Outcomes of patients with resected stage III/IV acral or mucosal melanoma, treated with adjuvant anti-PD-1 based therapy.

IMPORTANCE: Acral (AM) and mucosal melanomas (MM) are rare subtypes with a poor prognosis. In those with advanced disease, anti-PD-1 (PD1) therapy has reduced activity compared to that seen in non-acral cutaneous melanoma. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of adjuvant PD1 in resected AM or MM. DESIGN: An international, retrospective cohort study SETTING: Data up to November 2021 collected from 20 centres across 10 countries. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and ninety four patients with resected stage III or IV1 AM or MM who received adjuvant PD1 were included and compared to matched patients from the Melanoma Institute Australia (MIA) database using a propensity score matching analysis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS) were investigated. RESULTS: Forty five of 139 (32%) AM and 9 of 55 (16%) MM patients completed adjuvant therapy. The main reason for early treatment cessation in both groups was disease recurrence: 51 (37%) and 30 (55%) in the AM and MM groups, respectively. In the AM group adjuvant PD1 was associated with a longer RFS [HR-0.69 (0.52-0.92, p = 0.0127)], DMFS [HR0.58 (0.38-0.89, p = 0.0134)] and OS [HR of 0.59 (0.38-0.92, p-value 0.0196)] when compared to the historical cohort. In the MM group there was no statistical difference in RFS [HR1.36 (0.69-2.68,p-value 0.3799], DMFS or OS. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: After adjuvant PD1, both AM and MM have a high risk of recurrence. Our data suggests a benefit to using adjuvant PD1 therapy in resected AM but not in resected MM. Additional studies to investigate the efficacy of adjuvant PD1 for MM are needed.

The features and management of acquired resistance to PD1-based therapy in metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Anti-PD-1 therapy (PD1) either alone or with anti-CTLA-4 (CTLA4), has high initial response rates, however 20% of patients (pts) with complete response (CR) and 30% with partial response (PR) within 12 months of treatment experience subsequent disease progression by 6 years. The nature and optimal management of this acquired resistance (AR) remains unknown. METHODS: Pts from 16 centres who responded to PD1-based therapy and who later progressed were examined. Demographics, disease characteristics and subsequent treatments were evaluated. RESULTS: 299 melanoma pts were identified, median age 64y, 44% BRAFV600m. 172 (58%) received PD1 alone, 114 (38%) PD1/CTLA4 and 13 (4%) PD1 and an investigational drug. 90 (30%) pts had CR, 209 (70%) PR. Median time to AR was 12.6 mo (95% CI, 11.3, 14.2). Most (N = 193, 65%) progressed in a single organ site, and in a solitary lesion (N = 151, 51%). The most frequent sites were lymph nodes (38%) and brain (25%). Management at AR included systemic therapy (ST, 45%), local therapy (LT) +ST (31%), LT alone (21%), or observation (3%). There was no statistical difference in PFS2 or OS based on management, however, PFS2 was numerically superior for pts treated with ST alone who progressed off PD1 therapy than those who progressed on PD1 (2-year PFS2 42% versus 25%, p = 0.249). mOS from AR was 38.0 months (95% CI, 29.5-NR); longer in single-site versus multi-site progression (2-year OS 70% vs 54%, p < 0·001). CONCLUSIONS: Acquired resistance to PD1 therapy in melanoma is largely oligometastatic, and pts may have a favorable survival outcome following salvage treatment.

Efficacy and toxicity of adjuvant radiotherapy in recurrent melanoma after adjuvant immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: In patients with stage III melanoma, despite surgical resection and adjuvant systemic therapy, locoregional recurrences still occur. The randomized, phase III Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG) 02.01 trial demonstrated that adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) after complete lymphadenectomy (CLND) halves the incidence of melanoma recurrence within local nodal basins without improving overall survival or quality of life. However, the study was conducted prior to the current era of adjuvant systemic therapies and when CLND was the standard approach for microscopic nodal disease. As such, there is currently no data on the role of adjuvant RT in patients with melanoma who recur during or after adjuvant immunotherapy, including those that may or may not have undergone prior CLND. In this study, we aimed to answer this question. METHODS: Patients with resected stage III melanoma who received adjuvant anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) (±ipilimumab) immunotherapy with a subsequent locoregional (lymph node and/or in-transit metastases) recurrence were retrospectively identified. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses were conducted. Primary outcome was rate of subsequent locoregional recurrence; secondary outcomes were locoregional recurrence-free survival (lr-RFS2) and overall RFS (RFS2) to second recurrence. RESULTS: In total, 71 patients were identified: 42 (59%) men, 30 (42%) BRAF V600E mutant, 43 (61%) stage IIIC at diagnosis. Median time to first recurrence was 7 months (1-44), 24 (34%) received adjuvant RT and 47 (66%) did not. Thirty-three patients (46%) developed a second recurrence at a median of 5 months (1-22). The rate of locoregional relapse at second recurrence was lower in those who received adjuvant RT (8%, 2/24) compared with those who did not (36%, 17/47, p=0.01). Adjuvant RT at first recurrence was associated with an improved lr-RFS2 (HR 0.16, p=0.015), with a trend towards an improved RFS2 (HR 0.54, p=0.072) and no effect on risk of distant recurrence or overall survival. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to investigate the role of adjuvant RT in patients with melanoma with locoregional disease recurrence during or after adjuvant anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy. Adjuvant RT was associated with improved lr-RFS2, but not risk of distant recurrence, demonstrating a likely benefit in locoregional disease control in the modern era. Further prospective studies are required to validate these results.

Efficacy of anti-PD-1 and ipilimumab alone or in combination in acral melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Acral melanoma is a rare melanoma subtype with poor prognosis. Importantly, these patients were not identified as a specific subgroup in the landmark melanoma trials involving ipilimumab and the anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) agents nivolumab and pembrolizumab. There is therefore an absence of prospective clinical trial evidence regarding the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) in this population. Acral melanoma has lower tumor mutation burden (TMB) than other cutaneous sites, and primary site is associated with differences in TMB. However the impact of this on the effectiveness of immune CPIs is unknown. We examined the efficacy of CPIs in acral melanoma, including by primary site. METHODS: Patients with unresectable stage III/IV acral melanoma treated with CPI (anti-PD-1 and/or ipilimumab) were studied. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses were conducted. Primary outcome was objective response rate (ORR); secondary outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In total, 325 patients were included: 234 (72%) plantar, 69 (21%) subungual and 22 (7%) palmar primary sites. First CPI included: 184 (57%) anti-PD-1, 59 (18%) anti-PD-1/ipilimumab combination and 82 (25%) ipilimumab. ORR was significantly higher with initial anti-PD-1/ipilimumab compared with anti-PD-1 (43% vs 26%, HR 2.14, p=0.0004) and significantly lower with ipilimumab (15% vs 26%, HR 0.49, p=0.0016). Landmark PFS at 1 year was highest for anti-PD-1/ipilimumab at 34% (95% CI 24% to 49%), compared with 26% (95% CI 20% to 33%) with anti-PD-1 and 10% (95% CI 5% to 19%) with ipilimumab. Despite a trend for increased PFS, anti-PD-1/ipilimumab combination did not significantly improve PFS (HR 0.85, p=0.35) or OS over anti-PD-1 (HR 1.30, p=0.16), potentially due to subsequent therapies and high rates of acquired resistance. No outcome differences were found between primary sites. CONCLUSION: While the ORR to anti-PD-1/ipilimumab was significantly higher than anti-PD-1 and PFS numerically higher, in this retrospective cohort this benefit did not translate to improved OS. Future trials should specifically include patients with acral melanoma, to help determine the optimal management of this important melanoma subtype.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with pre-existing psoriasis: safety and efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are approved to treat multiple cancers. Retrospective analyses demonstrate acceptable safety of ICIs in most patients with autoimmune disease, although disease exacerbation may occur. Psoriasis vulgaris is a common, immune-mediated disease, and outcomes of ICI treatment in patients with psoriasis are not well described. Thus we sought to define the safety profile and effectiveness of ICIs in patients with pre-existing psoriasis. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients from eight academic centers with pre-existing psoriasis who received ICI treatment for cancer were evaluated. Main safety outcomes were psoriasis exacerbation and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). We also assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. RESULTS: Of 76 patients studied (50 (66%) male; median age 67 years; 62 (82%) with melanoma, 5 (7%) with lung cancer, 2 (3%) with head and neck cancer, and 7 (9%) with other cancers; median follow-up 25.1 months (range=0.2-99 months)), 51 (67%) received anti-PD-1 antibodies, 8 (11%) anti-CTLA-4, and 17 (22%) combination of anti-PD-1/CTLA-4. All patients had pre-existing psoriasis, most frequently plaque psoriasis (46 patients (61%)) and 15 (20%) with psoriatic arthritis. Forty-one patients (54%) had received any prior therapy for psoriasis although only two (3%) were on systemic immunosuppression at ICI initiation. With ICI treatment, 43 patients (57%) experienced a psoriasis flare of cutaneous and/or extracutaneous disease after a median of 44 days of receiving ICI. Of those who experienced a flare, 23 patients (53%) were managed with topical therapy only; 16 (21%) needed systemic therapy. Only five patients (7%) required immunotherapy discontinuation for psoriasis flare. Forty-five patients (59%) experienced other irAEs, 17 (22%) of which were grade 3/4. PFS with landmark analysis was significantly longer in patients with a psoriasis flare versus those without (39 vs 8.7 months, p=0.049). CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter study, ICI therapy was associated with frequent psoriasis exacerbation, although flares were manageable with standard psoriasis treatments and few required ICI discontinuation. Patients who experienced disease exacerbation performed at least as well as those who did not. Thus, pre-existing psoriasis should not prevent patients from receiving ICIs for treatment of malignancy.

Melanoma brain metastases that progress on BRAF-MEK inhibitors demonstrate resistance to ipilimumab-nivolumab that is associated with the Innate PD-1 Resistance Signature (IPRES).

BACKGROUND: Melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) are a challenging clinical problem with high morbidity and mortality. Although first-line dabrafenib-trametinib and ipilimumab-nivolumab have similar intracranial response rates (50%-55%), central nervous system (CNS) resistance to BRAF-MEK inhibitors (BRAF-MEKi) usually occurs around 6 months, and durable responses are only seen with combination immunotherapy. We sought to investigate the utility of ipilimumab-nivolumab after MBM progression on BRAF-MEKi and identify mechanisms of resistance. METHODS: Patients who received first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab for MBMs or second/third line ipilimumab-nivolumab for intracranial metastases with BRAFV600 mutations with prior progression on BRAF-MEKi and MRI brain staging from March 1, 2015 to June 30, 2018 were included. Modified intracranial RECIST was used to assess response. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples of BRAFV600 mutant MBMs that were naïve to systemic treatment (n=18) or excised after progression on BRAF-MEKi (n=14) underwent whole transcriptome sequencing. Comparative analyses of MBMs naïve to systemic treatment versus BRAF-MEKi progression were performed. RESULTS: Twenty-five and 30 patients who received first and second/third line ipilimumab-nivolumab, were included respectively. Median sum of MBM diameters was 13 and 20.5 mm for the first and second/third line ipilimumab-nivolumab groups, respectively. Intracranial response rate was 75.0% (12/16), and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 41.6 months for first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab. Efficacy of second/third line ipilimumab-nivolumab after BRAF-MEKi progression was poor with an intracranial response rate of 4.8% (1/21) and median PFS of 1.3 months. Given the poor activity of ipilimumab-nivolumab after BRAF-MEKi MBM progression, we performed whole transcriptome sequencing to identify mechanisms of drug resistance. We identified a set of 178 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between naïve and MBMs with progression on BRAF-MEKi treatment (p value <0.05, false discovery rate (FDR) <0.1). No distinct pathways were identified from gene set enrichment analyses using Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes, Gene Ontogeny or Hallmark libraries; however, enrichment of DEG from the Innate Anti-PD1 Resistance Signature (IPRES) was identified (p value=0.007, FDR=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Second-line ipilimumab-nivolumab for MBMs after BRAF-MEKi progression has poor activity. MBMs that are resistant to BRAF-MEKi that also conferred resistance to second-line ipilimumab-nivolumab showed enrichment of the IPRES gene signature.

Real-life data for first-line combination immune-checkpoint inhibition and targeted therapy in patients with melanoma brain metastases.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma brain metastases (MBM) have a poor prognosis. Systemic treatments that have improved outcomes in advanced melanoma have been shown to have an intracranial (IC) effect. We studied the efficacy and outcomes of combined immune checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab/nivolumab (Combi-ICI) or targeted therapy (Combi-TT) as first-line treatment in MBM. METHODS: MBM patients treated with Combi-ICI or Combi-TT within 3 months after MBM diagnosis. Endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: 53 patients received Combi-ICI, 32% had symptomatic MBM and 33.9% elevated LDH. 71.7% required local treatment. The disease control rate was 60.3%. IC response rate (RR) was 43.8% at 3-months with durable responses at 6- (46.5%) and 12-months (53.1%). Extracranial (EC) RR was 44.7% at 3-months and 50% at 12-months. Median PFS was 9.6 months (95% CI 3.6-NR) and median overall survival (mOS) 44.8 months (95% CI; 26.2-NR). 63 patients received Combi-TT, 55.6% of patients had symptomatic MBM, 57.2% of patients had elevated LDH and 68.3% of patients required local treatment. The disease control rate was 60.4%. ICRR was 50% at 3-months, but dropped at 6-months (20.9%). ECRR was 69.2% at 3-months and 17.6% at 12-months. Median PFS was 5.8 months (95% CI 4.2-7.6) and mOS 14.2 months (95% CI 8.99-26.8). In BRAFV600 patients, 26.7% of patients received Combi-ICI and 73.3% Combi-TT with OS (p = 0.0053) and mPFS (p = 0.03) in favour to Combi-ICI. CONCLUSION: Combi-ICI showed prolonged mOS with sustainable IC and EC responses. Despite the initially increased efficacy, Combi-TT responses at 12 months were low. Combi-ICI appeared superior to Combi-TT for OS and PFS in BRAFV600 patients. Other clinical factors are determinants for first-line treatment choice.

Re-induction ipilimumab following acquired resistance to combination ipilimumab and anti-PD-1 therapy.

PURPOSE: Combination immunotherapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab has a high initial response rate in advanced melanoma; however, up to 55% of patients later progress. The efficacy and safety of ipilimumab re-induction in the setting of acquired resistance (AR) to combination immunotherapy is unknown. METHODS: Patients with advanced melanoma who initially achieved a complete response, partial response or sustained stable disease to induction combination immunotherapy then progressed and were reinduced with ipilimumab (alone or in combination with anti-PD-1) and were analysed retrospectively. Demographics, disease characteristics, efficacy and toxicity were examined. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were identified from 12 centres. The response rate to reinduction therapy was 12/47 (26%), and disease control rate was 21/47 (45%). Responses appeared more frequent in patients who developed AR after ceasing induction immunotherapy (30% vs. 18%, P = 0.655). Time to AR was 11 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 8-15 months). After a median follow-up of 16 months (95% CI, 10-25 months), responders to reinduction had a median progression-free survival of 14 months (95% CI, 13, NR months), and in the whole cohort, the median overall survival from reinduction was 17 months (95% CI, 12-NR months). Twenty-seven (58%) immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were reported; 18 (38%) were grade 3/4, and in 11 of 27 (40%), the same irAE observed during induction therapy recurred. CONCLUSIONS: Reinduction with ipilimumab ± anti-PD-1 has modest clinical activity. Clinicians should be attentive to the risk of irAEs, including recurrence of irAEs that occurred during induction therapy. Future studies are necessary to determine best management after resistance to combination immunotherapy.

Combination anti-PD1 and ipilimumab therapy in patients with advanced melanoma and pre-existing autoimmune disorders.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of immunotherapy have excluded patients with pre-existing autoimmune disease. While the safety and efficacy of single agent ipilimumab and anti-PD1 antibodies in patients with autoimmune disease has been examined in retrospective studies, no data are available for combination therapy which has significantly higher toxicity risk. We sought to establish the safety and efficacy of combination immunotherapy for patients with advanced melanoma and pre-existing autoimmune diseases. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients with advanced melanoma and pre-existing autoimmune disease who received combination ipilimumab and anti-PD1 at 10 international centers from March 2015 to February 2020. Data regarding the autoimmune disease, treatment, toxicity and outcomes were examined in patients. RESULTS: Of the 55 patients who received ipilimumab and anti-PD1, the median age was 63 years (range 23-83). Forty-six were treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab and nine with ipilimumab and pembrolizumab.Eighteen patients (33%) had a flare of their autoimmune disease including 4 of 7 with rheumatoid arthritis, 3 of 6 with psoriasis, 5 of 10 with inflammatory bowel disease, 3 of 19 with thyroiditis, 1 of 1 with Sjogren's syndrome, 1 of 1 with polymyalgia and 1 of 1 with Behcet's syndrome and psoriasis. Eight (44%) patients ceased combination therapy due to flare. Thirty-seven patients (67%) had an unrelated immune-related adverse event (irAE), and 20 (36%) ceased combination immunotherapy due to irAEs. There were no treatment-related deaths. Patients on immunosuppression (OR 4.59; p=0.03) had a higher risk of flare.The overall response rate was 55%, with 77% of responses ongoing. Median progression free survival and overall survival were 10 and 24 months, respectively. Patients on baseline immunosuppression had an overall survival of 11 months (95% CI 3.42 to 18.58) compared with 31 months without (95% CI 20.89 to 41.11, p=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with pre-existing autoimmune disease, not on immunosuppression and advanced melanoma, combination ipilimumab and anti-PD1 has similar efficacy compared with previously reported trials. There is a risk of flare of pre-existing autoimmune disorders, particularly in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and rheumatologic conditions, and patients on baseline immunosuppression.

The role of local therapy in the treatment of solitary melanoma progression on immune checkpoint inhibition: A multicentre retrospective analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with metastatic melanoma, progression of a single tumour lesion (solitary progression) after response to immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) is increasingly treated with local therapy. We evaluated the role of local therapy for solitary progression in melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ICI between 2010 and 2019 with solitary progression as first progressive event were included from 17 centres in 9 countries. Follow-up and survival are reported from ICI initiation. RESULTS: We identified 294 patients with solitary progression after stable disease in 15%, partial response in 55% and complete response in 30%. The median follow-up was 43 months; the median time to solitary progression was 13 months, and the median time to subsequent progression after treatment of solitary progression (TTSP) was 33 months. The estimated 3-year overall survival (OS) was 79%; median OS was not reached. Treatment consisted of systemic therapy (18%), local therapy (36%), both combined (42%) or active surveillance (4%). In 44% of patients treated for solitary progression, no subsequent progression occurred. For solitary progression during ICI (n = 143), the median TTSP was 29 months. Both TTSP and OS were similar for local therapy, ICI continuation and both combined. For solitary progression post ICI (n = 151), the median TTSP was 35 months. TTSP was higher for ICI recommencement plus local therapy than local therapy or ICI recommencement alone (p = 0.006), without OS differences. CONCLUSION: Almost half of patients with melanoma treated for solitary progression after initial response to ICI had no subsequent progression. This study suggests that local therapy can benefit patients and is associated with favourable long-term outcomes.

Chronic Immune-Related Adverse Events Following Adjuvant Anti-PD-1 Therapy for High-risk Resected Melanoma.

Importance: Agents targeting programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/PD ligand 1 (PD-L1) improve long-term survival across many advanced cancers and are now used as adjuvant therapy for resected stage III and IV melanomas. The incidence and spectrum of chronic immune-related adverse events (irAEs) have not been well defined. Objective: To determine the incidence, time course, spectrum, and associations of chronic irAEs arising from adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted between 2015 and 2020 across 8 academic medical centers in the United States and Australia. Patients with stage III to IV melanomas treated with anti-PD-1 in the adjuvant setting were included. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incidence, types, and time course of chronic irAEs (defined as irAEs persisting at least 12 weeks after therapy cessation). Results: Among 387 patients, the median (range) age was 63 (17-88) years, and 235 (60.7%) were male. Of these patients, 267 (69.0%) had any acute irAE, defined as those arising during treatment with anti-PD-1, including 52 (19.5%) with grades 3 through 5 events; 1 patient each had fatal myocarditis and neurotoxicity. Chronic irAEs, defined as those that persisted beyond 12 weeks of anti-PD-1 discontinuation, developed in 167 (43.2%) patients, of which most (n = 161; 96.4%) were mild (grade 1 or 2) and most persisted until last available follow-up (n = 143; 85.6%). Endocrinopathies (73 of 88; 83.0%), arthritis (22 of 45; 48.9%), xerostomia (9 of 17; 52.9%), neurotoxicities (11 of 15; 73.3%), and ocular events (5 of 8; 62.5%) were particularly likely to become chronic. In contrast, irAEs affecting visceral organs (liver, colon, lungs, kidneys) had much lower rates of becoming chronic irAEs; for example, colitis became chronic in 6 of 44 (13.6%) cases, of which 4 of 6 (66.7%) resolved with prolonged follow-up. Age, gender, time of onset, and need for steroids were not associated with the likelihood of chronicity of irAEs. Conclusion and Relevance: In this multicenter cohort study, chronic irAEs associated with anti-PD-1 therapy appear to be more common than previously recognized and frequently persisted even with prolonged follow-up, although most were low grade. The risks of chronic irAEs should be integrated into treatment decision-making.

Melanoma recurrence patterns and management after adjuvant targeted therapy: a multicentre analysis.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant targeted therapy (TT) improves relapse free survival in patients with resected BRAF mutant stage III melanoma. The outcomes and optimal management of patients who relapse after adjuvant TT is unknown. METHODS: Patients from twenty-one centres with recurrent melanoma after adjuvant TT were included. Disease characteristics, adjuvant therapy, recurrence, treatment at relapse and outcomes were examined. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients developed recurrent melanoma; nineteen (22%) during adjuvant TT. Median time to first recurrence was 18 months and median follow-up from first recurrence was 31 months. Fifty-eight (68%) patients received immunotherapy (IT) or TT as 1st line systemic therapy at either first or subsequent recurrence and had disease that was assessable for response. Response to anti-PD-1 (±trial agent), combination ipilimumab-nivolumab, TT rechallenge and ipilimumab monotherapy was 63%, 62% 25% and 10% respectively. Twenty-eight (33%) patients had died at census, all from melanoma. Two-year OS was 84% for anti-PD-1 therapy (±trial agent), 92% for combination ipilimumab and nivolumab, 49% for TT and 45% for ipilimumab monotherapy (p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who relapse after adjuvant TT respond well to subsequent anti-PD-1 based therapy and have outcomes similar to those seen when first line anti-PD-1 therapy is used in stage IV melanoma.

Clinical, FDG-PET and molecular markers of immune checkpoint inhibitor response in patients with metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma (mMCC) is an aggressive neuroendocrine malignancy of the skin with a poor prognosis. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have shown substantial efficacy and favorable safety in clinical trials. METHODS: Medical records of patients (pts) with mMCC treated with ICIs from August 2015 to December 2018 at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre in Australia were analyzed. Response was assessed with serial imaging, the majority with FDG-PET/CT scans. RNA sequencing and immunohistochemistry for PD-L1, CD3 and Merkel cell polyomavirus (MCPyV) on tumor samples was performed. RESULTS: 23 pts with mMCC were treated with ICIs. A median of 8 cycles (range 1 to 47) were administered, with treatment ongoing in 6 pts. Objective responses (OR) were observed in 14 pts (61%): 10 (44%) complete responses (CR) and 4 (17%) partial responses (PR). Median time to response was 8 weeks (range 6 to 12) and 12-month progression-free survival rate was 39%. Increased OR were seen in pts aged less than 75 (OR 80% vs 46%), no prior history of chemotherapy (OR 64% vs 50%), patients with an immune-related adverse event (OR 100% vs 43%) and in MCPyV-negative tumors (OR 69% vs 43%). Pts with a CR had lower mean metabolic tumor volume on baseline FDG-PET/CT scan (CR: 35.7 mL, no CR: 187.8 mL, p=0.05). There was no correlation between PD-L1 positivity and MCPyV status (p=0.764) or OR (p=0.245). 10 pts received radiation therapy (RT) during ICI: 4 pts started RT concurrently (OR 75%, CR 50%), 3 pts had isolated ICI-resistant lesions successfully treated with RT and 3 pts with multisite progression continued to progress despite RT. Overall, 6 pts (26%) had grade 1-2 immune-related adverse events. CONCLUSION: ICIs showed efficacy and safety in mMCC consistent with trial data. Clinical and imaging predictors of response were identified.

Treatment of High Risk Resected Melanoma in Australia: Current Landscape and Practises.

Stage III melanoma involves regional lymph nodes and/or in-transit or satellite disease, without spread to distant metastatic sites. Stage IIIA melanoma includes a T1a-T2a primary lesion with N1a or N2a nodal involvement, whilst stage IIID melanoma includes a T4b primary lesion with N3a-N3c nodal involvement. With surgery alone, patients with stage IIIA melanoma have 10-year survival rates of ~88%; however, patients with stage IIID melanoma have 10-year survival rates of only ~24%. Targeted therapy and immunotherapy are being explored in stage III disease as adjuvant therapy after surgical resection, to eliminate micro-metastatic disease and thereby prevent relapse of melanoma and increase patient survival. A number of pivotal trials published in the last two years have shown improved relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival in patients with stage III melanoma treated with adjuvant therapy. COMBI-AD showed adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib improving RFS compared with placebo (HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.40-0.59). Checkmate-238 demonstrated an improvement in RFS of adjuvant nivolumab over ipilimumab (HR 0.68, P < 0.001) whilst Keynote-054 demonstrated an improvement in RFS with adjuvant pembrolizumab over placebo (HR 0.57, P < 0.001). Many nuances need to be considered when interpreting this data, including implications of an updated staging system, which patients are suitable for adjuvant therapy and the choice between adjuvant targeted therapy and immunotherapy in BRAF mutant patients. This review article summaries the currently available literature on adjuvant targeted therapy and provides a guide on applying this data in everyday practise.

Safe administration of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy in a patient with pre-existing primary biliary cholangitis.

A 63-year-old female presented with cholestatic liver function tests in November 2016. Screening tests were negative for other causes and liver biopsy revealed primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) overlap. Ursodeoxycholic acid and azathioprine was initiated. In September 2018 she was diagnosed with Stage III BRAF wild-type melanoma. Azathioprine was ceased and adjuvant immunotherapy was not recommended due to the risk of worsening PBC/AIH. Surveillance PET revealed metastatic disease and she commenced pembrolizumab. Restaging PET after 4 cycles showed a complete metabolic response, with no hepatitis or other significant toxicity. We believe this is the first reported case of the safe administration of pembrolizumab in a patient with known PBC/AIH. Treatment duration in such high risk patients needs further investigation.

Guide to performing cardiac surgery in patients with hereditary bleeding disorders.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: This study presents the experience of a large Australian hospital in performing cardiac surgery on patients with hereditary bleeding disorders (HBDs) and provides a suggested approach for their perioperative management. METHODS: Medical records of patients with HBDs who underwent cardiac surgery from January 1997 to December 2013 were reviewed. RESULTS: Seventeen patients were included in this study, 13 with Hemophilia A, one symptomatic Hemophilia A carrier, one with Hemophilia B, and two with von Willebrand Disease. Cardiac surgical procedures performed included 10 coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) operations, two aortic valve replacements, two mitral valve repairs, two aortic root replacements, and one combined aortic valve replacement and CABG. Perioperative management centered on factor substitution to maintain normal factor levels. Perioperative outcomes including length of hospital stay, mortality, and return to the operating room for bleeding were recorded. Two patients returned to the operating room for bleeding, one patient on the first postoperative day and one patient at day 20 postoperatively with pericardial bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients demonstrated excellent hemostasis, suggesting that cardiopulmonary bypass surgery in HBD patients may be safely performed with careful planning.