RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To investigate overall survival (OS) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of first-line isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) compared to best alternative care (BAC) for patients with uveal melanoma liver metastases. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Approximately half of patients with uveal melanoma develop metastatic disease, most commonly in the liver and systemic treatment options are limited. Isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) is a locoregional therapy with high response rates but with unclear effect on overall survival (OS). METHODS: In this phase III randomized controlled multicenter trial (the SCANDIUM trial) patients with previously untreated isolated uveal melanoma liver metastases were included between 2013-2021, with at least 24 months of follow-up. The planned accrual was 90 patients randomized 1:1 to receive a one-time treatment with IHP or BAC. Crossover to IHP was not allowed. The primary endpoint was the 24-month OS rate, with the hypothesis of a treatment effect leading to a 50% OS rate in the IHP group compared to 20% in the control group. HRQOL was measured by the EuroQol 5-domains 3-levels (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire over 12 months. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat (ITT) population included 87 patients randomized to the IHP group (43 patients; 41 [89%] received IHP) or the control group (44 patients). The control group received chemotherapy (49%), immunotherapy (39%), or localized interventions (9%). In the ITT population, the median PFS was 7.4 months in the IHP group compared with 3.3 months in the control group, with a hazard ratio of 0.21 (95% CI, 0.12-0.36). The 24-month OS rate was 46.5% in the IHP group versus 29.5% in the control group (P=0.12). The median OS was 21.7 months versus 17.6 months, with a hazard ratio of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.37-1.10). EQ-5D-3L showed a sustained high health status for the IHP group over 12 months, compared to a deteriorating trend in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with liver metastases from uveal melanoma, IHP offers high response rates translating to a benefit in PFS including a trend of better HRQOL compared to the control group. However, the primary endpoint of OS at 24 months was not met.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: About half of patients with metastatic uveal melanoma present with isolated liver metastasis, in whom the median survival is 6-12 months. The few systemic treatment options available only moderately prolong survival. Isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) with melphalan is a regional treatment option, but prospective efficacy and safety data are lacking. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III trial, patients with previously untreated isolated liver metastases from uveal melanoma were randomly assigned to receive a one-time treatment with IHP with melphalan or best alternative care (control group). The primary end point was overall survival at 24 months. Here, we report the secondary outcomes of response according to RECIST 1.1 criteria, progression-free survival (PFS), hepatic PFS (hPFS), and safety. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were randomly assigned, and 87 patients were assigned to either IHP (n = 43) or a control group receiving the investigator's choice of treatment (n = 44). In the control group, 49% received chemotherapy, 39% immune checkpoint inhibitors, and 9% locoregional treatment other than IHP. In an intention-to-treat analysis, the overall response rates (ORRs) were 40% versus 4.5% in the IHP and control groups, respectively (P < .0001). The median PFS was 7.4 months versus 3.3 months (P < .0001), with a hazard ratio of 0.21 (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.36), and the median hPFS was 9.1 months versus 3.3 months (P < .0001), both favoring the IHP arm. There were 11 treatment-related serious adverse events in the IHP group compared with seven in the control group. There was one treatment-related death in the IHP group. CONCLUSION: IHP treatment resulted in superior ORR, hPFS, and PFS compared with best alternative care in previously untreated patients with isolated liver metastases from primary uveal melanoma.
