Outcome of adjuvant immunotherapy in a real-world nation-wide cohort of patients with melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have demonstrated promising outcomes for adjuvant immunotherapy in patients with resected melanoma. Real-life data provide valuable insights to support patient guidance and treatment decisions. METHODS: Observational population-based study examining a national cohort of patients with resected stage III-IV melanoma referred for adjuvant therapy. Data were extracted from the Danish Metastatic Melanoma Database (DAMMED). RESULTS: Between November 2018 and January 2022, 785 patients received adjuvant anti-PD-1. The majority had stage III resected melanoma (87%), normal LDH levels (80%), and performance score 0 (87%). Patients were followed for a median of 25.6 months (95%CI 24-28). The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were not reached. The RFS was 78% (95%CI 75-81), 66% (63-70), and 59% (55-63); MSS was 97% (95-98), 93% (91-95), and 87% (84-90) at 1-, 2-, and 3-year; respectively. Less than half (42%) of the patients finalized planned therapy, 32% discontinued due to toxicity, and 19% due to melanoma recurrence. Patients discontinuing adjuvant treatment prematurely, without recurrence, had similar outcomes as patients finalizing therapy. In a multivariable analysis, ipilimumab plus nivolumab did not improve outcomes compared to ipilimumab monotherapy as a first-line metastatic treatment after adjuvant anti-PD-1. CONCLUSION: Survival outcomes in real-world patients with melanoma treated with adjuvant anti-PD-1 align with results from the randomized controlled trials. Patients discontinuing therapy prematurely, for other reasons than recurrence, had similar outcomes as patients finalizing planned treatment. First-line metastatic treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab post-adjuvant anti-PD-1 did not show improved outcomes compared to ipilimumab/anti-PD-1 monotherapy.

Quality of life and mental health in real-world patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma receiving adjuvant immunotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has expanded into the adjuvant setting enhancing the importance of knowledge on the immune-related toxicities and their impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Large phase 3 trials of patients with resected Stage III/IV melanoma found no effect on HRQoL during adjuvant immunotherapy. This study investigates how HRQoL was affected during and after adjuvant immunotherapy in a real-world setting. METHODS: Patients with resected melanoma treated with adjuvant nivolumab from 2018 to 2021 in Denmark were identified using the Danish Metastatic Melanoma Database (DAMMED). The study was performed as a nationwide cross-sectional analysis as a questionnaire consisting of six different validated questionnaires on HRQoL, cognitive function, fatigue, depression, fear of recurrence, and decision regret was sent to all patients in March 2021. To evaluate HRQoL during and after adjuvant treatment, patients were divided into groups depending on their treatment status when answering the questionnaire; patients in active treatment for 0-6 months, patients in active treatment for >6 months, patients who ended treatment 0-6 months ago, and patients who ended treatment >6 months ago. RESULTS: A total of 271/412 (66%) patients completed the questionnaire. Patients who ended therapy 0-6 months ago had the lowest HRQoL and had more fatigue. Patients in active treatment for >6 months had lower HRQoL and more fatigue than patients who started treatment 0-6 months ago. Patients ending therapy >6 months ago had higher HRQoL and less fatigue compared to patients who ended therapy 0-6 months ago. Multivariable analysis showed an association between HRQoL and treatment status, comorbidity, civil status, and employment status. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant nivolumab may affect some aspects of QoL, but the influence seems temporary. Patient characteristics, such as civil status, employment status, and comorbidity were associated with HRQoL.

Treatment plan comparison of proton vs photon radiotherapy for lower-grade gliomas.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patients with lower-grade gliomas are long-term survivors after radiotherapy and may benefit from the reduced dose to normal tissue achievable with proton therapy. Here, we aimed to quantify differences in dose to the uninvolved brain and contralateral hippocampus and compare the risk of radiation-induced secondary cancer for photon and proton plans for lower-grade glioma patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-three patients were included in this in-silico planning comparative study and had photon and proton plans calculated (50.4 Gy(RBE = 1.1), 28 Fx) applying similar dose constraints to the target and organs at risk. Automatically calculated photon plans were generated with a 3 mm margin from clinical target volume (CTV) to planning target volume. Manual proton plans were generated using robust optimisation on the CTV. Dose metrics of organs at risk were compared using population mean dose-volume histograms and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Secondary cancer risk per 10,000 persons per year (PPY) was estimated using dose-volume data and a risk model for secondary cancer induction. RESULTS: CTV coverage (V95%>98%) was similar for the two treatment modalities. Mean dose (Dmean) to the uninvolved brain was significantly reduced from 21.5 Gy (median, IQR 17.1-24.4 Gy) with photons compared to 10.3 Gy(RBE) (8.1-13.9 Gy(RBE)) with protons. Dmean to the contralateral hippocampus was significantly reduced from 6.5 Gy (5.4-11.7 Gy) with photons to 1.5 Gy(RBE) (0.4-6.8 Gy(RBE)) with protons. The estimated secondary cancer risk was reduced from 6.7 PPY (median, range 3.3-10.4 PPY) with photons to 3.0 PPY (1.3-7.5 PPY) with protons. CONCLUSION: A significant reduction in mean dose to uninvolved brain and contralateral hippocampus was found with proton planning. The estimated secondary cancer risk was reduced with proton therapy.