RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Both immunotherapy (IO) and targeted therapy (TT) are used as adjuvant (adj) treatment for stage III melanoma, however, data describing real-world outcomes are limited. In addition, a significant proportion of patients relapse, for whom best management is unclear. The aim of our study was to assess the efficacy, and safety of adj anti-PD1 IO and TT in a real-world cohort of patients with resected stage III melanoma, and further delineate patterns of recurrence and treatment strategies. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 130 patients who received adj therapy (100 anti-PD1 IO and 30 TT). RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 30 months, median relapse-free survival (RFS) was 24.6 (95% CI, 17-not reached [NR]) versus 64 (95% CI, 29.5-NR) months for the TT and IO groups, respectively (p = 0.26). Median overall survival (OS) was NR for either subgroup. At data cutoff, 77% and 82% of patients in TT and IO arms were alive. A higher number of grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were noted in the IO group (11% vs. 3%), however, a higher proportion of patients permanently discontinued adj therapy in the TT group (43% vs. 11%) due to toxicity. Strategies at relapse and outcomes were variable based on location and timing of recurrence. A significant number of patients who relapsed after adj IO received a second round of IO. Among them, patients who were off adj IO at relapse had superior second median RFS (mRFS2), compared to those who relapsed while on adj IO; mRFS2 was NR versus 5.1 months (95% CI, 2.5-NR), respectively, p = 0.02. CONCLUSION: In summary, both TT and IO yielded prolonged RFS in a real-world setting, however, longer follow-up is needed to determine any potential OS benefit. Adj therapy, particularly TT, may not be as well tolerated as suggested in clinical trials, with lower completion rates (59% vs. 74%) in a real-life setting. Overall, patients who relapse during adj therapy have poor outcomes, while patients who relapse after discontinuation of adj IO therapy appear to benefit from IO re-treatment.
Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Humanos , Melanoma/mortalidad , Melanoma/terapia , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Melanoma/patología , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Anciano , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/métodos , Adulto , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/efectos adversos , Neoplasias Cutáneas/terapia , Neoplasias Cutáneas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Cutáneas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Terapia Molecular Dirigida , Inmunoterapia/métodos , Anciano de 80 o más AñosRESUMEN
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Given the rapid development of multiple targeted and immune therapies for patients with advanced melanoma, it can be challenging to select a therapy based on currently available data. This review aims to provide an overview of frontline options for metastatic melanoma, with practical guidance for selecting a treatment regimen. RECENT FINDINGS: Recently reported data from randomized trials suggests that the majority of patients with unresectable melanoma should receive a PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor as part of their first line therapy, irrespective of BRAF mutation status. Additional data also suggests that combination immunotherapies result in improved outcomes compared to single agent, albeit at the cost of increased toxicity, though to date no biomarker exists to help guide treatment selection. As the number therapeutic options continue to grow for patients with advanced melanoma, there is likely to be a continued focus on combination strategies. Defining the optimal treatment approach in order to maximize efficacy while minimizing toxicity remains an area of active investigation.
Asunto(s)
Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico , Melanoma , Humanos , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Melanoma/patología , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/uso terapéutico , Inmunoterapia/métodos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Metástasis de la Neoplasia , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/antagonistas & inhibidores , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/genética , Neoplasias Cutáneas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patología , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Prior studies have estimated a small number of individuals with melanoma (2%-2.5%) have germline cancer predisposition, yet a recent twin study suggested melanoma has the highest hereditability among cancers. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of hereditary melanoma and characterize the spectrum of cancer predisposition genes that may increase the risk of melanoma. METHODS: Four hundred individuals with melanoma and personal or family history of cancers underwent germline testing of >80 cancer predisposition genes. Comparative analysis of germline data was performed on 3 additional oncologic and dermatologic data sets. RESULTS: Germline pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variants were identified in 15.3% (61) individuals with melanoma. Most variants (41, 67%) involved genes considered unrelated to melanoma (BLM, BRIP1, CHEK2, MLH1, MSH2, PMS2, RAD51C). A third (20, 33%) were in genes previously associated with familial melanoma (BAP1, BRCA2, CDKN2A, MITF, TP53). Nearly half (30, 46.9%) of P/LP variants were in homologous repair deficiency genes. Validation cohorts demonstrated P/LP rates of 10.6% from an unselected oncologic cohort, 15.8% from a selected commercial testing cohort, and 14.5% from a highly selected dermatologic study. LIMITATIONS: Cohorts with varying degrees of selection, some retrospective. CONCLUSION: Germline predisposition in individuals with melanoma is common, with clinically actionable findings diagnosed in 10.6% to 15.8%.
Asunto(s)
Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Mutación de Línea Germinal , Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Humanos , Melanoma/genética , Melanoma/epidemiología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/genética , Neoplasias Cutáneas/epidemiología , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Anciano , Pruebas Genéticas , Adulto Joven , IncidenciaRESUMEN
Cancer immunotherapies, including checkpoint inhibitors and adoptive cell therapy, manipulate the immune system to recognize and attack cancer cells. These therapies have the potential to induce durable responses in multiple solid and hematologic malignancies and thus have transformed treatment algorithms for numerous tumor types. Cancer immunotherapies lead to unique toxicity profiles distinct from the toxicities of other cancer therapies, depending on their mechanism of action. These toxicities often require specific management, which can include steroids and immune-modulating therapy and for which consensus guidelines have been published. This review will focus on the toxicities of checkpoint inhibitors and chimeric antigen receptor T cells, including pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management.
Asunto(s)
Factores Inmunológicos/uso terapéutico , Inmunoterapia/métodos , Neoplasias/terapia , HumanosRESUMEN
The use of checkpoint inhibitor-based immunotherapy has transformed the treatment landscape for melanoma as well as many other cancer types. With the ability to potentiate tumor-specific immune responses, these agents can result in durable tumor control. However, this activation of the immune system can lead to a unique constellation of side effects, distinct from other cancer therapies, collectively termed immune-mediated adverse events (irAEs). This review will focus on irAEs and guidelines for management related to the most clinically relevant checkpoint inhibitors, those that target programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4).
RESUMEN
Recipients of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) are at risk for potentially preventable infectious complications because of defects in humoral and cell-mediated immunity. Studies of vaccine immunogenicity in HCT recipients have shown that antibody response rates depend on age, type of vaccine, and presence or absence of graft-versus-host disease. However, few large-scale studies have assessed the immune response to vaccination in HCT recipients. Additionally, HCT recipients have much higher rates of potentially preventable infections compared with the general population even after vaccination. This review evaluates the available studies and our view on the measurement of specific antibody titers, definition of an immune response, and durability of response in HCT recipients in both inactivated and live attenuated vaccines.