ABSTRACT
Treatment duration with checkpoint inhibitors must be optimized to prevent unjustified toxicity, but evidence for the management of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma is lacking. A retrospective study was performed to evaluate the survival of patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) who discontinued cemiplimab due to different causes and without progression. Among 95 patients with CSCC who received cemiplimab, 22 (23%) patients discontinued immunotherapy due to causes other than progression, such as comorbidities, toxicity, complete response or lack of compliance (group that discontinued before censoring [DBC]), then 73 patients had standard treatment scheduled (STS). The overall survival was 25.2 months (95% CI: 8.9-29.4) in STS group and 28.3 months (95% CI: 12.7-28.3) in the DBC group; deaths for all causes were 11/22 (50%) in the DBC group and 34/73 (46.6%) in the STS group (p = 0.32). 10/22 (45.4%) subjects died due to CSCC in the DBC after discontinuation and 34/73 (46.6%) in the STS group, and the difference between groups was not significant (p = 0.230). Duration of treatment was significantly lower in subjects with stable disease versus those with complete or partial response (16.9, 30.6 and 34.9 months, respectively; p = 0.004). Among the 22 STS patients, 12 received cemiplimab for less than 12 months (10 [83%] died) and 10 for at least 12 months (1 [10%] died). Our observation, finding no outcome difference between DBC and STS groups, suggests that ICI treatment after one year might expose patients to further treatment related events without efficacy advantages.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell , Skin Neoplasms , Humans , Male , Female , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Skin Neoplasms/mortality , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/adverse effects , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/mortality , Aged , Retrospective Studies , Middle Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Treatment Outcome , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/adverse effects , Adult , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/adverse effectsABSTRACT
No prospective data were available prior to 2021 to inform selection between combination BRAF and MEK inhibition versus dual blockade of programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) as first-line treatment options for BRAFV600-mutant melanoma. SECOMBIT (NCT02631447) was a randomized, three-arm, noncomparative phase II trial in which patients were randomized to one of two sequences with immunotherapy or targeted therapy first, with a third arm in which an 8-week induction course of targeted therapy followed by a planned switch to immunotherapy was the first treatment. BRAF/MEK inhibitors were encorafenib plus binimetinib and checkpoint inhibitors ipilimumab plus nivolumab. Primary outcome of overall survival was previously reported, demonstrating improved survival with immunotherapy administered until progression and followed by BRAF/MEK inhibition. Here we report 4-year survival outcomes, confirming long-term benefit with first-line immunotherapy. We also describe preliminary results of predefined biomarkers analyses that identify a trend toward improved 4-year overall survival and total progression-free survival in patients with loss-of-function mutations affecting JAK or low baseline levels of serum interferon gamma (IFNy). These long-term survival outcomes confirm immunotherapy as the preferred first-line treatment approach for most patients with BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma, and the biomarker analyses are hypothesis-generating for future investigations of predictors of durable benefit with dual checkpoint blockade and targeted therapy.
Subject(s)
Melanoma , Skin Neoplasms , Humans , Melanoma/drug therapy , Melanoma/genetics , Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf/genetics , Ipilimumab/therapeutic use , Immunotherapy/methods , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Kinases/genetics , Skin Neoplasms/genetics , MutationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab plus nivolumab (COMBO) is the standard treatment in asymptomatic patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBM). We report a retrospective study aiming to assess the outcome of patients with MBM treated with COMBO outside clinical trials. METHODS: Consecutive patients treated with COMBO have been included. Demographics, steroid treatment, Central Nervous System (CNS)-related symptoms, BRAF status, radiotherapy or surgery, response rate (RR), progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) have been analyzed. RESULTS: 376 patients were included: 262 received COMBO as first-line and 114 as a subsequent line of therapy, respectively. In multivariate analysis, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) (≥1 vs 0) [HR 1.97 (1.46-2.66)], extracerebral metastases [HR 1.92 (1.09-3.40)], steroid use at the start of COMBO [HR 1.59 (1.08-2.38)], CNS-related symptoms [HR 1.59 (1.08-2.34)], SRS (Stereotactic radiosurgery) [HR 0.63 (0.45-0.88)] and surgery [HR 0.63 (0.43-0.91)] were associated with OS. At a median follow-up of 30 months, the median OS (mOS) in the overall population was 21.3 months (18.1-24.5), whilst OS was not yet reached in treatment-naive patients, steroid-free at baseline. In patients receiving COMBO after BRAF/MEK inhibitors(i) PFS at 1-year was 15.7%. The dose of steroids (dexamethasone < vs ≥ 4 mg/day) was not prognostic. SRS alongside COMBO vs COMBO alone in asymptomatic patients prolonged survival. (p = 0.013). Toxicities were consistent with previous studies. An independent validation cohort (n = 51) confirmed the findings. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate remarkable long-term survival in treatment-naïve, asymptomatic, steroid-free patients, as well as in those receiving SRS plus COMBO. PFS and OS were poor in patients receiving COMBO after progressing to BRAF/MEKi.
Subject(s)
Brain Neoplasms , Melanoma , Radiosurgery , Humans , Melanoma/drug therapy , Melanoma/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf/genetics , Brain Neoplasms/drug therapy , Brain Neoplasms/pathology , Radiosurgery/methods , Immunotherapy/adverse effects , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Steroids/therapeutic useABSTRACT
Patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBM) have poor prognosis, albeit advances in locoregional and systemic treatments. The melanoma-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) effectively stratifies survival for patients with MBM. Nevertheless, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), a well known prognostic factor for patients with melanoma, is not represented in the GPA scores and might add prognostic information for patients with MBM. In this study, 150 consecutive patients with MBM were retrospectively analyzed with the aim of evaluating independent prognostic factors for MBM patients, including LDH. Furthermore, we implemented a disease-specific prognostic score and estimated survival according to treatment modalities. On the basis of multivariable Cox regression analyses, six prognostic factors (age, BRAF status, number of MBM, number of extracranial metastatic sites, performance status, and LDH level) resulted statistically significant in terms of survival and were combined in a prognostic score to stratify patients in distinct prognostic groups ( P â <â 0.0001). Among treatment modalities, a multimodal approach with stereotactic radiosurgery or neurosurgery associated with systemic therapy showed the best outcome (median overall survival: 12.32â months, 95% confidence interval, 7.92-25.30). This is the first study to demonstrate that LDH has independent prognostic value for patients with MBM and might be used to improve prognostic stratification, albeit external validation is mandatory. Survival of patients with MBM is affected by both disease-specific risk factors and treatment modalities, with locoregional treatments associated with better outcomes.
Subject(s)
Brain Neoplasms , Melanoma , Radiosurgery , Skin Neoplasms , Humans , Prognosis , Melanoma/pathology , Retrospective Studies , L-Lactate Dehydrogenase , Skin Neoplasms/surgery , Brain Neoplasms/secondaryABSTRACT
PURPOSE: No evidence exists as to whether type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) impairs clinical outcome from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In a large cohort of ICI recipients treated at 21 institutions from June 2014 to June 2020, we studied whether patients on glucose-lowering medications (GLM) for T2DM had shorter overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). We used targeted transcriptomics in a subset of patients to explore differences in the tumor microenvironment (TME) of patients with or without diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 1,395 patients were included. Primary tumors included non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; 54.7%), melanoma (24.7%), renal cell (15.0%), and other carcinomas (5.6%). After multivariable analysis, patients on GLM (n = 226, 16.2%) displayed an increased risk of death [HR, 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI),1.07-1.56] and disease progression/death (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.43) independent of number of GLM received. We matched 92 metformin-exposed patients with 363 controls and 78 patients on other oral GLM or insulin with 299 control patients. Exposure to metformin, but not other GLM, was associated with an increased risk of death (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.16-2.03) and disease progression/death (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.04-1.72). Patients with T2DM with higher pretreatment glycemia had higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (P = 0.04), while exploratory tumoral transcriptomic profiling in a subset of patients (n = 22) revealed differential regulation of innate and adaptive immune pathways in patients with T2DM. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, patients on GLM experienced worse outcomes from immunotherapy, independent of baseline features. Prospective studies are warranted to clarify the relative impact of metformin over a preexisting diagnosis of T2DM in influencing poorer outcomes in this population.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Lung Neoplasms , Metformin , Humans , Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/drug therapy , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/adverse effects , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Lung Neoplasms/genetics , Metformin/adverse effects , Disease Progression , Retrospective Studies , Tumor MicroenvironmentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Prognostic factors for initial response of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma to cemiplimab treatment are lacking. Il-6 has been found to affect immune cell populations which impact tumor development. The aim was to investigate the prognostic significance of IL-6 serum levels before and during treatment. METHODS: Serum levels of IL-6 were correlated with clinical outcomes in a retrospective study. RESULTS: Overall, 39 patients were enrolled. High serum levels of IL-6 (> 5.6 pg/ml) were associated with poorer survival (45.1% vs 0 deaths; OS: 16.1 ± 1.5 vs 20.8 ± 0 months, 95% CI 13,046 to 19,184) and shorter PFS (10.3 ± 1.9 vs 18.9 ± 1.5 months; 95% CI 3433 to 10,133) in patients with advanced CSCC treated with cemiplimab. In addition, patients whose IL-6 level increased after treatment with cemiplimab, independently of the basal level, had a poorer response to treatment than patients whose level was reduced or stable after immunotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Serum levels of IL-6 at baseline and changes after cemiplimab immunotherapy may have a prognostic significance in patients with advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.
Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Squamous Cell , Skin Neoplasms , Humans , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/drug therapy , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/pathology , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Skin Neoplasms/pathology , Interleukin-6 , Prognosis , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Immunotherapy denotes an exemplar change in an oncological setting. Despite the effective application of these treatments across a broad range of tumors, only a minority of patients have beneficial effects. The efficacy of immunotherapy is affected by several factors, including human immunity, which is strongly correlated to genetic features, such as intra-tumor heterogeneity. Classic imaging assessment, based on computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which is useful for conventional treatments, has a limited role in immunotherapy. The reason is due to different patterns of response and/or progression during this kind of treatment which differs from those seen during other treatments, such as the possibility to assess the wide spectrum of immunotherapy-correlated toxic effects (ir-AEs) as soon as possible. In addition, considering the unusual response patterns, the limits of conventional response criteria and the necessity of using related immune-response criteria are clear. Radiomics analysis is a recent field of great interest in a radiological setting and recently it has grown the idea that we could identify patients who will be fit for this treatment or who will develop ir-AEs.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Nivolumab is an anti-PD-1 antibody approved for treating metastatic melanoma (MM), for which still limited evidence is available on the correlation between drug exposure and patient outcomes. METHODS: In this observational retrospective study, we assessed whether nivolumab concentration is associated with treatment response in 88 patients with MM and if the patient's genetic profile plays a role in this association. RESULTS: We observed a statistically significant correlation between nivolumab serum concentration and clinical outcomes, measured as overall and progression-free survival. Moreover, patients who achieved a clinical or partial response tended to have higher levels of nivolumab than those who reached stable disease or had disease progression. However, the difference was not statistically significant. In particular, patients who reached a clinical response had a significantly higher concentration of nivolumab and presented a distinct genetic signature, with more marked activation of ICOS and other genes involved in effector T-cells mediated proinflammatory pathways. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, these preliminary results show that in patients with MM, nivolumab concentration correlates with clinical outcomes and is associated with an increased expression of ICOS and other genes involved in the activation of T effectors cells.
Subject(s)
Melanoma , Neoplasms, Second Primary , Humans , Nivolumab/therapeutic use , Retrospective Studies , Genetic Profile , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Melanoma/drug therapy , Melanoma/genetics , Melanoma/pathology , Neoplasms, Second Primary/chemically inducedABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The clinical observation showed a potential additive effect of anti-PD-1 agents and cetirizine in patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS: Clinical outcomes of concomitant cetirizine/anti-PD-1 treatment of patients with stage IIIb-IV melanoma were retrospectively collected, and a transcriptomic analysis was performed on blood samples obtained at baseline and after 3 months of treatment. RESULTS: Patients treated with cetirizine concomitantly with an anti-PD-1 agent had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS; mean PFS: 28 vs 15 months, HR 0.46, 95% CI: 0.28-0.76; p = 0.0023) and OS (mean OS was 36 vs 23 months, HR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.29-0.78; p = 0.0032) in comparison with those not receiving cetirizine. The concomitant treatment was significantly associated with ORR and DCR (p < 0.05). The expression of FCGR1A/CD64, a specific marker of macrophages, was increased after the treatment in comparison with baseline in blood samples from patients receiving cetirizine, but not in those receiving only the anti-PD1, and positively correlated with the expression of genes linked to the interferon pathway such as CCL8 (rho = 0.32; p = 0.0111), IFIT1 (rho = 0.29; p = 0.0229), IFIT3 (rho = 0.57; p < 0.0001), IFI27 (rho = 0.42; p = 0.008), MX1 (rho = 0.26; p = 0.0383) and RSAD2 (rho = 0.43; p = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study suggests that M1 macrophage polarization may be induced by cetirizine through the interferon-gamma pathway. This effect may synergize with the immunotherapy of advanced melanoma with anti-PD-1 agents.
Subject(s)
Melanoma , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor , Cetirizine/pharmacology , Cetirizine/therapeutic use , Humans , Interferon-gamma/therapeutic use , Macrophages/metabolism , Melanoma/genetics , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Guidelines addressing melanoma in-transit metastasis (ITM) recommend immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) as a first-line treatment option, despite the fact that there are no efficacy data available from prospective trials for exclusively ITM disease. The study aims to analyze the outcome of patients with ITM treated with ICI based on data from a large cohort of patients treated at international referral clinics. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients treated between January 2015 and December 2020 from Australia, Europe, and the USA, evaluating treatment with ICI for ITM with or without nodal involvement (AJCC8 N1c, N2c, and N3c) and without distant disease (M0). Treatment was with PD-1 inhibitor (nivolumab or pembrolizumab) and/or CTLA-4 inhibitor (ipilimumab). The response was evaluated according to the RECIST criteria modified for cutaneous lesions. RESULTS: A total of 287 patients from 21 institutions in eight countries were included. Immunotherapy was first-line treatment in 64 (22%) patients. PD-1 or CTLA-4 inhibitor monotherapy was given in 233 (81%) and 23 (8%) patients, respectively, while 31 (11%) received both in combination. The overall response rate was 56%, complete response (CR) rate was 36%, and progressive disease (PD) rate was 32%. Median PFS was ten months (95% CI 7.4-12.6 months) with a one-, two-, and five-year PFS rate of 48%, 33%, and 18%, respectively. Median MSS was not reached, and the one-, two-, and five-year MSS rates were 95%, 83%, and 71%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Systemic immunotherapy is an effective treatment for melanoma ITM. Future studies should evaluate the role of systemic immunotherapy in the context of multimodality therapy, including locoregional treatments such as surgery, intralesional therapy, and regional therapies.
Subject(s)
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors , Melanoma , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Ipilimumab/therapeutic use , Melanoma/pathology , Prospective Studies , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Mucosal melanomas (MM) are rare tumors, being less than 2% of all diagnosed melanomas, comprising a variegated group of malignancies arising from melanocytes in virtually all mucosal epithelia, even if more frequently found in oral and sino-nasal cavities, ano-rectum and female genitalia (vulva and vagina). To date, there is no consensus about the optimal management strategy of MM. Furthermore, the clinical rationale of molecular tumor characterization regarding BRAF, KIT or NRAS, as well as the therapeutic value of immunotherapy, chemotherapy and targeted therapy, has not yet been deeply explored and clearly established in MM. In this overview, focused on anorectal and genital MM as models of rare melanomas deserving of a multidisciplinary approach, we highlight the need of referring these patients to centers with experts in melanoma, anorectal and uro-genital cancers treatments. Taking into account the rarity, the poor outcomes and the lack of effective treatment options for MM, tailored research needs to be promptly promoted.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Among the several therapeutic options assessed for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), tocilizumab (TCZ), an antagonist of the interleukine-6 receptor, has emerged as a promising therapeutic choice, especially for the severe form of the disease. Proper synthesis of the available randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is needed to inform clinical practice. METHODS: A systematic review with a meta-analysis of RCTs investigating the efficacy of TCZ in COVID-19 patients was conducted. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register were searched up until 30 April 2021. RESULTS: The database search yielded 2885 records; 11 studies were considered eligible for full-text review, and nine met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 3358 patients composed the TCZ arm, and 3131 the comparator group. The main outcome was all-cause mortality at 28-30 days. Subgroup analyses according to trials' and patients' features were performed. A trial sequential analysis (TSA) was also carried out to minimize type I and type II errors. According to the fixed-effect model approach, TCZ was associated with a better survival odds ratio (OR) (0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.75-0.94; I2: 24% (low heterogeneity)). The result was consistent in the subgroup of severe disease (OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.74-0.93; I2: 53% (moderate heterogeneity)). However, the TSA illustrated that the required information size was not met unless the study that was the major source of heterogeneity was omitted. CONCLUSIONS: TCZ may represent an important weapon against severe COVID-19. Further studies are needed to consolidate this finding.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The favourable safety profile and the increasing confidence with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) might have boosted their prescription in frail patients with short life expectancies, who usually are not treated with standard chemotherapy. METHODS: The present analysis aims to describe clinicians' attitudes towards ICIs administration during late stages of life within a multicenter cohort of advanced cancer patients treated with single agent PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors in Italy. RESULTS: Overall, 1149 patients with advanced cancer who received single agent PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors were screened. The final study population consisted of 567 deceased patients. 166 patients (29.3%) had received ICIs within 30 days of death; among them there was a significantly higher proportion of patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (28.3% vs 11.5%, p < 0.0001) and with a higher burden of disease (69.3% vs 59.4%, p = 0.0266). In total, 35 patients (6.2%) started ICIs within 30 days of death; among them there was a higher proportion of patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (45.7% vs 14.5%, p < 0.0001) and with a higher burden of disease (82.9% vs 60.9%, p = 0.0266). Primary tumors were significantly different across subgroups (p = 0.0172), with a higher prevalence of NSCLC patients (80% vs 60.9%) among those who started ICIs within 30 days of death. Lastly, 123 patients (21.7%) started ICIs within 3 months of death. Similarly, within this subgroup there was a higher proportion of patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (29.3% vs 12.8%, p < 0.0001), with a higher burden of disease (74.0% vs 59.0%, p = 0.0025) and with NSCLC (74.0% vs 58.8%, p = 0.0236). CONCLUSION: Our results confirmed a trend toward an increasing ICIs prescription in frail patients, during the late stages of life. Caution should be exercised when evaluating an ICI treatment for patients with a poor PS and a high burden of disease.
Subject(s)
B7-H1 Antigen , Lung Neoplasms , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors , Italy , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Programmed Cell Death 1 ReceptorABSTRACT
The median overall survival (OS) and local control (LC) of patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) are poor even with immune checkpoint inhibitors and/or radiotherapy (RT). The aims of the study were to evaluate the association and timing of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT)/radiosurgery (SRS) performed with the CyberKnife® System and ipilimumab (IPI). A total of 63 MBMs patients were analyzed: 53 received RT+IPI and 10 RT alone. Therefore, the patients were divided into four groups: RT PRE-PI (>4 weeks before IPI) (18), RT CONC-IPI (4 weeks before/between first and last cycle/within 3 months of last cycle of IPI) (20), RT POST-IPI (>3 months after IPI) (15), and NO-IPI (10). A total of 127 lesions were treated: 75 with SRS (one fraction) and 24 with SRT (three to five fractions). The median follow-up was 10.6 months. The median OS was 10.6 months for all patients, 10.7 months for RT+IPI, and 3.3 months for NO-IPI (p = 0.96). One-year LC was 50% for all patients, 56% for RT+IPI, and 18% for NO-IPI (p = 0.08). The 1-year intracranial control was 45% for all patients, 44% for RT+IPI, and 51% for NO-IPI (p = 0.73). IPI with SRS/SRT in MBMs treatment could improve LC. However, the impact and timing of the two modalities on patients' outcomes are still unclear.
ABSTRACT
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has created unique challenges to healthcare systems throughout the world. Ensuring subjects' safety is mandatory especially in oncology, in consideration of cancer patients' particular frailty. We examined the proportion of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) IgM and/or IgG positive subjects in three different groups from Istituto Nazionale Tumori - IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale" in Naples (Campania region, Italy): cancer patients treated with Innovative Immunotherapy (Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors, ICIs), cancer patients undergoing standard Chemotherapies (CHTs) and healthcare providers. 9 out of 287 (3.1%) ICIs patients resulted positive, with a significant lower percentage in respect to CHTs patients (39 positive subjects out of 598, 6.5%) (p = 0.04). There was no statistically significant difference between ICIs cohort and healthcare providers, 48 out of 1050 resulting positive (4.6%). Performing a Propensity Score Matching based on gender and tumor stage, the effect of treatment on seropositivity was analyzed through a regression logistic model and the ICIs treatment resulted to be the only protective factor significantly (p = 0.03) associated with positivity (odds ratio-OR: 0.41; 95% confidence interval-CI 0.18-0.91). According to these preliminary data, ICIs would appear to be a protective factor against the onset of COVID-19 infection.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Immunotherapy , Neoplasms/therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , Antibodies, Viral/blood , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/immunology , Female , Humans , Immunoglobulin G/blood , Immunoglobulin M/blood , Italy/epidemiology , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/immunology , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Translational Research, BiomedicalABSTRACT
As widely acknowledged, 40-50% of all melanoma patients harbour an activating BRAF mutation (mostly BRAF V600E). The identification of the RAS-RAF-MEK-ERK (MAP kinase) signalling pathway and its targeting has represented a valuable milestone for the advanced and, more recently, for the completely resected stage III and IV melanoma therapy management. However, despite progress in BRAF-mutant melanoma treatment, the two different approaches approved so far for metastatic disease, immunotherapy and BRAF+MEK inhibitors, allow a 5-year survival of no more than 60%, and most patients relapse during treatment due to acquired mechanisms of resistance. Deep insight into BRAF gene biology is fundamental to describe the acquired resistance mechanisms (primary and secondary) and to understand the molecular pathways that are now being investigated in preclinical and clinical studies with the aim of improving outcomes in BRAF-mutant patients.
Subject(s)
Melanoma/genetics , Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf/physiology , Skin Neoplasms/genetics , Antineoplastic Agents/administration & dosage , Cell Cycle , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Clinical Trials as Topic , DNA Mutational Analysis , Drug Resistance, Neoplasm/genetics , Extracellular Signal-Regulated MAP Kinases/metabolism , Female , Humans , Immunohistochemistry , Immunotherapy , MAP Kinase Signaling System , Male , Medical Oncology/trends , Melanoma/metabolism , Mutation , Neoplasm Metastasis , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/drug therapy , Protein Kinase Inhibitors/pharmacology , Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf/genetics , Recurrence , Skin Neoplasms/metabolismABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Increased understanding of the interactive mechanisms between tumors and the immune system led to the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors, which have revolutioned the treatment of metastatic melanoma and subsequently many other tumors. In 2014, nivolumab and pembrolizumab, two checkpoint inhibitors binding to PD-1, were approved for the treatment of metastatic melanoma. Since then, a plethora of new molecules have enriched the armamentarium against melanoma. AREAS COVERED: This review summarizes the last updates about treatment with nivolumab and pembrolizumab, data on other PD-1/PDL-1 agents such as spartalizumab and atezolizumab and emerging compounds, new combinations with NKTR-214, anti LAG-3, anti IDO-1 and TVEC, new checkpoint inhibitors (e.g. TIM-3 or TIGIT) and other new molecules for the treatment of metastatic melanoma. EXPERT OPINION: Currently, several ongoing clinical trials are investigating novel molecules, or immunotherapy combinations, in order to achieve even better survival outcomes for patients, overcoming resistance mechanisms and improving toxicity profiles. The challenge in the near future will be to select the most appropriate treatments according to the specific characteristics of the patients.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/pharmacology , Melanoma/drug therapy , Skin Neoplasms/drug therapy , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/adverse effects , B7-H1 Antigen/antagonists & inhibitors , Drug Design , Drug Resistance, Neoplasm , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/adverse effects , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/pharmacology , Immunotherapy/methods , Melanoma/immunology , Melanoma/pathology , Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor/antagonists & inhibitors , Skin Neoplasms/immunology , Skin Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In ambulatory patients with cancer with asymptomatic or pauci-symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, the safety of targeted therapies (TTs), chemotherapy (CT) or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) therapy is still unknown. MATERIAL AND METHODS: From the start of the first epidemic wave of SARS-CoV-2 in Bergamo, Italy, we have prospectively screened all consecutive outpatients who presented for treatment to the Oncology Division of the Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo for SARS-CoV-2 antigen expression. We identified patients treated with ICIs and compared these to patients with the same cancer subtypes treated with TTs or CT. RESULTS: Between March 5 and May 18, 293 consecutive patients (49% melanoma, 34% non-small cell lung cancer, 9% renal cell carcinoma, 8% other) were included in this study: 159 (54%), 50 (17%) and 84 (29%) received ICIs, CT or TTs, respectively. Overall 89 patients (30.0%) were SARS-CoV-2 positive. Mortality of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients was statistically significantly higher compared with SARS-CoV-2 negative patients (8/89 vs 3/204, respectively, Fisher's exact test p=0.004). All deaths were due to COVID-19. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were more frequent in SARS-CoV-2-positive patients compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative cases (Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel (CMH) test p=0.0008). The incidence of SAEs in SARS-CoV-2 positive compared with SARS-CoV-2 negative patients was similar in ICI and CT patients (17.3% and 3.7% for positive and negative patients in ICIs and 15.4% and 2.7% in CT, Breslow-Day test p=0.891). No COVID-19-related SAEs were observed in the TTs patients. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of SAEs was higher for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients treated with ICIs and CT, mostly in advanced disease. No SAEs were observed in patients treated with TTs. SAEs were COVID-19 related rather than treatment related. Treatment with ICIs does not appear to significantly increase risk of SAEs compared with CT. This information should be considered when determining treatment options for patients.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Neoplasms/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Aged , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/virology , Female , Gastrointestinal Diseases/chemically induced , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/mortality , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Survival RateABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer who are infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are more likely to develop severe illness and die compared with those without cancer. The impact of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) on the severity of COVID-19 illness is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate whether ICI confers an additional risk for severe COVID-19 in patients with cancer. METHODS: We analyzed data from 110 patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 while on treatment with ICI without chemotherapy in 19 hospitals in North America, Europe and Australia. The primary objective was to describe the clinical course and to identify factors associated with hospital and intensive care (ICU) admission and mortality. FINDINGS: Thirty-five (32%) patients were admitted to hospital and 18 (16%) died. All patients who died had advanced cancer, and only four were admitted to ICU. COVID-19 was the primary cause of death in 8 (7%) patients. Factors independently associated with an increased risk for hospital admission were ECOG ≥2 (OR 39.25, 95% CI 4.17 to 369.2, p=0.0013), treatment with combination ICI (OR 5.68, 95% CI 1.58 to 20.36, p=0.0273) and presence of COVID-19 symptoms (OR 5.30, 95% CI 1.57 to 17.89, p=0.0073). Seventy-six (73%) patients interrupted ICI due to SARS-CoV-2 infection, 43 (57%) of whom had resumed at data cut-off. INTERPRETATION: COVID-19-related mortality in the ICI-treated population does not appear to be higher than previously published mortality rates for patients with cancer. Inpatient mortality of patients with cancer treated with ICI was high in comparison with previously reported rates for hospitalized patients with cancer and was due to COVID-19 in almost half of the cases. We identified factors associated with adverse outcomes in ICI-treated patients with COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/immunology , COVID-19/virology , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors/adverse effects , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/immunology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purificationABSTRACT
Approximately 40% of malignant melanomas are diagnosed in patients older than 65 years. Elderly patients with melanoma present clinicopathological features related to a more aggressive biology, and they are often diagnosed with advanced stage of disease. Interestingly, in older patients the immune system can be altered with changes both in the innate system and in the adaptive immune system with the acquisition of a pro-inflammatory and immune suppressive phenotype. Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors has reshaped the treatment strategies and prognosis of patients with melanoma, and particularly, older age should not be considered a contraindication for immunotherapy. However, data regarding efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in elderly population are still limited because frail older patients are generally excluded from clinical trials. Recently, real-world data have shed light on similar efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in older population compared with younger counterpart. The aim of the present review was to summarize the available knowledge on the underlying immune system in older patients with a diagnosis of melanoma and the immunotherapeutic approaches in this population.