RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Nivolumab is approved as adjuvant therapy for resected stage III/IV melanoma based on the phase 3 CheckMate 238 trial. This analysis compared outcomes from CheckMate 238 with those from the real-world Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived de-identified database in patients with resected stage III melanoma (per AJCC-8) treated with adjuvant nivolumab. MATERIALS: Outcomes included baseline characteristics, overall survival (OS) in the CheckMate 238 cohort (randomization until death or last known alive), and real-world overall survival (rwOS) in the Flatiron Health cohort (nivolumab initiation until death or data cutoff). rwOS was compared with OS using unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was combined with the adjusted model to reduce baseline discrepancies. RESULTS: The CheckMate 238 and real-world cohorts included 369 and 452 patients, respectively (median age, 56.0 and 63.0 years; median follow-up, 61.4 vs. 25.5 months). rwOS was not different from OS in the unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR] 1.27; 95% CI 0.92-1.74), adjusted (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.67-1.54), and adjusted IPTW (HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.70-1.63) analyses. In the adjusted analysis, 2-year OS and rwOS rates were 84%. Median OS and rwOS were not reached. After IPTW, OS and rwOS were not different (HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.70-1.64). CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative analysis, OS in the CheckMate 238 trial was similar to rwOS in the Flatiron Health database after adjustments in patients with resected stage III melanoma (per AJCC-8) treated with adjuvant nivolumab, validating the trial results.
Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Nivolumab , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Antineoplásicos Inmunológicos/uso terapéutico , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/métodos , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Melanoma/mortalidad , Melanoma/patología , Melanoma/cirugía , Nivolumab/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/cirugía , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Since the first approval for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma more than a decade ago, immunotherapy has completely transformed the treatment landscape of this chemotherapy-resistant disease. Combination regimens including ICIs directed against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) with anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) agents or, more recently, anti-lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) agents, have gained regulatory approvals for the treatment of metastatic cutaneous melanoma, with long-term follow-up data suggesting the possibility of cure for some patients with advanced disease. In the resectable setting, adjuvant ICIs prolong recurrence-free survival, and neoadjuvant strategies are an active area of investigation. Other immunotherapy strategies, such as oncolytic virotherapy for injectable cutaneous melanoma and bispecific T-cell engager therapy for HLA-A*02:01 genotype-positive uveal melanoma, are also available to patients. Despite the remarkable efficacy of these regimens for many patients with cutaneous melanoma, traditional immunotherapy biomarkers (ie, programmed death-ligand 1 expression, tumor mutational burden, T-cell infiltrate and/or microsatellite stability) have failed to reliably predict response. Furthermore, ICIs are associated with unique toxicity profiles, particularly for the highly active combination of anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 agents. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to develop this clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, including rare subtypes of the disease (eg, uveal, mucosal), with the goal of improving patient care by providing guidance to the oncology community. Drawing from published data and clinical experience, the Expert Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for healthcare professionals using immunotherapy to treat melanoma, with topics including therapy selection in the advanced and perioperative settings, intratumoral immunotherapy, when to use immunotherapy for patients with BRAFV600-mutated disease, management of patients with brain metastases, evaluation of treatment response, special patient populations, patient education, quality of life, and survivorship, among others.
Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Humanos , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Calidad de Vida , Inmunoterapia , Melanoma Cutáneo MalignoRESUMEN
Since the first approval for immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma more than a decade ago, immunotherapy has completely transformed the treatment landscape of this chemotherapy-resistant disease. Combination regimens including ICIs directed against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) with anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) agents or, more recently, anti-lymphocyte-activation gene 3 (LAG-3) agents, have gained regulatory approvals for the treatment of metastatic cutaneous melanoma, with long-term follow-up data suggesting the possibility of cure for some patients with advanced disease. In the resectable setting, adjuvant ICIs prolong recurrence-free survival, and neoadjuvant strategies are an active area of investigation. Other immunotherapy strategies, such as oncolytic virotherapy for injectable cutaneous melanoma and bispecific T-cell engager therapy for HLA-A*02:01 genotype-positive uveal melanoma, are also available to patients. Despite the remarkable efficacy of these regimens for many patients with cutaneous melanoma, traditional immunotherapy biomarkers (ie, programmed death-ligand 1 expression, tumor mutational burden, T-cell infiltrate and/or microsatellite stability) have failed to reliably predict response. Furthermore, ICIs are associated with unique toxicity profiles, particularly for the highly active combination of anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 agents. The Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a panel of experts to develop this clinical practice guideline on immunotherapy for the treatment of melanoma, including rare subtypes of the disease (eg, uveal, mucosal), with the goal of improving patient care by providing guidance to the oncology community. Drawing from published data and clinical experience, the Expert Panel developed evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for healthcare professionals using immunotherapy to treat melanoma, with topics including therapy selection in the advanced and perioperative settings, intratumoral immunotherapy, when to use immunotherapy for patients with BRAFV600- mutated disease, management of patients with brain metastases, evaluation of treatment response, special patient populations, patient education, quality of life, and survivorship, among others.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Inmunoterapia/normas , Melanoma/inmunología , Antineoplásicos Inmunológicos/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Genomic alterations of BRAF and NRAS are oncogenic drivers in malignant melanoma and other solid tumors. Tovorafenib is an investigational, oral, selective, CNS-penetrant, small molecule, type II panRAF inhibitor. This first-in-human phase 1 study explored the safety and antitumor activity of tovorafenib. METHODS: This two-part study in adult patients with relapsed or refractory advanced solid tumors included a dose escalation phase and a dose expansion phase including molecularly defined cohorts of patients with melanoma. Primary objectives were to evaluate the safety of tovorafenib administered once every other day (Q2D) or once weekly (QW), and to determine the maximum-tolerated and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) on these schedules. Secondary objectives included evaluation of antitumor activity and tovorafenib pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Tovorafenib was administered to 149 patients (Q2D n = 110, QW n = 39). The RP2D of tovorafenib was defined as 200 mg Q2D or 600 mg QW. In the dose expansion phase, 58 (73%) of 80 patients in Q2D cohorts and 9 (47%) of 19 in the QW cohort had grade ≥ 3 adverse events. The most common of these overall were anemia (14 patients, 14%) and maculo-papular rash (8 patients, 8%). Responses were seen in 10 (15%) of 68 evaluable patients in the Q2D expansion phase, including in 8 of 16 (50%) patients with BRAF mutation-positive melanoma naïve to RAF and MEK inhibitors. In the QW dose expansion phase, there were no responses in 17 evaluable patients with NRAS mutation-positive melanoma naïve to RAF and MEK inhibitors; 9 patients (53%) had a best response of stable disease. QW dose administration was associated with minimal accumulation of tovorafenib in systemic circulation in the dose range of 400-800 mg. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of both schedules was acceptable, with QW dosing at the RP2D of 600 mg QW preferred for future clinical studies. Antitumor activity of tovorafenib in BRAF-mutated melanoma was promising and justifies continued clinical development across multiple settings. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01425008.
Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Neoplasias Primarias Secundarias , Neoplasias , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Adulto , Humanos , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/genética , Neoplasias/patología , Melanoma/patología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patología , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas , Quinasas de Proteína Quinasa Activadas por Mitógenos , Dosis Máxima ToleradaRESUMEN
The incidence of brain metastases continues to present a management issue despite the advent of improved systemic control and overall survival. While the management of oligometastatic disease (ie, 1-4 brain metastases) with surgery and radiation has become fairly straightforward in the era of radiosurgery, the management of patients with multiple metastatic brain lesions can be challenging. Here we review the available evidence and provide a multidisciplinary management algorithm for brain metastases that incorporates the latest advances in surgery, radiation therapy, and systemic therapy while taking into account the latest in precision medicine-guided therapies. In particular, we argue that whole-brain radiation therapy can likely be omitted in most patients as up-front therapy.
RESUMEN
Nonmelanoma skin cancers (NMSCs) are some of the most commonly diagnosed malignancies. In general, early-stage NMSCs have favorable outcomes; however, a small subset of patients develop resistant, advanced, or metastatic disease, or aggressive subtypes that are more challenging to treat successfully. Recently, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC), cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC), and basal cell carcinoma (BCC). Although ICIs have demonstrated activity against NMSCs, the routine clinical use of these agents may be more challenging due to a number of factors including the lack of predictive biomarkers, the need to consider special patient populations, the management of toxicity, and the assessment of atypical responses. With the goal of improving patient care by providing expert guidance to the oncology community, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to develop a clinical practice guideline (CPG). The expert panel drew on the published literature as well as their own clinical experience to develop recommendations for healthcare professionals on important aspects of immunotherapeutic treatment for NMSCs, including staging, biomarker testing, patient selection, therapy selection, post-treatment response evaluation and surveillance, and patient quality of life (QOL) considerations, among others. The evidence- and consensus-based recommendations in this CPG are intended to provide guidance to cancer care professionals treating patients with NMSCs.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Basocelular , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas , Inmunoterapia , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/patología , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto , Guías como Asunto , Humanos , Calidad de Vida , Neoplasias Cutáneas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patologíaRESUMEN
Checkpoint immunotherapies (CPIs) have improved outcomes for metastatic melanoma patients, with objective response rates to combination ipilimumab and nivolumab of ~58%. Preclinical data suggest that histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibition enhances antitumor immune activity and may augment CPI. In a phase Ib open-label pilot trial (NCT03565406), patients with therapy-naive metastatic melanoma were treated with the class I/IV HDAC inhibitor mocetinostat orally three times a week in combination with nivolumab and ipilimumab every 3 weeks for 12 weeks followed by 12-week maintenance cycles of nivolumab every 2 weeks and mocetinostat at the same dose and schedule as induction. The endpoints of the trial were safety, definition of a recommended phase 2 dose, preliminary assessment of response, and correlative marker determination. Patient PBMC and serum samples collected at baseline and on-treatment were assessed by flow cytometry and Luminex assays for immune correlates. Ten patients were treated: nine with 70-mg and one with 50-mg mocetinostat. In the 70-mg cohort, eight patients had objective responses. The patient in the 50-mg cohort had an early progression of disease. All patients had grade 2 or higher toxicities, and six had grades 3 and 4 toxicities. Patient PBMC showed significant decreases in myeloid-derived suppressor cells and trends towards reduced anti-inflammatory monocyte phenotypes. Patient serum showed significant upregulation of granzyme A and TNF and trends towards increased granzyme B and IFNγ. Collectively, combining CPI and mocetinostat had favorable response rates but with high levels of toxicity. Assessment of immune correlates supports a shift away from immunosuppressive phenotypes towards enhanced immune responses.
Asunto(s)
Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutáneas , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Benzamidas , Inhibidores de Histona Desacetilasas/efectos adversos , Humanos , Ipilimumab/farmacología , Ipilimumab/uso terapéutico , Leucocitos Mononucleares/patología , Melanoma/patología , Nivolumab/farmacología , Nivolumab/uso terapéutico , Pirimidinas , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patología , Melanoma Cutáneo MalignoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: New therapies for melanoma have been associated with increasing survival expectations, as opposed to the dismal outcomes of only a decade ago. Using a prospective registry, we aimed to define current survival goals for melanoma patients with brain metastases (BM), based on state-of-the-art multimodality care. METHODS: We reviewed 171 melanoma patients with BM receiving stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) who were followed with point-of-care data collection between 2012 and 2020. Clinical, molecular and imaging data were collected, including systemic treatment and radiosurgical parameters. RESULTS: Mean age was 63 ± 15 years, 39% were female and 29% had BRAF-mutated tumors. Median overall survival after radiosurgery was 15.7 months (95% Confidence Interval 11.4-27.7) and 25 months in patients managed since 2015. Thirty-two patients survived [Formula: see text] 5 years from their initial SRS. BRAF mutation-targeted therapies showed a survival advantage in comparison to chemotherapy (p = 0.009), but not to immunotherapy (p = 0.09). In a multivariable analysis, both immunotherapy and the number of metastases at 1st SRS were predictors of long-term survival ([Formula: see text] 5 years) from initial SRS (p = 0.023 and p = 0.018, respectively). Five patients (16%) of the long-term survivors required no active treatment for [Formula: see text] 5 years. CONCLUSION: Long-term survival in patients with melanoma BM is achievable in the current era of SRS combined with immunotherapies. For those alive [Formula: see text] 5 years after first SRS, 16% had been also off systemic or local brain therapy for over 5 years. Given late recurrences of melanoma, caution is warranted, however prolonged survival off active treatment in a subset of our patients raises the potential for cure.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Encefálicas , Melanoma , Radiocirugia , Anciano , Neoplasias Encefálicas/patología , Femenino , Humanos , Inmunoterapia , Masculino , Melanoma/patología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Terapia Molecular Dirigida , Radiocirugia/métodos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma is the second most common skin cancer in the United States. Currently, there is no standardized management approach for patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma who develop metastatic or locally advanced disease and are not candidates for curative surgery or curative radiation. To address this issue, the Expert Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma Leadership program convened an expert steering committee to develop evidence-based consensus recommendations on the basis of a large, structured literature review. Consensus was achieved through modified Delphi methodology. The steering committee included five dermatologists, three medical oncologists, two head and neck surgeons, one radiation oncologist, and a patient advocacy group representative. The steering committee aligned on the following clinical topics: diagnosis and identification of patients considered not candidates for surgery; staging systems and risk stratification in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma; the role of radiation therapy, surgery, and systemic therapy in the management of advanced disease, with a focus on immunotherapy; referral patterns; survivorship care; and inclusion of the patient's perspective. Consensus was achieved on 34 recommendations addressing 12 key clinical questions. The Expert Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma Leadership steering committee's evidence-based consensus recommendations may provide healthcare professionals with practically oriented guidance to help optimize outcomes for patients with advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Combination nivolumab plus ipilimumab was efficacious in patients with asymptomatic melanoma brain metastases (MBM) in CheckMate 204, but showed low efficacy in patients with symptomatic MBM. Here, we provide final 3-year follow-up data from the trial. METHODS: This open-label, multicentre, phase 2 study (CheckMate 204) included adults (aged ≥18 years) with measurable MBM (0·5-3·0 cm in diameter). Asymptomatic patients (cohort A) had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1 and no neurological symptoms or baseline corticosteroid use; symptomatic patients (cohort B) had an ECOG performance status of 0-2 with stable neurological symptoms and could be receiving low-dose dexamethasone. Nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg was given intravenously every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks for up to 2 years, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was intracranial clinical benefit rate (complete responses, partial responses, or stable disease lasting ≥6 months) assessed in all treated patients. Intracranial progression-free survival and overall survival were key secondary endpoints. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02320058. FINDINGS: Between Feb 19, 2015, and Nov 1, 2017, 119 (72%) of 165 screened patients were enrolled and treated: 101 patients were asymptomatic (cohort A; median follow-up 34·3 months [IQR 14·7-36·4]) and 18 were symptomatic (cohort B; median follow-up 7·5 months [1·2-35·2]). Investigator-assessed intracranial clinical benefit was observed in 58 (57·4% [95% CI 47·2-67·2]) of 101 patients in cohort A and three (16·7% [3·6-41·4]) of 18 patients in cohort B; investigator-assessed objective response was observed in 54 (53·5% [43·3-63·5]) patients in cohort A and three (16·7% [3·6-41·4]) patients in cohort B. 33 (33%) patients in cohort A and three (17%) patients in cohort B had an investigator-assessed intracranial complete response. For patients in cohort A, 36-month intracranial progression-free survival was 54·1% (95% CI 42·7-64·1) and overall survival was 71·9% (61·8-79·8). For patients in cohort B, 36-month intracranial progression-free survival was 18·9% (95% CI 4·6-40·5) and overall survival was 36·6% (14·0-59·8). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase (15 [15%] of 101 patients each) in cohort A; no grade 3 TRAEs occurred in more than one patient each in cohort B, and no grade 4 events occurred. The most common serious TRAEs were colitis, diarrhoea, hypophysitis, and increased alanine aminotransferase (five [5%] of each among the 101 patients in cohort A); no serious TRAE occurred in more than one patient each in cohort B. There was one treatment-related death (myocarditis in cohort A). INTERPRETATION: The durable 3-year response, overall survival, and progression-free survival rates for asymptomatic patients support first-line use of nivolumab plus ipilimumab. Symptomatic disease in patients with MBM remains difficult to treat, but some patients achieve a long-term response with the combination. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Encefálicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano , Neoplasias Encefálicas/secundario , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Ipilimumab/administración & dosificación , Masculino , Melanoma/patología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nivolumab/administración & dosificación , Pronóstico , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Effective treatment options are limited for patients with advanced (metastatic or unresectable) melanoma who progress after immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies. Adoptive cell therapy using tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes has demonstrated efficacy in advanced melanoma. Lifileucel is an autologous, centrally manufactured tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte product. METHODS: We conducted a phase II open-label, single-arm, multicenter study in patients with advanced melanoma who had been previously treated with checkpoint inhibitor(s) and BRAF ± MEK targeted agents. Lifileucel was produced from harvested tumor specimens in central Good Manufacturing Practice facilities using a streamlined 22-day process. Patients received a nonmyeloablative lymphodepletion regimen, a single infusion of lifileucel, and up to six doses of high-dose interleukin-2. The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST, version 1.1. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients received a mean of 3.3 prior therapies (anti-programmed death 1 [PD-1] or programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1]: 100%; anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein-4: 80%; BRAF ± MEK inhibitor: 23%). The ORR was 36% (95% CI, 25 to 49), with two complete responses and 22 partial responses. Disease control rate was 80% (95% CI, 69 to 89). Median duration of response was not reached after 18.7-month median study follow-up (range, 0.2-34.1 months). In the primary refractory to anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy subset, the ORR and disease control rate were 41% (95% CI, 26 to 57) and 81% (95% CI, 66 to 91), respectively. Safety profile was consistent with known adverse events associated with nonmyeloablative lymphodepletion and interleukin-2. CONCLUSION: Lifileucel demonstrated durable responses and addresses a major unmet need in patients with metastatic melanoma with limited treatment options after approved therapy, including the primary refractory to anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy subset.
Asunto(s)
Linfocitos Infiltrantes de Tumor/metabolismo , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In patients with melanoma and asymptomatic brain metastases (MBM), nivolumab plus ipilimumab provided an intracranial response rate of 55%. Here, we present the first report for patients who were symptomatic and/or required corticosteroids and updated data for asymptomatic patients. METHODS: Patients with measurable MBM, 0.5-3.0 cm, were enrolled into Cohort A (asymptomatic) or Cohort B (stable neurologic symptoms and/or receiving corticosteroids). Nivolumab, 1 mg/kg, and ipilimumab, 3 mg/kg, were given intravenously every 3 weeks ×4, followed by nivolumab, 3 mg/kg, every 2 weeks until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or 24 months. The primary endpoint was intracranial clinical benefit rate (CBR; complete response [CR], partial response [PR], or stable disease ≥6 months). RESULTS: Symptomatic patients (N = 18) received a median of one nivolumab and ipilimumab combination dose and had an intracranial CBR of 22.2%. Two of 12 patients on corticosteroids had CR; 2 responded among the 6 not on corticosteroids. Median intracranial progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 1.2 and 8.7 months, respectively. In contrast, with 20.6 months of follow-up, we confirmed an intracranial CBR of 58.4% in asymptomatic patients (N = 101); median duration of response, PFS, and OS were not reached. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab provides durable clinical benefit for asymptomatic patients with MBM and should be considered for first-line therapy. This regimen has limited activity in MBM patients with neurologic symptoms and/or requiring corticosteroids, supporting the need for alternative approaches and methods to reduce the dependency on corticosteroids. Clinical trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02320058.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Encefálicas , Melanoma , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Neoplasias Encefálicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Ipilimumab/efectos adversos , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Nivolumab/efectos adversosRESUMEN
Twenty to sixty percent of patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) experience high-grade immune-related adverse events (irAEs) which may prevent the continuation of treatment. Limited clinical evidence is available to guide treatment for these patients. Patients with stage IV or unresectable stage III melanoma at NYU Langone Health were reviewed from 1 January 2014 to 1 July 2019. Patients with first-line ICI systemic therapy, a high-grade irAE and a rechallenge with ICI therapy were included. Postrechallenge irAE recurrence, response rate, overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated. Postrechallenge irAEs recurred in 71.9% (n = 23/32) of patients at a median of 5.1 weeks from rechallenge, with 46.9% (15/32) recurring as high-grade events. Clinical response was achieved in 46.9% (15/32) of patients, including 40.6% (13/32) with a complete response and 6.3% (2/32) with partial response. Median OS from first ICI initiation was 85.4 weeks (45.7-140.7; 25th-75th percentile) and median PFS was 42.9 weeks (29.2-114.2; 25th-75th percentile). Patients with a shorter time to initial irAE and shorter time to postrechallenge irAE were at greater risk for disease progression [hazard ratio 7.80; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.91-32.83; P = 0.004; hazard ratio 7.45, 95% CI, 1.57-35.35; P = 0.012). Those with greater duration to rechallenge (>10 weeks) were at lower risk for disease progression (hazard ratio 0.15, 0.03-0.68; P = 0.015). ICI rechallenge can be considered in patients with advanced melanoma, as the risk-benefit profile appears favorable. Treatment toxicity should be appropriately managed, as longer durations to rechallenge may lower the risk of disease progression.
Asunto(s)
Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/efectos adversos , Melanoma/complicaciones , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del TumorRESUMEN
Five years ago, the Melanoma Research Foundation (MRF) conducted an assessment of the challenges and opportunities facing the melanoma research community and patients with melanoma. Since then, remarkable progress has been made on both the basic and clinical research fronts. However, the incidence, recurrence, and death rates for melanoma remain unacceptably high and significant challenges remain. Hence, the MRF Scientific Advisory Council and Breakthrough Consortium, a group that includes clinicians and scientists, reconvened to facilitate intensive discussions on thematic areas essential to melanoma researchers and patients alike, prevention, detection, diagnosis, metastatic dormancy and progression, response and resistance to targeted and immune-based therapy, and the clinical consequences of COVID-19 for patients with melanoma and providers. These extensive discussions helped to crystalize our understanding of the challenges and opportunities facing the broader melanoma community today. In this report, we discuss the progress made since the last MRF assessment, comment on what remains to be overcome, and offer recommendations for the best path forward.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/prevención & control , Oncología Médica/métodos , Melanoma/terapia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , SARS-CoV-2/aislamiento & purificación , Neoplasias Cutáneas/terapia , Investigación Biomédica/métodos , Investigación Biomédica/tendencias , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/virología , Humanos , Oncología Médica/organización & administración , Oncología Médica/tendencias , Melanoma/diagnóstico , SARS-CoV-2/fisiología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/diagnósticoRESUMEN
Aim: To compare effectiveness of nivolumab + ipilimumab (NIVO + IPI) versus BRAF + MEK inhibitors (BRAFi + MEKi) in patients with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma in the real-world setting. Materials & methods: This study used the Flatiron Health electronic medical record database. Results: After adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics, NIVO + IPI was associated with a 32% reduction in risk of death versus BRAFi + MEKi. At a mean follow-up of 15-16 months, 64% of NIVO + IPI patients and 43% of BRAFi + MEKi patients were alive; subsequent therapy was administered to 33 and 41% of patients, respectively. After first-line NIVO + IPI, 20% of patients died before subsequent therapy, whereas 32% died after first-line BRAFi + MEKi. Conclusion: In this real-world study, patients treated with first-line NIVO + IPI showed significant survival benefit versus those receiving first-line BRAFi + MEKi.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/uso terapéutico , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/farmacología , Antígeno B7-H1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Antígeno B7-H1/metabolismo , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/farmacología , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Melanoma/diagnóstico , Melanoma/genética , Melanoma/mortalidad , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mutación , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Inhibidores de Proteínas Quinasas/farmacología , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/antagonistas & inhibidores , Proteínas Proto-Oncogénicas B-raf/genética , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Cutáneas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/genética , Neoplasias Cutáneas/mortalidad , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Several biomarkers of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) show potential but are not yet scalable to the clinic. We developed a pipeline that integrates deep learning on histology specimens with clinical data to predict ICI response in advanced melanoma. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We used a training cohort from New York University (New York, NY) and a validation cohort from Vanderbilt University (Nashville, TN). We built a multivariable classifier that integrates neural network predictions with clinical data. A ROC curve was generated and the optimal threshold was used to stratify patients as high versus low risk for progression. Kaplan-Meier curves compared progression-free survival (PFS) between the groups. The classifier was validated on two slide scanners (Aperio AT2 and Leica SCN400). RESULTS: The multivariable classifier predicted response with AUC 0.800 on images from the Aperio AT2 and AUC 0.805 on images from the Leica SCN400. The classifier accurately stratified patients into high versus low risk for disease progression. Vanderbilt patients classified as high risk for progression had significantly worse PFS than those classified as low risk (P = 0.02 for the Aperio AT2; P = 0.03 for the Leica SCN400). CONCLUSIONS: Histology slides and patients' clinicodemographic characteristics are readily available through standard of care and have the potential to predict ICI treatment outcomes. With prospective validation, we believe our approach has potential for integration into clinical practice.
Asunto(s)
Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/uso terapéutico , Aprendizaje Automático , Melanoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/tratamiento farmacológico , Piel/patología , Adulto , Anciano , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Resistencia a Antineoplásicos , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Procesamiento de Imagen Asistido por Computador , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/farmacología , Masculino , Melanoma/diagnóstico , Melanoma/inmunología , Melanoma/mortalidad , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Pronóstico , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Estudios Prospectivos , Curva ROC , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Neoplasias Cutáneas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Cutáneas/inmunología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/mortalidadRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Melanoma is one of the most common malignancies diagnosed during pregnancy. This study examined the impact of pregnancy on management decisions of melanoma patients treated at NYU Langone Health (NYULH). METHODS: We analyzed data for patients who were pregnant at initial or recurrent melanoma diagnosis at NYULH from 2012 to 2019 with prospective protocol-driven follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 900 female patients accrued during this period, 11 women in the childbearing range were pregnant at melanoma diagnosis. Six patients presented with early (stage 0 or I) disease and five with advanced (stage III or IV) melanoma. Women with early stage disease had normal deliveries and minimal changes to their treatment timeline and regimen. However, patients with more advanced stage disease opted for either termination of the pregnancy or early delivery and altered treatment timelines because of pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Both melanoma stage and gestational age at diagnosis contribute to the differences in the therapeutic management of melanoma in pregnant women. Given the complexity and variety of each case of melanoma during pregnancy, informed discussion between patients and physicians allows for individualized treatment plans that address each patient's unique situation.
Asunto(s)
Melanoma/terapia , Complicaciones Neoplásicas del Embarazo/terapia , Pronóstico , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Melanoma/complicaciones , Melanoma/patología , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Embarazo , Complicaciones Neoplásicas del Embarazo/patologíaRESUMEN
T-cell landscape differences between cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) tumors in immune competent (SCC in IC) and immunocompromised organ transplant recipients (TSCC in OTR) are unclear. We developed an analytical method to define tumor infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) phenotype in cSCC from immune competent and immune suppressed patients using single-cell TCR sequencing and gene expression data. TSCC exhibits reduced proportions of cytotoxic and naïve TILs and similar numbers of regulatory TILs. Fewer, more heterogeneous TCR clonotypes are observed in TIL from OTR. Most TCR sequences for top ten clonotypes correspond to known antigens, while 24% correspond to putative neoantigens. OTR show increased cSCC events over 12 months possibly due to reduced cytotoxic T-cells. Our novel method of barcoding CD8+ T-cells is the first providing gene expression and TCR sequences in cSCC. Knowledge regarding putative antigens recognized by TCRs with phenotypic function of T-cells bearing those TCRs could facilitate personalized cSCC treatments.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Cemiplimab, a high-affinity, potent human immunoglobulin G4 monoclonal antibody to programmed cell death-1 demonstrated antitumor activity in a Phase 1 advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) expansion cohort (NCT02383212) and the pivotal Phase 2 study (NCT02760498). Here we report the primary analysis of fixed dose cemiplimab 350 mg intravenously every 3 weeks (Q3W) (Group 3) and provide a longer-term update after the primary analysis of weight-based cemiplimab 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks (Q2W) (Group 1) among metastatic CSCC (mCSCC) patients in the pivotal study (NCT02760498). METHODS: The primary objective for each group was objective response rate (ORR) per independent central review (ICR). Secondary endpoints included ORR by investigator review (INV), duration of response (DOR) per ICR and INV, and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: For Group 3 (n=56) and Group 1 (n=59), median follow-up was 8.1 (range, 0.6 to 14.1) and 16.5 (range, 1.1 to 26.6) months, respectively. ORR per ICR was 41.1% (95% CI, 28.1% to 55.0%) in Group 3, 49.2% (95% CI, 35.9% to 62.5%) in Group 1, and 45.2% (95% CI, 35.9% to 54.8%) in both groups combined. Per ICR, Kaplan-Meier estimate for DOR at 8 months was 95.0% (95% CI, 69.5% to 99. 3%) in responding patients in Group 3, and at 12 months was 88.9% (95% CI, 69.3% to 96.3%) in responding patients in Group 1. Per INV, ORR was 51.8% (95% CI, 38.0% to 65.3%) in Group 3, 49.2% (95% CI, 35.9% to 62.5%) in Group 1, and 50.4% (95% CI, 41.0% to 59.9%) in both groups combined. Overall, the most common adverse events regardless of attribution were fatigue (27.0%) and diarrhea (23.5%). CONCLUSION: In patients with mCSCC, cemiplimab 350 mg intravenously Q3W produced substantial antitumor activity with durable response and an acceptable safety profile. Follow-up data of cemiplimab 3 mg/kg intravenously Q2W demonstrate ongoing durability of responses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02760498. Registered May 3, 2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02760498.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Cutáneas/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/efectos adversos , Peso Corporal , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/inmunología , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/mortalidad , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/secundario , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Esquema de Medicación , Cálculo de Dosificación de Drogas , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Inhibidores de Puntos de Control Inmunológico/efectos adversos , Infusiones Intravenosas , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/antagonistas & inhibidores , Receptor de Muerte Celular Programada 1/inmunología , Supervivencia sin Progresión , Neoplasias Cutáneas/inmunología , Neoplasias Cutáneas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Cutáneas/patologíaRESUMEN
There have been several significant advances in cancer treatment in the last decade that are applicable to the treatment of melanoma and advanced nonmelanoma skin cancers. Among these are the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting the programmed death protein-1 (PD-1)/programmed death legand-1 (PDL-1) axis, as well as targeted inhibitors of the BRAF/MEK signaling cascade in melanoma, and the hedgehog signaling pathway in basal cell carcinoma (BCC). These immune-based and targeted therapies have dramatically changed the treatment options for locally advanced and metastatic melanoma, Merkel's cell carcinoma, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), and BCC. In this article, we will briefly review the currently approved targeted and immunotherapy-based treatments for locally advanced and metastatic melanoma, Merkel's cell carcinoma, and cSCC and discuss various combinations of approved therapies, as well as emerging therapeutic candidates that are currently in clinical trials, including novel checkpoint inhibitors in development, intratumoral oncolytic agents (viral and nonviral), and various immune-based therapies such as toll-like receptor (TLR) agonists, adoptive T-cell therapy, T-cell costimulation, and innate immune cell therapy. For advanced BCC, we will discuss trials investigating the currently approved smoothened (SMO) inhibitors for neoadjuvant use, emerging SMO inhibitors in development, topical SMO inhibitors, alternative targets in the hedgehog signaling pathway, and the use of anti-PD-1 agents for advanced BCC both alone and in combination with SMO inhibitors.