Three-Year Overall Survival with Tebentafusp in Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Tebentafusp, a T-cell receptor-bispecific molecule that targets glycoprotein 100 and CD3, is approved for adult patients who are positive for HLA-A*02:01 and have unresectable or metastatic uveal melanoma. The primary analysis in the present phase 3 trial supported a long-term survival benefit associated with the drug. METHODS: We report the 3-year efficacy and safety results from our open-label, phase 3 trial in which HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive tebentafusp (tebentafusp group) or the investigator's choice of therapy with pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine (control group), with randomization stratified according to the lactate dehydrogenase level. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of 36 months, median overall survival was 21.6 months in the tebentafusp group and 16.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 0.87). The estimated percentage of patients surviving at 3 years was 27% in the tebentafusp group and 18% in the control group. The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade in the tebentafusp group were rash (83%), pyrexia (76%), pruritus (70%), and hypotension (38%). Most tebentafusp-related adverse events occurred early during treatment, and no new adverse events were observed with long-term administration. The percentage of patients who discontinued treatment because of adverse events continued to be low in both treatment groups (2% in the tebentafusp group and 5% in the control group). No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This 3-year analysis supported a continued long-term benefit of tebentafusp for overall survival among adult HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma. (Funded by Immunocore; IMCgp100-202 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03070392; EudraCT number, 2015-003153-18.).

Overall survival with first-line atezolizumab in combination with vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma (IMspire150): second interim analysis of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Primary analysis of the phase 3 IMspire150 study showed improved investigator-assessed progression-free survival with first-line atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) versus placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group) in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma. With a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4-23·8) at the primary analysis, overall survival data were immature. Here, we report the results from the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis. METHODS: The multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 IMspire150 study was done at 108 academic and community hospitals in 20 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated unresectable stage IIIc or stage IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously on day 1 and 15) or placebo plus vemurafenib (960 mg or 720 mg twice daily orally) and cobimetinib (60 mg once daily orally; 21 days on and 7 days off) in 28-day cycles. Atezolizumab and placebo were added to treatment regimens from cycle two onwards. Randomisation was done centrally (Durham, NC, USA) based on a permuted block randomisation scheme (block size of 4) using an interactive web-based response system and was stratified by geographical region and baseline lactate dehydrogenase concentration. Overall survival was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug according to actual treatment received. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, which was previously reported. Here, we report the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis, which was planned after about 270 overall survival events had occurred. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer enrolling patients, and it is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 514 patients (median age 54 years [IQR 43-63]; 299 [58%] men and 215 [42%] women) were enrolled in the trial and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (256 [50%] patients) or the control group (258 [50%] patients). At the data cutoff (Sept 8, 2021), 273 patients had died (126 in the atezolizumab group and 147 in the control group). Median follow-up was 29·1 months (IQR 10·1-45·4) for the atezolizumab group versus 22·8 months (10·6-44·1) for the control group. Median overall survival was 39·0 months (95% CI 29·9-not estimable) in the atezolizumab group versus 25·8 months (22·0-34·6) in the control group (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·66-1·06]; p=0·14). The most common adverse events of any grade in the atezolizumab group were blood creatine phosphokinase increased (123 [53%] of 231 patients), diarrhoea (116 [50%]), and pyrexia (115 [50%]). The most common adverse events of any grade in the control group were diarrhoea (157 [56%] of 280 patients), blood creatine phosphokinase increased (135 [48%]), and rash (119 [43%]). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were increased lipase (54 [23%] of 231 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 62 [22%] of 280 patients in the control group), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (51 [22%] vs 50 [18%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase (32 [14%] vs 26 [9%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 112 (48%) patients in the atezolizumab group and 117 (42%) patients in the control group. Grade 5 adverse events were reported in eight (3%) patients in the atezolizumab group versus six (2%) patients in the control group. Two grade 5 adverse events (hepatitis fulminant and hepatic failure) in the atezolizumab group were considered to be associated with the triplet combination, and one event in the control group (pulmonary haemorrhage) was considered to be associated with cobimetinib. INTERPRETATION: Additional follow-up of the IMspire150 trial showed that overall survival was not significantly improved with atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib compared with placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. Results of the final analysis are awaited to establish whether a significant improvement in overall survival can be achieved with long-term treatment with this triplet combination versus vemurafenib plus cobimetinib. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Global Phase III Trial of Talimogene Laherparepvec Combined With Pembrolizumab for Advanced Melanoma.

PURPOSE: The combination of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) and pembrolizumab previously demonstrated an acceptable safety profile and an encouraging complete response rate (CRR) in patients with advanced melanoma in a phase Ib study. We report the efficacy and safety from a phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, international study of T-VEC plus pembrolizumab (T-VEC-pembrolizumab) versus placebo plus pembrolizumab (placebo-pembrolizumab) in patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS: Patients with stage IIIB-IVM1c unresectable melanoma, naïve to antiprogrammed cell death protein-1, were randomly assigned 1:1 to T-VEC-pembrolizumab or placebo-pembrolizumab. T-VEC was administered at ≤ 4 × 106 plaque-forming unit (PFU) followed by ≤ 4 × 108 PFU 3 weeks later and once every 2 weeks until dose 5 and once every 3 weeks thereafter. Pembrolizumab was administered intravenously 200 mg once every 3 weeks. The dual primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) per modified RECIST 1.1 by blinded independent central review and overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included objective response rate per mRECIST, CRR, and safety. Here, we report the primary analysis for PFS, the second preplanned interim analysis for OS, and the final analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 692 patients were randomly assigned (346 T-VEC-pembrolizumab and 346 placebo-pembrolizumab). T-VEC-pembrolizumab did not significantly improve PFS (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.04; P = .13) or OS (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.22; P = .74) compared with placebo-pembrolizumab. The objective response rate was 48.6% for T-VEC-pembrolizumab (CRR 17.9%) and 41.3% for placebo-pembrolizumab (CRR 11.6%); the durable response rate was 42.2% and 34.1% for the arms, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 20.7% of patients in the T-VEC-pembrolizumab arm and in 19.5% of patients in the placebo-pembrolizumab arm. CONCLUSION: T-VEC-pembrolizumab did not significantly improve PFS or OS compared with placebo-pembrolizumab. Safety results of the T-VEC-pembrolizumab combination were consistent with the safety profiles of each agent alone.

Pinpointing the tumor-specific T cells via TCR clusters.

Adoptive cell transfer (ACT) is a promising approach to cancer immunotherapy, but its efficiency fundamentally depends on the extent of tumor-specific T cell enrichment within the graft. This can be estimated via activation with identifiable neoantigens, tumor-associated antigens (TAAs), or living or lysed tumor cells, but these approaches remain laborious, time-consuming, and functionally limited, hampering clinical development of ACT. Here, we demonstrate that homology cluster analysis of T cell receptor (TCR) repertoires efficiently identifies tumor-reactive TCRs allowing to: (1) detect their presence within the pool of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs); (2) optimize TIL culturing conditions, with IL-2low/IL-21/anti-PD-1 combination showing increased efficiency; (3) investigate surface marker-based enrichment for tumor-targeting T cells in freshly isolated TILs (enrichment confirmed for CD4+ and CD8+ PD-1+/CD39+ subsets), or re-stimulated TILs (informs on enrichment in 4-1BB-sorted cells). We believe that this approach to the rapid assessment of tumor-specific TCR enrichment should accelerate T cell therapy development.

Improved pyrexia-related outcomes associated with an adapted pyrexia adverse event management algorithm in patients treated with adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib: Primary results of COMBI-APlus.

BACKGROUND: COMBI-AD demonstrated long-term benefit of adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with resected stage III BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma; however, 9% of patients permanently discontinued therapy due to pyrexia. COMBI-APlus evaluated whether an adapted pyrexia management algorithm reduces high-grade pyrexia and pyrexia-related adverse outcomes. METHODS: COMBI-APlus is an open-label, phase IIIb trial evaluating an adapted pyrexia management algorithm in patients with high-risk resected stage III BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma treated with up to 12 months of adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib. Both drugs were interrupted for pyrexia (temperature ≥38°C) or the occurrence of pyrexia syndrome for suspected recurrent pyrexia. Treatment was restarted at the same dose once patients were symptom free for ≥24 h. The primary endpoint was the composite rate of grade 3/4 pyrexia, hospitalisation due to pyrexia, or permanent discontinuation due to pyrexia versus historical COMBI-AD control (20.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 16.3%-24.1%). RESULTS: At data cutoff (5 October 2020), COMBI-APlus met its primary endpoint of significant improvement in the composite rate of pyrexia (8.0% [95% CI, 5.9%-10.6%]), with rates of 3.8% for grade 3/4 pyrexia, 4.3% for hospitalisation due to pyrexia, and 2.4% for discontinuation due to pyrexia. Estimated 12-month relapse-free survival was 91.8% (95% CI, 89.0%-93.9%). The most common adverse events were consistent with those in COMBI-AD, and 14.7% of patients permanently discontinued treatment due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The adapted pyrexia management algorithm appears to reduce the incidence of severe pyrexia outcomes, enables patients to manage pyrexia at home, and helps patients remain on treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03551626.

Overall Survival Benefit with Tebentafusp in Metastatic Uveal Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Uveal melanoma is a disease that is distinct from cutaneous melanoma, with a low tumor mutational burden and a 1-year overall survival of approximately 50% in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. Data showing a proven overall survival benefit with a systemic treatment are lacking. Tebentafusp is a bispecific protein consisting of an affinity-enhanced T-cell receptor fused to an anti-CD3 effector that can redirect T cells to target glycoprotein 100-positive cells. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned previously untreated HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with metastatic uveal melanoma in a 2:1 ratio to receive tebentafusp (tebentafusp group) or the investigator's choice of therapy with single-agent pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine (control group), stratified according to the lactate dehydrogenase level. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 378 patients were randomly assigned to either the tebentafusp group (252 patients) or the control group (126 patients). Overall survival at 1 year was 73% in the tebentafusp group and 59% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37 to 0.71; P<0.001) in the intention-to-treat population. Progression-free survival was also significantly higher in the tebentafusp group than in the control group (31% vs. 19% at 6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.94; P = 0.01). The most common treatment-related adverse events in the tebentafusp group were cytokine-mediated events (due to T-cell activation) and skin-related events (due to glycoprotein 100-positive melanocytes), including rash (83%), pyrexia (76%), and pruritus (69%). These adverse events decreased in incidence and severity after the first three or four doses and infrequently led to discontinuation of the trial treatment (2%). No treatment-related deaths were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with tebentafusp resulted in longer overall survival than the control therapy among previously untreated patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. (Funded by Immunocore; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03070392; EudraCT number, 2015-003153-18.).

5-Year Outcomes with Cobimetinib plus Vemurafenib in BRAFV600 Mutation-Positive Advanced Melanoma: Extended Follow-up of the coBRIM Study.

PURPOSE: The randomized phase III coBRIM study (NCT01689519) demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with addition of cobimetinib to vemurafenib compared with vemurafenib in patients with previously untreated BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. We report long-term follow-up of coBRIM, with at least 5 years since the last patient was randomized. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either oral cobimetinib (60 mg once daily on days 1-21 in each 28-day cycle) or placebo in combination with oral vemurafenib (960 mg twice daily). RESULTS: 495 patients were randomized to cobimetinib plus vemurafenib (n = 247) or placebo plus vemurafenib (n = 248). Median follow-up was 21.2 months for cobimetinib plus vemurafenib and 16.6 months for placebo plus vemurafenib. Median OS was 22.5 months (95% CI, 20.3-28.8) with cobimetinib plus vemurafenib and 17.4 months (95% CI, 15.0-19.8) with placebo plus vemurafenib; 5-year OS rates were 31% and 26%, respectively. Median PFS was 12.6 months (95% CI, 9.5-14.8) with cobimetinib plus vemurafenib and 7.2 months (95% CI, 5.6-7.5) with placebo plus vemurafenib; 5-year PFS rates were 14% and 10%, respectively. OS and PFS were longest in patients with normal baseline lactate dehydrogenase levels and low tumor burden, and in those achieving complete response. The safety profile remained consistent with previously published reports. CONCLUSIONS: Extended follow-up of coBRIM confirms the long-term clinical benefit and safety profile of cobimetinib plus vemurafenib compared with vemurafenib monotherapy in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma.

Real-World Experience with Targeted Therapy in BRAF Mutant Advanced Melanoma Patients: Results from a Multicenter Retrospective Observational Study Advanced Melanoma in Russia (Experience) (ADMIRE).

Clinical trials of targeted therapy (TT) and immunotherapy (IT) for highly aggressive advanced melanoma have shown marked improvements in response and survival rates. However, real-world data on treatment patterns and clinical outcomes for patients with advanced BRAF V600 mutant melanoma are ultimately scarce. The study was designed as an observational retrospective chart review study, which included 382 patients with advanced BRAF V600 mutant melanoma, who received TT in a real-world setting and were not involved in clinical trials. The data were collected from twelve medical centers in Russia. The objective response rates (ORRs) to combined BRAFi plus MEKi and to BRAFi mono-therapy were 57.4% and 39.8%, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 9.2 months and 22.6 months, respectively, for the combined first-line therapy; 9.4 months and 16.1 months, respectively, for the combined second-line therapy; and 7.4 months and 17.1 months, respectively, for the combined third- or higher-line therapy. Analysis of treatment patterns demonstrated the effectiveness of the combined TT with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors in patients with brain metastases, rare types of BRAF mutations, and across lines of therapy, as well as a well-tolerated and manageable safety profile.

Novel PD-1 inhibitor prolgolimab: expanding non-resectable/metastatic melanoma therapy choice.

BACKGROUND: Prolgolimab is an IgG1 anti-PD-1 (programmed cell death protein 1) monoclonal antibody containing the Fc-silencing 'LALA' mutation. We assessed the efficacy and safety of two dosing regimens of prolgolimab in patients with advanced melanoma in a multicenter open-label parallel-arm phase II trial (MIRACULUM). We present the final analysis after 1 year of follow-up and additional efficacy results from 2 years of follow-up. METHODS: Patients with advanced cutaneous or non-cutaneous melanoma, including stable brain metastasis, without autoimmune disease and who underwent no prior targeted therapy, anti-PD-(L)1 or anti-CTLA-4 (cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4) therapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive prolgolimab in 2 dosing regimens, 1 mg/kg every 2 weeks (arm 1) or 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks (arm 2), until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified based on performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0 or 1), lactate dehydrogenase levels (elevated or normal) and prior systemic therapy (naive or previously treated). The primary outcome was the objective response rate, assessed as per immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours by independent central review. The hypothesis that each dosing regimen of prolgolimab has an overall response rate >28% was tested independently for each study arm comprising all patients who received at least one dose of prolgolimab. Exploratory assessment of efficacy, including subgroup analysis, at 2 years of follow-up was not specified in the protocol. This study is registered withClinicalTrials.gov(NCT03269565). RESULTS: Between August 2017 and March 2018, 126 patients with advanced melanoma were enrolled. At main 1-year data cut-off, the median follow-up was 13.8 and 14.5 months in arm 1 and 2, respectively. An objective response was observed in 38.1% of patients (arm 1) and in 28.6% (arm 2). Grade III-IV treatment-related adverse events occurred in 12.7% and 3.2% of patients in arm 1 and 2, respectively. For exploratory efficacy analysis, the median follow-up was 25.4 and 25.7 months in arm 1 and 2, respectively. The 2-year progression-free survival was 33.3% in arm 1 and 30.2% in arm 2, and the 2-year overall survival was 57.1% and 46.0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The MIRACULUM study met its primary end-point in both the study arms. Prolgolimab showed significant antitumour activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with advanced melanoma.

Screening for Melanoma and Other Skin Cancer Shows a Higher Early Melanoma Incidence: Social Educational Program "Life Fear-Free".

BACKGROUND: The screening program Life Fear-Free (LFF) aimed at early diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma (CM) was introduced in Samara, Chelyabinsk, Yekaterinburg, and Krasnodar (Russia) in 2019. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the impact of the program on early CM and non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) detection. METHODS: According to the social educational campaign, people were informed about CM risk factors and symptoms and were invited for skin examination. The program planned to involve 3200 participants in total. Participants with suspicious lesions were invited for excisional biopsy. RESULTS: 3143 participants, including 75.4% women, were examined for skin lesions. The average age of the participants was 43.7 years. Mostly skin phototypes II and III were registered (48.2% and 41.0%, respectively); 3 patients had CM, 15 had basal cell carcinoma, and 1 had Bowen's disease, which were confirmed histologically. All detected melanomas had Breslow's thickness of 1 mm. CONCLUSION: The participants showed high interest in early skin cancer detection programs. The incidence rate of CM and NMSCs among the program participants was higher than in general public. The early disease grade was proven for the detected CMs and NMSCs. The study has shown that it is important to continue such programs.

Effect of Itraconazole, a Potent CYP3A4 Inhibitor, on the Steady-State Pharmacokinetics of Vemurafenib in Patients With BRAFV600 Mutation-Positive Malignancies.

The effects of itraconazole, a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor, on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of vemurafenib were evaluated in a phase 1, multicenter, open-label, fixed-sequence study. Patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive metastatic malignancies received oral vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily on days 1 to 20 (period A) and oral vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily with oral itraconazole 200 mg once daily on days 21 to 40 (period B). A mixed-effects analysis of variance model was used to compare log-transformed area under the concentration-time curve during the dosing interval and maximum plasma concentration values for vemurafenib in 8 patients between period B (vemurafenib plus itraconazole) and period A (vemurafenib alone). Multiple doses of itraconazole increased steady-state exposure of vemurafenib by approximately 40%, with geometric least squares mean ratios (period B/period A) of 140% (90% confidence interval, 121-161) for both maximum plasma concentration and area under the concentration-time curve during the dosing interval. There was no apparent increase in incidence or severity of adverse events during coadministration of vemurafenib with itraconazole. In conclusion, coadministration of itraconazole with vemurafenib resulted in a modest increase in exposure of vemurafenib at steady state and was generally well tolerated.

Atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib as first-line treatment for unresectable advanced BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma (IMspire150): primary analysis of the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: IMspire150 aimed to evaluate first-line combination treatment with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors and immune checkpoint therapy in BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced or metastatic melanoma. METHODS: IMspire150 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study done at 112 institutes in 20 countries. Patients with unresectable stage IIIc-IV, BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1 to 28-day cycles of atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) or atezolizumab placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group). In cycle 1, all patients received vemurafenib and cobimetinib only; atezolizumab placebo was added from cycle 2 onward. Randomisation was stratified by lactate dehydrogenase concentration and geographical region. Blinding for atezolizumab was achieved by means of an identical intravenous placebo, and blinding for vemurafenib was achieved by means of a placebo tablet. The primary outcome was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. This trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672) is ongoing but no longer recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 777 patients were screened and 514 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (n=256) or control group (n=258). At a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4-23·8), progression-free survival as assessed by the study investigator was significantly prolonged with atezolizumab versus control (15·1 vs 10·6 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0·78; 95% CI 0·63-0·97; p=0·025). Common treatment-related adverse events (>30%) in the atezolizumab and control groups were blood creatinine phosphokinase increased (51·3% vs 44·8%), diarrhoea (42·2% vs 46·6%), rash (40·9%, both groups), arthralgia (39·1% vs 28·1%), pyrexia (38·7% vs 26·0%), alanine aminotransferase increased (33·9% vs 22·8%), and lipase increased (32·2% vs 27·4%); 13% of patients in the atezolizumab group and 16% in the control group stopped all treatment because of adverse events. INTERPRETATION: The addition of atezolizumab to targeted therapy with vemurafenib and cobimetinib was safe and tolerable and significantly increased progression-free survival in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Long-term outcomes in patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma receiving dabrafenib monotherapy: Analysis from phase 2 and 3 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Previous analyses of BREAK-2 and BREAK-3 showed that durable outcomes lasting ≥3 years are achievable with dabrafenib in some patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma (MM); however, additional follow-up is needed to fully characterise the long-term impact of dabrafenib in these patients. METHODS: BREAK-2 was a single-arm phase 2 study evaluating dabrafenib in treatment-naive or previously treated BRAF V600E/K-mutant MM. BREAK-3, a randomised (3:1) phase 3 study, assessed dabrafenib versus dacarbazine in previously untreated unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600E-mutant melanoma. Five-year analyses were performed. RESULTS: All BREAK-2 patients (N = 92 [V600E, n = 76; V600K, n = 16]) discontinued treatment by the data cutoff. Median follow-up was 13.0 months. In BRAF V600E patients, 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 11% and 20%, respectively. Subsequent immunotherapy was received by 22% of patients. In BREAK-3, median follow-up was 17.0 and 12.0 months in the dabrafenib (n = 187) and dacarbazine (n = 63) arms, respectively. Thirty-seven patients (59%) receiving dacarbazine crossed over to dabrafenib following disease progression as per protocol. Five-year PFS was 12% in the dabrafenib arm; all dacarbazine-arm patients progressed or were censored by 5 years. Dabrafenib improved PFS versus dacarbazine, regardless of baseline lactate dehydrogenase levels. Five-year OS rates were 24% and 22% in the dabrafenib and dacarbazine arms, respectively. Subsequent therapy in each arm included anti-CTLA-4 (dabrafenib [24%] and dacarbazine [24%]) and/or anti-PD-1 (8% and 2%) treatment. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These data, representing extended follow-up for dabrafenib monotherapy, demonstrate that durable benefit lasting ≥5 years is achievable in a subset of patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (BREAK-2, NCT01153763; BREAK-3, NCT01227889).

Health-related quality of life in patients with fully resected BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma receiving adjuvant vemurafenib.

AIM OF STUDY: The aim of the study was to assess the impact of treatment with adjuvant vemurafenib monotherapy on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with resected stage IIC-IIIC melanoma. METHODS: The phase 3 BRIM8 study (NCT01667419) randomised patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive resected stage IIC-IIIC melanoma to 960 mg of vemurafenib twice daily or matching placebo for 52 weeks (13 × 28-day cycles). Patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) version 3 at baseline, cycle 1 (days 1, 15 and 22), cycle 2 (days 1 and 15), day 1 of every subsequent 4-week cycle, the end-of-treatment visit and each visit during the follow-up period. RESULTS: Completion rates for the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire were high (>80%). There was a mean decline in the global health status (GHS)/quality of life (QOL) score of 17.4 (±22.9) and 17.3 (±24.1) points at days 15 and 22 of cycle 1, respectively, among vemurafenib-treated patients who recovered to approximately 10 points below baseline for the remainder of the treatment period. A similar trend was observed in all functional scales except for cognitive function (<10-point change from baseline at all visits) and in the symptom scores for appetite loss, fatigue and pain. As observed for the GHS/QOL score, all scores rapidly returned to baseline after completion of planned vemurafenib treatment or treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: The schedule of HRQOL assessments allowed for an accurate and complete evaluation of the impact of acute treatment-related symptoms. Vemurafenib-treated patients experience clinically meaningful moderate worsening in some treatment- or disease-related symptoms and GHS/QOL that resolve over time.

Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in challenging subgroups with advanced melanoma who progressed on or after ipilimumab treatment: A single-arm, open-label, phase II study (CheckMate 172).

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on nivolumab in challenging subgroups with advanced melanoma. We report outcomes of nivolumab after prior ipilimumab in patients who are typically excluded from clinical trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase II, single-arm, open-label, multicentre study (CheckMate 172), patients with advanced melanoma who progressed on or after ipilimumab received nivolumab 3 mg/kg, every 2 weeks for up to 2 years. The primary objective was incidence of grade ≥3, treatment-related select adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of 18 months, grade ≥3 treatment-related select AEs with the most variation across subgroups were diarrhoea and colitis (1.1% [n = 11] and 0.3% [n = 3] for the total population [n = 1008]; 0.6% [n = 1] and 0.6% [n = 1] for patients with an asymptomatic central nervous system [CNS] metastasis [n = 165; 16.4%]; 4.5% [n = 3] and 3.0% [n = 2] for patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status [ECOG PS] of 2 [n = 66; 6.5%]; 2.4% [n = 2] and 0% for those who experienced a grade 3/4 immune-related AE [irAE] with prior ipilimumab [n = 84; 8.3%]; and 0% and 0% for autoimmune disease [n = 25; 2.5%], respectively). Median overall survival was 21.4 months in the total population and was 11.6, 2.4, 21.5, and 18.6 months in patients with a CNS metastasis, ECOG PS 2, a grade 3/4 irAE with prior ipilimumab, and autoimmune disease, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, phase II clinical trial of patients with advanced melanoma who progressed on or after ipilimumab, nivolumab demonstrated a safety profile consistent with that of prior clinical trials. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02156804.

Safety and efficacy of nivolumab in patients with rare melanoma subtypes who progressed on or after ipilimumab treatment: a single-arm, open-label, phase II study (CheckMate 172).

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab has been widely studied in non-acral cutaneous melanoma; however, limited data are available in other melanoma subtypes. We report outcomes by melanoma subtype in patients who received nivolumab after progression on prior ipilimumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CheckMate 172 was a phase II, single-arm, open-label, multicentre study that evaluated nivolumab in patients with advanced melanoma who progressed on or after ipilimumab. Patients received 3 mg/kg of nivolumab, every 2 weeks for up to 2 years. The primary end-point was incidence of grade ≥3, treatment-related select adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Among 1008 treated patients, we report data on patients with non-acral cutaneous melanoma (n = 723 [71.7%]), ocular melanoma (n = 103 [10.2%]), mucosal melanoma (n = 63 [6.3%]), acral cutaneous melanoma (n = 55 [5.5%]) and other melanoma subtypes (n = 64 [6.3%]). There were no meaningful differences in the incidence of grade ≥3, treatment-related select AEs among melanoma subtypes or compared with the total population. No new safety signals emerged. At a minimum follow-up of 18 months, median overall survival was 25.3 months for non-acral cutaneous melanoma and 25.8 months for acral cutaneous melanoma, with 18-month overall survival rates of 57.5% and 59.0%, respectively. Median overall survival was 12.6 months for ocular melanoma and 11.5 months for mucosal melanoma, with 18-month overall survival rates of 34.8% and 31.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of nivolumab after ipilimumab is similar across melanoma subtypes. Compared with non-acral cutaneous melanoma, patients with acral cutaneous melanoma had similar survival outcomes, whereas those with ocular and mucosal melanoma had lower median overall survival. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV ID: NCT02156804.

Bone Marrow Involvement in Melanoma. Potentials for Detection of Disseminated Tumor Cells and Characterization of Their Subsets by Flow Cytometry.

Disseminated tumor cells (DTCs) are studied as a prognostic factor in many non-hematopoietic tumors. Melanoma is one of the most aggressive tumors. Forty percent of melanoma patients develop distant metastases at five or more years after curative surgery, and frequent manifestations of melanoma without an identified primary lesion may reflect the tendency of melanoma cells to spread from indolent sites such as bone marrow (BM). The purpose of this work was to evaluate the possibility of detecting melanoma DTCs in BM based on the expression of a cytoplasmatic premelanocytic glycoprotein HMB-45 using flow cytometry, to estimate the influence of DTCs' persistence in BM on hematopoiesis, to identify the frequency of BM involvement in patients with melanoma, and to analyze DTC subset composition in melanoma. DTCs are found in 57.4% of skin melanoma cases and in as many as 28.6% of stage I cases, which confirms the aggressive course even of localized disease. Significant differences in the groups with the presence of disseminated tumor cells (DTCs+) and the lack thereof (DTC-) are noted for blast cells, the total content of granulocyte cells, and oxyphilic normoblasts of erythroid raw cells.

Epacadostat plus pembrolizumab versus placebo plus pembrolizumab in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma (ECHO-301/KEYNOTE-252): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind study.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy combination treatments can improve patient outcomes. Epacadostat, an IDO1 selective inhibitor, and pembrolizumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, showed promising antitumour activity in the phase 1-2 ECHO-202/KEYNOTE-037 study in advanced melanoma. In this trial, we aimed to compare progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma receiving epacadostat plus pembrolizumab versus placebo plus pembrolizumab. METHODS: In this international, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 trial, eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma previously untreated with PD-1 or PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors, an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1, and had a known BRAFV600 mutant status or consented to BRAFV600 mutation testing during screening. Patients were stratified by PD-L1 expression and BRAFV600 mutation status and randomly assigned (1:1) through a central interactive voice and integrated web response system to receive epacadostat 100 mg orally twice daily plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks or placebo plus pembrolizumab for up to 2 years. We used block randomisation with a block size of four in each stratum. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. The safety analysis population included randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. The study was stopped after the second interim analysis; follow-up for safety is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02752074. FINDINGS: Between June 21, 2016, and Aug 7, 2017, 928 patients were screened and 706 patients were randomly assigned to receive epacadostat plus pembrolizumab (n=354) or placebo plus pembrolizumab (n=352). Median follow-up was 12·4 months (IQR 10·3-14·5). No significant differences were found between the treatment groups for progression-free survival (median 4·7 months, 95% CI 2·9-6·8, for epacadostat plus pembrolizumab vs 4·9 months, 2·9-6·8, for placebo plus pembrolizumab; hazard ratio [HR] 1·00, 95% CI 0·83-1·21; one-sided p=0·52) or overall survival (median not reached in either group; epacadostat plus pembrolizumab vs placebo plus pembrolizumab: HR 1·13, 0·86-1·49; one-sided p=0·81). The most common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse event was lipase increase, which occurred in 14 (4%) of 353 patients receiving epacadostat plus pembrolizumab and 11 (3%) of 352 patients receiving placebo plus pembrolizumab. Treatment-related serious adverse events were reported in 37 (10%) of 353 patients receiving epacadostat plus pembrolizumab and 32 (9%) of 352 patients receiving placebo plus pembrolizumab. There were no treatment-related deaths in either treatment group. INTERPRETATION: Epacadostat 100 mg twice daily plus pembrolizumab did not improve progression-free survival or overall survival compared with placebo plus pembrolizumab in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma. The usefulness of IDO1 inhibition as a strategy to enhance anti-PD-1 therapy activity in cancer remains uncertain. FUNDING: Incyte Corporation, in collaboration with Merck Sharp & Dohme.

Lack of Response to Imatinib in Melanoma Carrying Rare KIT Mutation p.T632I.

Approximately 15% of acral and mucous melanomas carry activating mutations in KIT oncogene. There is a diversity of spectrum of KIT mutations, with some of them rendering tumors responsive to imatinib, while others being imatinib-resistant or not studied yet. Here we present an acral melanoma patient with KIT р.T632I mutation, who failed to respond to imatinib.

Melanoma arising in a Giant congenital melanocytic nevus: two case reports.

BACKGROUND: A giant congenital melanocytic nevus (GCMN) is found in 0.1% of live-born infants. If present, the lesion has a chance of about 6% to develop into malignant melanoma. Both children and adults can be affected by malignant melanoma arising in a giant congenital nevus. Up to 95% of GCMNs harbor NRAS mutations, and mutations in the BRAF, MC1R, TP53, and GNAQ genes have also been described. The individualization of therapy is required, but diagnostic and prognostic criteria remain controversial. CASE PRESENTATIONS: We report two cases: 1) melanoma arising in a giant congenital nevus during the first month of life complicated with neurocutaneous melanosis (NCM), and 2) melanoma arising in a giant congenital nevus during the first 6 months of life. Pathology, immunohistochemistry, and genetic analyses of tumor tissue were performed. The first case revealed only a non-pathogenic P72R polymorphism of the TP53 gene in the homozygote condition. For the second case, a Q61K mutation was detected in the NRAS gene. CONCLUSION: Malignant melanoma associated with GCMN is rare and therefore poorly understood. Outcomes have been linked to the stage at diagnosis, but no additional pathological prognostic factors have been identified. The most frequent genetic event in giant CMNs is NRAS mutations, which was discovered in one of our cases. To accumulate evidence to improve disease prognosis and outcomes, children with congenital melanocytic nevus should be included in a systemic follow-up study from birth.