SEOM clinical guideline for the management of immune-related adverse events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (2019).

The use of immune checkpoint inhibitors has emerged as an effective treatment option for patients with several tumor types. By increasing the activity of the immune system, they can induce inflammatory side effects, which are often termed immune-related adverse events. These are pathophysiologically unique toxicities, compared with those from other anticancer therapies. In addition, the spectrum of the target organs is very broad. Immune-inflammatory adverse events can be life threatening. Prompt diagnosis and pharmacological intervention are instrumental to avoid progression to severe manifestations. Consequently, clinicians require new skills to successfully diagnose and manage these events. These SEOM guidelines have been developed with the consensus of ten medical oncologists. Relevant studies published in peer-review journals were used for the guideline elaboration. The Infectious Diseases Society of America grading system was used to assign levels of evidence and grades of recommendation.

Safety of vemurafenib in patients with BRAF V600 mutated metastatic melanoma: the Spanish experience.

OBJECTIVES: Vemurafenib tolerability was assessed in a large, open-label, multicentre study in patients with BRAF V600 mutated advanced melanoma. We investigated safety, tolerability and efficacy of vemurafenib in Spanish patients participating in that study. METHODS: Patients with previously treated or treatment-naive, unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV, BRAF V600 mutation-positive melanoma received vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent or death. The primary endpoint was safety; secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: 301 Spanish patients were included, 70 % with M1c disease, 22 % with brain metastases and 51 % with prior systemic therapy for metastatic disease. Most frequent adverse events included fatigue (48 %), arthralgia (45 %), rash (41 %), photosensitivity (34 %) and skin neoplasms (21 %). Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 156 patients (52 %), including cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (including keratoacanthoma; 16 %), fatigue (6 %) and arthralgia (5 %). The ORR was 28 % (95 % CI 23-34 %). Responses occurred in patients with brain metastases (18 %), elevated baseline lactate dehydrogenase (19 %) and poor performance status (15 %), and elderly patients (22 %). Median PFS was 5.8 (95 % CI 5.0-6.4) months; median OS was 10.5 (95 % CI 9.5-13.5) months. CONCLUSION: Our results for Spanish patients in the vemurafenib safety study indicate similar efficacy and a comparable safety profile in Spanish patients with no new safety signals compared with the overall population. Clinical benefit was demonstrated in poor-prognosis patients and in those with favourable baseline characteristics, suggesting that poor-prognosis patients may also benefit from vemurafenib treatment.

Guidelines for biomarker testing in metastatic melanoma: a National Consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology.

This consensus statement, conceived as a joint initiative of the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), makes diagnostic and treatment recommendations for the management of patients with advanced or metastatic melanoma based on the current scientific evidence on biomarker use. This document thus provides an opportunity to improve healthcare efficiency and resource use, which will benefit these patients. Based on the data available so far, this expert group recommends routinely testing patients with metastatic melanoma for BRAF mutation status, as the result affects the subsequent therapeutic management of these patients. The analysis of genetic alterations in KIT may be reasonable in patients with primary tumours in acral or mucosal sites or on chronically sun-exposed skin, in an advanced condition, but not in patients with other types of melanomas. This panel believes that testing for other genetic alterations, such as NRAS mutation status in patients not carrying BRAF mutations, GNAQ/GNA11 mutational analysis or genetic alterations in PTEN, is not currently indicated as routine clinical practice, because the results do not influence treatment planning in these patients at the present time. Other important issues addressed in this document are the organisational requirements and quality controls needed for proper testing of these biomarkers, and the legal implications to be borne in mind.