BRAF-Mutated Melanoma Journey in Latin America: Expert Recommendations From Diagnosis to Treatment.

OBJECTIVES: • Gather a panel of Latin American experts in testing and treating BRAF-melanoma. • Describe the current landscape of BRAF-mutated melanoma in Latin America. • Outline the current gaps in testing and recommend improvements for testing and treating BRAF-mutated melanoma in the region. INTRODUCTION: Melanoma prevalence in Latin America is lower than in high- and middle-income countries. However, recent data indicate that the region's incidence and mortality are rising, with more stage IV patients being diagnosed. According to international clinical practice guidelines, conducting BRAF-mutation testing in patients with stage III or stage IV melanoma and high-risk resected disease is imperative. Still, BRAF-mutation testing and targeted therapies are inconsistently available in the region. METHODS: Americas Health Foundation convened a meeting of Latin American experts on BRAF-mutated melanoma to develop guidelines and recommendations for diagnosis through treatment. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Some recommendations for improving diagnostics through improving access and reducing the cost of BRAF-mutation testing, enhancing efficiency in pathology laboratories, and creating country-specific local guidelines. The panel also gave treatment recommendations for neo-adjuvant therapy, adjuvant therapy, and therapy for patients with metastatic disease in Latin America.

Immunotherapy at any line of treatment improves survival in patients with advanced metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) compared with chemotherapy (Quijote-CLICaP).

BACKGROUND: To compare survival outcomes of patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received immunotherapy as first-, second- or beyond line, versus matched patients receiving standard chemotherapy with special characterization of hyperprogressors. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 296 patients with unresectable/metastatic NSCLC treated with either, first-, second-, third- or fourth-line of immunotherapy was conducted. A matched comparison with a historical cohort of first-line chemotherapy and a random forest tree analysis to characterize hyperprogressors was conducted. RESULTS: Median age was 64 years (range 34-90), 40.2% of patients were female. A total of 91.2% of patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score ≤ 1. Immunotherapy as first-line was given to 39 patients (13.7%), second-line to 140 (48.8%), and as third-line and beyond to 108 (37.6%). Median overall survival was 12.7 months (95% CI 9.67-14 months) and progression-free survival (PFS) of 4.27 months (95% CI 3.97-5.0). Factors associated with increased survival included treatment with immunotherapy as first-line (P < 0.001), type of response (P < 0.001) and PD-L1 status (P = 0.0039). Compared with the historical cohort, immunotherapy proved to be superior in terms of OS (P = 0.05) but not PFS (P = 0.2). A total of 44 hyperprogressors were documented (19.8%, [95% CI 14.5-25.1%]). Leukocyte count over 5.300 cells/dL was present in both hyperprogressors and long-term responders. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who receive immune-checkpoint inhibitors as part of their treatment for NSCLC have better overall survival (OS) compared with matched patients treated with standard chemotherapy, regardless of the line of treatment.