BRAF-mutated melanoma.

Adjuvant therapy for stage II melanoma: the need for further studies.

Immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors has revolutionised the outcomes for melanoma patients. In the metastatic setting, patients treated with nivolumab and ipilimumab have an expected 5-year survival of> 50%. For patients with resected high-risk stage III disease, adjuvant pembrolizumab, nivolumab or dabrafenib and trametinib are associated with a significant improvement in both relapse-free survival (RFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). More recently neoadjuvant immunotherapy has shown very promising outcomes in patients with clinically detectable nodal disease and is likely to become a new standard of care. For stage IIB/C disease, two pivotal adjuvant trials of pembrolizumab and nivolumab have also reported a significant improvement in both RFS and DMFS. However, the absolute benefit is low and there are concerns about the risk of severe toxicities as well as long-term morbidity from endocrine toxicity. Ongoing registration phase III trials are currently evaluating newer immunotherapy combinations and the role of BRAF/MEK-directed targeted therapy for stage II melanoma. However, our ability to personalise therapy based on molecular risk stratification has lagged behind the development of novel immune therapies. There is a critical need to evaluate the use of tissue and blood-based biomarkers, to better select patients that will recur and avoid unnecessary treatment for the majority of patients cured by surgery alone.

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

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

Engaging European society at the forefront of cancer research and care: How discussions at the 5th Gago Conference on European Science policy led to the Heidelberg Manifesto

European cancer research stakeholders met in October 2022 in Heidelberg, Germany, at the 5th Gago conference on European Cancer Policy, to discuss the current cancer research and cancer care policy landscape in Europe. Meeting participants highlighted gaps in the existing European programmes focusing on cancer research, including Europe's Beating Cancer Plan (EBCP), the Mission on Cancer (MoC), Understanding Cancer (UNCAN.eu), and the joint action CRANE, and put forward the next priorities, in the form of the Heidelberg Manifesto for cancer research. This meeting report presents all discussions that shed light on how infrastructures can be effectively shaped for translational, prevention, clinical and outcomes cancer research, with a focus on implementation and sustainability and while engaging patients and the public. In addition, we summarize recommendations on how to introduce frameworks for the digitalization of European cancer research. Finally, we discuss what structures, commitment, and resources are needed to establish a collaborative cancer research environment in Europe to achieve the scale required for innovation.

Neo-adjuvant immunotherapy emerges as best medical practice, and will be the new standard of care for macroscopic stage III melanoma.

Survival of macroscopic stage III melanoma is poor. Five-year overall survival and relapse-free survival rates for surgery alone range from 40 to 59% and 30 to-39%, respectively. The current standard of care is therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND) followed by a year of adjuvant systemic therapy. Multiple phase 2 trials have shown that neo-adjuvant immunotherapy induces major pathologic response (MPR) rates (pathologic complete response (pCR): pCR, 0% viable tumour cells; near-pCR, <10% viable tumour cells), which translate into durable relapse free survival rates. Single agent anti-PD-1 achieves 20-30% MPR, the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab doubles the MPR rates to 50-60%. The OpACIN trial demonstrated that neoadjuvant immunotherapy induced both higher numbers and a broader repertoire of tumour-resident T-cells in peripheral blood compared with adjuvant immunotherapy. Very recently, the randomised phase 2 trial S1801 reported its first interim results. S1801 compared TLND, followed by 18 courses of adjuvant pembrolizumab, to three courses of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab, followed by surgery and 15 adjuvant doses. With a median follow-up of 14 months, a 23% EFS rate benefit was observed. The ongoing phase 3 NADINA trial randomises patients between TLND + one year of adjuvant nivolumab (control arm) or 2 courses of neoadjuvant therapy with ipilimumab + nivolumab, followed by adjuvant therapy only for non-MPR patients. There is rapid, consistent, and accumulating evidence generated from all phase 1 and phase 2 trials, indicating clinical superiority of neoadjuvant immunotherapy over adjuvant systemic therapy for macroscopic stage III melanoma. Therefore, payers should consider neoadjuvant immunotherapy for reimbursement as this approach is the best option for our patients, and classify it as the best medical practice.

Alternatives and reduced need for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) staging for melanoma.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has been introduced in the 1990s to identify patients who might benefit from completion lymph node dissection. Neither SLNB nor CLND improved survival, but SLNB staging did provide the best staging, above Breslow thickness and ulceration. The SLN status and SLN tumour burden were used in all trials until date looking at modern adjuvant systemic therapy with immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) or targeted therapies (TT). Adjuvant ICI and TT are shifting towards stage II melanoma. The question is whether there is still role for SLNB in melanoma, in this day and age, and if so, how does the future look for SLNB staging? The SLN status and SLN tumour burden might be useful for a consultation to discuss the number needed to treat in a risk/benefit discussion. For stage IIB/C patients, it seems likely, however, that patients will forego a nuclear scan followed by the risk of surgical intervention and morbidity associated with SLNB if they opt to receive adjuvant therapy regardless of the SLNB result. For stage I/IIA, it is still required to detect high-risk patients who might benefit from adjuvant therapy. However, biomarkers are emerging, such as gene expression profilers (GEP), immunohistological signatures and liquid biopsies with ctDNA. There still is a role for SLNB staging in melanoma today, but we expect that the availability of therapeutic option independent of SLNB status as well as emergence of validated biomarkers to predict risk will reduce the need for SLNB staging in the upcoming decade to the point it will no longer be used.

Immunotherapy for brain metastases and primary brain tumors.

During the V Siena Immuno-Oncology (IO) Think Tank meeting in 2021, conditions were discussed which favor immunotherapy responses in either primary or secondary brain malignancies. Core elements of these discussions have been reinforced by important publications in 2021 and 2022. In primary brain tumors (such as glioblastoma) current immunotherapies have failed to deliver meaningful clinical benefit. By contrast, brain metastases frequently respond to current immunotherapies. The main differences between both conditions seem to be related to intrinsic factors (e.g., type of driver mutations) and more importantly extrinsic factors, such as the blood brain barrier and immune suppressive microenvironment (e.g., T cell counts, functional differences in T cells, myeloid cells). Future therapeutic interventions may therefore focus on rebalancing the immune cell population in a way which enables the host to respond to current or future immunotherapies.

The end of wide local excision (WLE) margins for melanoma ?

CLINICAL QUESTION: Is there nowadays any benefit of continuing the practice of routine wide local excision (WLE) for primary stage I/II cutaneous melanoma? BACKGROUND: WLE aims to eradicate potential microsatellites around melanomas and thereby reduce local recurrence rates and improve overall survival. Six large prospective randomised trials investigated WLE versus wider WLE, they all failed to show any effect on overall survival (OS). METHODS: A literature search was performed to identify data on outcome after omitting WLE. Additionally circumstantial evidence was gathered from pathology studies and outcomes of modified surgical techniques, as well as publications on morbidity. RESULTS: No prospective and one retrospective study was found. The retrospective study showed no difference in OS after correction for confounding factors. Pathology studies showed a low incidence of residual melanoma in WLE specimen (0-4.2%). Mohs surgery does not show a difference in recurrence rates or OS. WLE is associated with considerable postoperative morbidity, which increases with wider excision margins. CONCLUSION: There is no solid prospective evidence to support the classic dogma of a 2-step approach with the use of WLE for primary cutaneous melanoma that has been completely excised on diagnostic excision biopsy. We recommend to setup and conduct a prospective randomised trial to compare the classical 2-step approach with WLE to a complete diagnostic excision only to abolish the routine practice of WLE in the future.

Uncovering the mode of action of engineered T cells in patient cancer organoids.

Extending the success of cellular immunotherapies against blood cancers to the realm of solid tumors will require improved in vitro models that reveal therapeutic modes of action at the molecular level. Here we describe a system, called BEHAV3D, developed to study the dynamic interactions of immune cells and patient cancer organoids by means of imaging and transcriptomics. We apply BEHAV3D to live-track >150,000 engineered T cells cultured with patient-derived, solid-tumor organoids, identifying a 'super engager' behavioral cluster comprising T cells with potent serial killing capacity. Among other T cell concepts we also study cancer metabolome-sensing engineered T cells (TEGs) and detect behavior-specific gene signatures that include a group of 27 genes with no previously described T cell function that are expressed by super engager killer TEGs. We further show that type I interferon can prime resistant organoids for TEG-mediated killing. BEHAV3D is a promising tool for the characterization of behavioral-phenotypic heterogeneity of cellular immunotherapies and may support the optimization of personalized solid-tumor-targeting cell therapies.