Neoadjuvant relatlimab and nivolumab in resectable melanoma.

Relatlimab and nivolumab combination immunotherapy improves progression-free survival over nivolumab monotherapy in patients with unresectable advanced melanoma1. We investigated this regimen in patients with resectable clinical stage III or oligometastatic stage IV melanoma (NCT02519322). Patients received two neoadjuvant doses (nivolumab 480 mg and relatlimab 160 mg intravenously every 4 weeks) followed by surgery, and then ten doses of adjuvant combination therapy. The primary end point was pathologic complete response (pCR) rate2. The combination resulted in 57% pCR rate and 70% overall pathologic response rate among 30 patients treated. The radiographic response rate using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 was 57%. No grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events were observed in the neoadjuvant setting. The 1- and 2-year recurrence-free survival rate was 100% and 92% for patients with any pathologic response, compared to 88% and 55% for patients who did not have a pathologic response (P = 0.005). Increased immune cell infiltration at baseline, and decrease in M2 macrophages during treatment, were associated with pathologic response. Our results indicate that neoadjuvant relatlimab and nivolumab induces a high pCR rate. Safety during neoadjuvant therapy is favourable compared to other combination immunotherapy regimens. These data, in combination with the results of the RELATIVITY-047 trial1, provide further confirmation of the efficacy and safety of this new immunotherapy regimen.

Androgen receptor blockade promotes response to BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy.

Treatment with therapy targeting BRAF and MEK (BRAF/MEK) has revolutionized care in melanoma and other cancers; however, therapeutic resistance is common and innovative treatment strategies are needed1,2. Here we studied a group of patients with melanoma who were treated with neoadjuvant BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy ( NCT02231775 , n = 51) and observed significantly higher rates of major pathological response (MPR; ≤10% viable tumour at resection) and improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) in female versus male patients (MPR, 66% versus 14%, P = 0.001; RFS, 64% versus 32% at 2 years, P = 0.021). The findings were validated in several additional cohorts2-4 of patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma who were treated with BRAF- and/or MEK-targeted therapy (n = 664 patients in total), demonstrating improved progression-free survival and overall survival in female versus male patients in several of these studies. Studies in preclinical models demonstrated significantly impaired anti-tumour activity in male versus female mice after BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy (P = 0.006), with significantly higher expression of the androgen receptor in tumours of male and female BRAF/MEK-treated mice versus the control (P = 0.0006 and P = 0.0025). Pharmacological inhibition of androgen receptor signalling improved responses to BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy in male and female mice (P = 0.018 and P = 0.003), whereas induction of androgen receptor signalling (through testosterone administration) was associated with a significantly impaired response to BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy in male and female patients (P = 0.021 and P < 0.0001). Together, these results have important implications for therapy.

Neoadjuvant-Adjuvant or Adjuvant-Only Pembrolizumab in Advanced Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Whether pembrolizumab given both before surgery (neoadjuvant therapy) and after surgery (adjuvant therapy), as compared with pembrolizumab given as adjuvant therapy alone, would increase event-free survival among patients with resectable stage III or IV melanoma is unknown. METHODS: In a phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with clinically detectable, measurable stage IIIB to IVC melanoma that was amenable to surgical resection to three doses of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab, surgery, and 15 doses of adjuvant pembrolizumab (neoadjuvant-adjuvant group) or to surgery followed by pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses) for approximately 1 year or until disease recurred or unacceptable toxic effects developed (adjuvant-only group). The primary end point was event-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Events were defined as disease progression or toxic effects that precluded surgery; the inability to resect all gross disease; disease progression, surgical complications, or toxic effects of treatment that precluded the initiation of adjuvant therapy within 84 days after surgery; recurrence of melanoma after surgery; or death from any cause. Safety was also evaluated. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 14.7 months, the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group (154 patients) had significantly longer event-free survival than the adjuvant-only group (159 patients) (P = 0.004 by the log-rank test). In a landmark analysis, event-free survival at 2 years was 72% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64 to 80) in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group and 49% (95% CI, 41 to 59) in the adjuvant-only group. The percentage of patients with treatment-related adverse events of grades 3 or higher during therapy was 12% in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant group and 14% in the adjuvant-only group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with resectable stage III or IV melanoma, event-free survival was significantly longer among those who received pembrolizumab both before and after surgery than among those who received adjuvant pembrolizumab alone. No new toxic effects were identified. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and Merck Sharp and Dohme; S1801 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03698019.).

Vascular stenting of a malignant arterial blowout as a bridge to effective systemic and regional therapy.

Locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma can erode into blood vessels, leading to vascular blowout, requiring emergent surgical intervention. We describe a first case of this disease complication which was effectively managed with endovascular stenting as a bridge to effective systemic and regional therapy. We discuss the efficacy of this staged approach which is novel and timely in a clinical environment of increasingly effective systemic therapies.

Melanoma staging: Evidence-based changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual.

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE To update the melanoma staging system of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) a large database was assembled comprising >46,000 patients from 10 centers worldwide with stages I, II, and III melanoma diagnosed since 1998. Based on analyses of this new database, the existing seventh edition AJCC stage IV database, and contemporary clinical trial data, the AJCC Melanoma Expert Panel introduced several important changes to the Tumor, Nodes, Metastasis (TNM) classification and stage grouping criteria. Key changes in the eighth edition AJCC Cancer Staging Manual include: 1) tumor thickness measurements to be recorded to the nearest 0.1 mm, not 0.01 mm; 2) definitions of T1a and T1b are revised (T1a, <0.8 mm without ulceration; T1b, 0.8-1.0 mm with or without ulceration or <0.8 mm with ulceration), with mitotic rate no longer a T category criterion; 3) pathological (but not clinical) stage IA is revised to include T1b N0 M0 (formerly pathologic stage IB); 4) the N category descriptors "microscopic" and "macroscopic" for regional node metastasis are redefined as "clinically occult" and "clinically apparent"; 5) prognostic stage III groupings are based on N category criteria and T category criteria (ie, primary tumor thickness and ulceration) and increased from 3 to 4 subgroups (stages IIIA-IIID); 6) definitions of N subcategories are revised, with the presence of microsatellites, satellites, or in-transit metastases now categorized as N1c, N2c, or N3c based on the number of tumor-involved regional lymph nodes, if any; 7) descriptors are added to each M1 subcategory designation for lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level (LDH elevation no longer upstages to M1c); and 8) a new M1d designation is added for central nervous system metastases. This evidence-based revision of the AJCC melanoma staging system will guide patient treatment, provide better prognostic estimates, and refine stratification of patients entering clinical trials. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:472-492. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Spitz melanocytic neoplasms with MLPH::ALK fusions: Report of two cases with previously unreported features and literature review.

ALK-fused Spitz melanocytic neoplasms are a distinct subgroup of melanocytic lesions exhibiting unique histopathologic characteristics. These lesions often manifest as exophytic or polypoid tumors, characterized by fusiform-to-epithelioid melanocytes arranged in a nested, fascicular, or plexiform growth pattern. Several fusion partners of the ALK gene have been identified in spitzoid melanocytic neoplasms, with TPM3 and DCTN1 being the most prevalent. Less common fusion partners include NPM1, TPR, CLIP1, GTF3C2, EEF2, MYO5A, KANK1, and EHBP1. The MLPH gene, which encodes melanophilin (MLPH), playing a crucial role in regulating skin pigmentation by acting as a linker between RAB27A and myosin Va during melanosome transport, has also recently been recognized as a rare fusion partner of ALK in Spitz melanocytic neoplasms. Currently, there exists a sparse documentation within English literature, illustrating a limited number of cases featuring MLPH::ALK fusion in Spitz melanocytic neoplasms. In this report, we present two additional cases, including a previously unreported instance of Spitz melanoma, contributing to the expanding knowledge on ALK-fused Spitz melanocytic neoplasms. In addition, we provide a comprehensive review of the clinical, histopathologic, and molecular features observed in documented cases with this novel fusion.

Melanoma metastatic to the adrenal gland: An update on the role of adrenalectomy in multidisciplinary management.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Modern systemic therapy (immune checkpoint blockade [ICB], targeted therapy) has improved survival for patients with metastatic melanoma. The role of adrenal metastasectomy is not well characterized in this setting. METHODS: Consecutive patients treated with adrenalectomy 1/1/2007-1/1/2019 were retrospectively compared to patients treated with systemic therapy alone in the same time period. Overall survival and survival after adrenal metastasis were compared, prognostic factors associated with survival after adrenal metastasis development were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 74 patients underwent adrenalectomy and were compared to 69 treated with systemic therapy alone. The most common indications for adrenalectomy were to render the patient disease-free in the setting of isolated adrenal metastasis (n = 32, 43.2%) or treatment of isolated progression in the setting of other stable/responding metastases (n = 32, 43.2%). Patients treated surgically had longer survival (116.9 vs. 11.0 months after adrenal metastasis diagnosis, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, receipt of ICB (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.40-0.95]) and selection for adrenalectomy (HR: 0.27, 95% CI: [0.17-0.42]) were the strongest factors associated with improved survival after adrenal metastasis diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Selective application of adrenal metastasectomy is associated with prolonged survival benefit and remains an important consideration in the multidisciplinary management of patients with metastatic melanoma.

Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy (NAST) in Patients with Melanoma: Surgical Considerations by the International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium (INMC).

Exciting advances in melanoma systemic therapies have presented the opportunity for surgical oncologists and their multidisciplinary colleagues to test the neoadjuvant systemic treatment approach in high-risk, resectable metastatic melanomas. Here we describe the state of the science of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) for melanoma, focusing on the surgical aspects and the key role of the surgical oncologist in this treatment paradigm. This paper summarizes the past decade of developments in melanoma treatment and the current evidence for NAST in stage III melanoma specifically. Issues of surgical relevance are discussed, including the risk of progression on NAST prior to surgery. Technical aspects, such as the definition of resectability for melanoma and the extent and scope of routine surgery are presented. Other important issues, such as the utility of radiographic response evaluation and method of pathologic response evaluation, are addressed. Surgical complications and perioperative management of NAST related adverse events are considered. The International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium has the goal of harmonizing NAST trials in melanoma to facilitate rapid advances with new approaches, and facilitating the comparison of results across trials evaluating different treatment regimens. Our ultimate goals are to provide definitive proof of the safety and efficacy of NAST in melanoma, sufficient for NAST to become an acceptable standard of care, and to leverage this platform to allow more personalized, biomarker-driven, tailored approaches to subsequent treatment and surveillance.

Utilization and evolving prescribing practice of opioid and non-opioid analgesics in patients undergoing lymphadenectomy for cutaneous malignancy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Opioids are commonly prescribed following surgery and can lead to persistent opioid use. We assessed changes in prescribing practices following an opioid education initiative for patients undergoing lymphadenectomy for cutaneous malignancy. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective study of all eligible patients (3/2016-3/2020) was performed. RESULTS: Indications for lymphadenectomy in 328 patients were metastatic melanoma (84%), squamous cell carcinoma (10%), and Merkel cell carcinoma (5%). At discharge, non-opioid analgesics were increasingly utilized over the 4-year study period, with dramatic increases after education initiatives (32%, 42%, 59%, and 79% of pts, respectively each year; p < 0.001). Median oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) prescribed also decreased dramatically starting in year 3 (250, 238, 150, and 100 mg, respectively; p < 0.001). Patients discharged with 200 mg OMEs were less likely to also be discharged with non-opioid analgesics (40% vs. 64%. respectively, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Analgesic prescribing practices following lymphadenectomy for cutaneous malignancy improved significantly over a 4-year period, with use of non-opioids more than doubling and a 60% reduction in median OME. Opportunities exist to further increase non-opioid use and decrease opioid dissemination after lymphadenectomy for cutaneous malignancy.

Prognostic significance of acral lentiginous histologic type in T1 melanoma.

Acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM) is a rare type of cutaneous melanoma with a poor prognosis. It is unclear whether the poor outcome of ALM is due to its inherent disease characteristics or advanced stage at initial diagnosis. To address this question, we retrospectively analyzed the clinicopathologic factors of 828 thin (T1; Breslow thickness ≤1.0 mm) melanomas [129 (15.6%) ALMs and 699 (84.4%) non-ALMs] and their nodal and distance metastases and local recurrence rates and determined their relationship with the disease-specific (DSS), overall (OS), and recurrence-free survivals (RFS) at the pathologic stages T1, T1a, and T1b with a median follow-up time of 84.5 months. With the exception of OS at T1b stage, ALM patients showed significantly lower 5- and 10-year DSS, OS, and RFS rates at every pathologic stage when compared with non-ALM. In multivariable analysis, ALM histologic type, SLN positivity, age, and the use of systemic therapy were detected as independent poor prognostic factors associated with significantly lower survival rates. ALM histologic type was associated with lower DSS and OS rates at T1 and T1a stages and lower RFS rates at T1b stage. SLN positivity was associated with lower DSS, OS, and RFS rates at T1, T1a, and T1b stages. Age was associated with lower OS rates at T1 and T1b stages. Whereas the use of systemic therapy was associated with lower DSS rates at T1a stage and RFS rates at T1b stage. In addition, the ALM group showed significantly older median age patients and higher rates of female sex, Hispanic ethnicity, nevoid cytology, non-brisk tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, nodal metastasis, and local recurrence at every pathologic stage of thin melanoma. Our findings suggest that ALM is inherently more aggressive than other types of cutaneous melanoma. This information may be useful for prognostic stratification of patients with thin melanomas, especially to help guide the clinical decision-making for SLN biopsy and patients entering clinical trials.

Nodal Recurrence is a Primary Driver of Early Relapse for Patients with Sentinel Lymph Node-Positive Melanoma in the Modern Therapeutic Era.

BACKGROUND: Management of patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma has changed dramatically over the last few years such that completion lymph node dissection (CLND) has become uncommon, and many patients receive adjuvant immunotherapy or targeted therapy. This study seeks to characterize patterns and predictors of early recurrence in this setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients with primary cutaneous melanoma undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) between 3/2016 and 12/2019 were identified. The subset with a positive SLN who did not undergo CLND were examined for further analysis of outcomes and predictors of recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, 215 patients with SLN-positive melanoma who did not have CLND were identified. Adjuvant systemic therapy was administered to 102 (47%), with 93% of this subset receiving immunotherapy (n = 95). Median follow-up from SLNB was 20 months (IQR 12-28.5 months), and 57 patients (27%) recurred during this time. The SLN basin was the most common site of recurrence (n = 38, 67% of recurrence), with isolated nodal recurrence being the most common first site of recurrent disease (n = 22, 39% of recurrence). On multivariable analysis, lymphovascular invasion (LVI) of the primary tumor, two or more involved nodes, and > 1 mm nodal deposit were independently associated with higher rates of nodal relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Nodal recurrence is a primary driver of early disease relapse for patients with SLN-positive melanoma who do not undergo CLND in the era of effective adjuvant systemic therapy. LVI, ≥ 2 nodes, or > 1 mm nodal disease identifies patients at particularly high risk of nodal relapse.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Melanoma: Cutaneous, Version 2.2021.

Over the past few years, the NCCN Guidelines for Melanoma: Cutaneous have been expanded to include pathways for treatment of microscopic satellitosis (added in v2.2020), and the following Principles sections: Molecular Testing (added in v2.2019), Systemic Therapy Considerations (added in v2.2020), and Brain Metastases Management (added in v3.2020). The v1.2021 update included additional modifications of these sections and notable revisions to Principles of: Pathology, Surgical Margins for Wide Excision of Primary Melanoma, Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy, Completion/Therapeutic Lymph Node Dissection, and Radiation Therapy. These NCCN Guidelines Insights discuss the important changes to pathology and surgery recommendations, as well as additions to systemic therapy options for patients with advanced disease.

Functional annotation of melanoma risk loci identifies novel susceptibility genes.

Genome-wide association study (GWAS)-identified single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are tag SNPs located in both transcribed and non-coding regulatory DNA regions, rather than representing causal or functional variants for disease. To identify functional variants or genes for melanoma susceptibility, we used functional mapping and annotation (FUMA) to perform functional annotation of the summary statistics of 2541 significant melanoma risk SNPs (P < 5 × 10-8) identified by GWAS. The original GWAS melanoma study included 15 990 cases and 26 409 controls, representing the largest international meta-analysis of melanoma susceptibility. We prioritized 330 unique genes, including those in immune cytokine signaling pathways, from 19 loci through positional, expression quantitative trait locus, and chromatin interaction mapping. In comparison, only 38 melanoma-related genes were identified in the original meta-analysis. In addition to the well-known melanoma susceptibility genes confirmed in the meta-analysis (MC1R, CDKN2A, TERT, OCA2 and ARNT/SETDB1), we also identified additional novel genes using FUMA to map SNPs to genes. Through chromatin interaction mapping, we prioritized IFNA7, IFNA10, IFNA16, IFNA17, IFNA14, IFNA6, IFNA21, IFNA4, IFNE and IFNA5; these 10 most significant genes are all involved in immune system and cytokine signaling pathways. In the gene analysis, we identified 72 genes with a P < 2.5 × 10-6. The genes associated with melanoma risk were DEF8 (P = 1.09 × 10-57), DBNDD1 (P = 2.19 × 10-42), SPATA33 (P = 3.54 × 10-38) and MC1R (P = 1.04 × 10-36). In summary, this study identifies novel putative melanoma susceptibility genes and provides a guide for further experimental validation of functional variants and disease-related genes.

Prognostic model for patient survival in primary anorectal mucosal melanoma: stage at presentation determines relevance of histopathologic features.

Pathological staging of primary anorectal mucosal melanoma is often performed according to the American Joint Commission on Cancer (AJCC) guidelines for cutaneous melanoma, as an anorectal melanoma-specific staging system does not exist. However, it remains unknown whether prognostic factors derived for cutaneous melanoma also stratify risk in anorectal melanoma. We retrospectively determined correlations between clinicopathological parameters and disease-specific survival in 160 patients. Patients were grouped by clinical stage at presentation (localized disease, regional or distant metastases). Cox proportional hazards regression models determined associations with disease-specific survival. We also summarized the somatic mutations identified in a subset of tumors analyzed for hotspot mutations in cancer-associated gene panels. Most of the patients were white (82%) and female (61%). The median age was 62 years. With a median follow-up of 1.63 years, median disease-specific survival was 1.75 years, and 121 patients (76%) died of anorectal melanoma. Patients presenting with regional (34%) or distant metastases (24%) had significantly shorter disease-specific survival compared to those with disease localized to the anorectum (42%). Of the 71 anorectal melanoma tumors analyzed for hotspot genetic alterations, somatic mutations involving the KIT gene (24%) were most common followed by NRAS (19%). Increasing primary tumor thickness, lymphovascular invasion, and absence of regression also correlated with shorter disease-specific survival. Primary tumor parameters correlated with shorter disease-specific survival in patients presenting with localized disease (tumor thickness) or regional metastases (tumor thickness, absence of regression, and lymphovascular invasion), but not in patients presenting with distant metastases. Grouping of patients according to a schema based on modifications of the 8th edition AJCC cutaneous melanoma staging system stratified survival in anorectal melanoma. Our findings support stage-specific associations between primary tumor parameters and disease-specific survival in anorectal melanoma. Moreover, the AJCC cutaneous melanoma staging system and minor modifications of it predicted survival among anorectal melanoma patients.

NCCN Guidelines Insights: Uveal Melanoma, Version 1.2019.

The NCCN Guidelines for Uveal Melanoma include recommendations for staging, treatment, and follow-up of patients diagnosed with uveal melanoma of the choroid or ciliary body. In addition, because distinguishing between uveal melanoma and benign uveal nevi is in some cases difficult, these guidelines also contain recommendations for workup of patients with suspicious pigmented uveal lesions, to clarify the tests needed to distinguish between those who should have further workup and treatment for uveal melanoma versus those with uncertain diagnosis and low risk who should to be followed and later reevaluated. These NCCN Guidelines Insights describe recommendations for treatment of newly diagnosed nonmetastatic uveal melanoma in patients who have already undergone a complete workup.

Neoadjuvant systemic therapy in melanoma: recommendations of the International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium.

Advances in the treatment of metastatic melanoma have improved responses and survival. However, many patients continue to experience resistance or toxicity to treatment, highlighting a crucial need to identify biomarkers and understand mechanisms of response and toxicity. Neoadjuvant therapy for regional metastases might improve operability and clinical outcomes over upfront surgery and adjuvant therapy, and has become an established role for drug development and biomarker discovery in other cancers (including locally advanced breast cancer, head and neck squamous cell carcinomas, gastroesophageal cancer, and anal cancer). Patients with clinically detectable stage III melanoma are ideal candidates for neoadjuvant therapy, because they represent a high-risk patient population with poor outcomes when treated with upfront surgery alone. Neoadjuvant therapy is now an active area of research for melanoma with numerous completed and ongoing trials (since 2014) with disparate designs, endpoints, and analyses under investigation. We have, therefore, established the International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium with experts in medical oncology, surgical oncology, pathology, radiation oncology, radiology, and translational research to develop recommendations for investigating neoadjuvant therapy in melanoma to align future trial designs and correlative analyses. Alignment and consistency of neoadjuvant trials will facilitate optimal data organisation for future regulatory review and strengthen translational research across the melanoma disease continuum.

Cutaneous Melanoma, Version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Cutaneous melanoma have been significantly revised over the past few years in response to emerging data on immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies and BRAF-targeted therapy. This article summarizes the data and rationale supporting extensive changes to the recommendations for systemic therapy as adjuvant treatment of resected disease and as treatment of unresectable or distant metastatic disease.

Neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib versus standard of care in patients with high-risk, surgically resectable melanoma: a single-centre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Dual BRAF and MEK inhibition produces a response in a large number of patients with stage IV BRAF-mutant melanoma. The existing standard of care for patients with clinical stage III melanoma is upfront surgery and consideration for adjuvant therapy, which is insufficient to cure most patients. Neoadjuvant targeted therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors (such as dabrafenib and trametinib) might provide clinical benefit in this high-risk p opulation. METHODS: We undertook this single-centre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (Houston, TX, USA). Eligible participants were adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically or cytologically confirmed surgically resectable clinical stage III or oligometastatic stage IV BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K (ie, Val600Glu or Val600Lys)-mutated melanoma. Eligible patients had to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, a life expectancy of more than 3 years, and no previous exposure to BRAF or MEK inhibitors. Exclusion criteria included metastases to bone, brain, or other sites where complete surgical excision was in doubt. We randomly assigned patients (1:2) to either upfront surgery and consideration for adjuvant therapy (standard of care group) or neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib (8 weeks of neoadjuvant oral dabrafenib 150 mg twice per day and oral trametinib 2 mg per day followed by surgery, then up to 44 weeks of adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib starting 1 week after surgery for a total of 52 weeks of treatment). Randomisation was not masked and was implemented by the clinical trial conduct website maintained by the trial centre. Patients were stratified by disease stage. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed event-free survival (ie, patients who were alive without disease progression) at 12 months in the intent-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02231775. FINDINGS: Between Oct 23, 2014, and April 13, 2016, we randomly assigned seven patients to standard of care, and 14 to neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib. The trial was stopped early after a prespecified interim safety analysis that occurred after a quarter of the participants had been accrued revealed significantly longer event-free survival with neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib than with standard of care. After a median follow-up of 18·6 months (IQR 14·6-23·1), significantly more patients receiving neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib were alive without disease progression than those receiving standard of care (ten [71%] of 14 patients vs none of seven in the standard of care group; median event-free survival was 19·7 months [16·2-not estimable] vs 2·9 months [95% CI 1·7-not estimable]; hazard ratio 0·016, 95% CI 0·00012-0·14, p<0·0001). Neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib were well tolerated with no occurrence of grade 4 adverse events or treatment-related deaths. The most common adverse events in the neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib group were expected grade 1-2 toxicities including chills (12 patients [92%]), headache (12 [92%]), and pyrexia (ten [77%]). The most common grade 3 adverse event was diarrhoea (two patients [15%]). INTERPRETATION: Neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib significantly improved event-free survival versus standard of care in patients with high-risk, surgically resectable, clinical stage III-IV melanoma. Although the trial finished early, limiting generalisability of the results, the findings provide proof-of-concept and support the rationale for further investigation of neoadjuvant approaches in this disease. This trial is currently continuing accrual as a single-arm study of neoadjuvant plus adjuvant dabrafenib and trametinib. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.