Search

Background: The treatment landscape has completely changed for advanced melanoma. We report survival outcomes and the differential impact of prognostic factors over time in daily clinical practice., Methods: From a Dutch nationwide population-based registry, patients with advanced melanoma diagnosed from 2013 to 2017 were analysed (n = 3616). Because the proportional hazards assumption was violated, a multivariable Cox model restricted to the first 6 months and a multivariable landmark Cox model from 6 to 48 months were used to assess overall survival (OS) of cases without missing values. The 2017 cohort was excluded from this analysis because of the short follow-up time., Results: Median OS of the 2013 and 2016 cohort was 11.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.4-13.5) and 17.7 months (95% CI: 14.9-19.8), respectively. Compared with the 2013 cohort, the 2016 cohort had superior survival in the Cox model from 0 to 6 months (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.55 [95% CI: 0.43-0.72]) and in the Cox model from 6 to 48 months (HR = 0.68 [95% CI: 0.57-0.83]). Elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, distant metastases in ≥3 organ sites, brain and liver metastasis and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of ≥1 had stronger association with inferior survival from 0 to 6 months than from 6 to 48 months. BRAF-mutated melanoma had superior survival in the first 6 months (HR = 0.50 [95% CI: 0.42-0.59])., Conclusion(s): Prognosis for advanced melanoma in the Netherlands has improved from 2013 to 2016. Prognostic importance of most evaluated factors was higher in the first 6 months after diagnosis. BRAF-mutated melanoma was only associated with superior survival in the first 6 months., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement AvdE reports advisory relationships with Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Novartis, MSD, and Pierre-Fabre. AvA reports consultancy/advisory relationships with Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, MSD-Merck, Merck-Pfizer, and 4SC and research grants not related to this paper from Amgen, BMS, and Novartis. JdG reports personal fees outside the submitted work from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Pierre-Fabre, Servier, and MSD, Novartis. GH reports consultancy/advisory relationships with Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, MSD, Pfizer, and Novartis and research grants not related to this paper from Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Seerave. EK has consultancy/advisory relationships with Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Roche, Merck, Pierre-Fabre, EISAI, Bayer, and Genzyme-Sanofi and research grants not related to this paper from Novartis and Bristol-Myers Squibb. KS advisory relationships with Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Novartis, MSD, and Pierre-Fabre. AvdV reports consultancy relationships with Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Roche, Novartis, Pierre-Fabre, Pfizer, Sanofi, Ipsen, and Eisai. JH reports advisory relationships with Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celsius Therapeutics, GSK, Immunocore, Ipsen, MSD, Merck Serono, Novartis, Neon Therapeutics, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, and Seattle Genetics and research grants not related to this paper from Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, and Neon Therapeutics. All grants were paid to the institutions. The funders had no role in the writing of this article or decision to submit it for publication., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Mucosal melanoma (MM) is rare and has a poor prognosis. Since 2011, new effective treatments are available for advanced melanoma. It is unclear whether patients with mucosal melanoma equally benefit from these new treatments compared with patients with cutaneous melanoma (CM)., Methods: Patients with advanced MM and CM diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 were included from a nationwide population-based registry - the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Overall survival (OS) was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method (also for a propensity score-matched cohort). A Cox model was used to analyse the association of possible prognostic factors with OS., Results: In total, 120 patients with MM and 2960 patients with CM were included. Median OS was 8.7 months and 14.5 months, respectively. Patients with MM were older (median age 70 versus 65 years) and more often female (60% versus 41%), compared with CM. In total, 77% and 2% of the MM patients were treated with first-line immunotherapy and targeted therapy, respectively, compared with 49% and 33% of the CM patients. In contrast to CM, OS for MM did not improve for patients diagnosed in 2015-2017, compared with 2013-2014. ECOG performance score ≥1 (HR = 1.99 [1.26-3.15; p = 0.003]) and elevated LDH level (HR = 1.63 [0.96-2.76]; p = 0.069) in MM were associated with worse survival., Conclusions: Within the era of immune and targeted therapies, prognosis for patients with advanced MM has not improved as much as for CM. Collaboration is necessary to enlarge sample size for research to improve immunotherapeutic strategies and identify targetable mutations., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement M.C.T.v.Z., F.L.B., M.I.E.v.P., L.C.d.W., M.W.J.M.W., M.J.B.S., M.J.B.A., F.W.P.J.v.d.B., D.P., R.S.v.R., A.J.t.T., G.V., J.v.d.H. have no conflicts of interest to disclose. A.J.M.v.d.E. reports having advisory relationships with Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Novartis, MSD, and Pierre Fabre. J.W.B.d.G. reports receiving personal fees outside the submitted work from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Pierre Fabre, Servier, MSD, Novartis. G.A.P.H. reports having consultancy/advisory relationships with Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, MSD, Pfizer, Novartis and receiving research grants not related to this paper from Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Seerave. E.H.W.K. reports having consultancy/advisory relationships with Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Roche, Merck, Pierre Fabre, EISAI, Bayer, Genzyme-Sanofi and receiving research grants not related to this paper from Novartis and Bristol-Myers Squibb. K.P.M.S. reports having advisory relationships with Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Novartis, MSD, and Pierre Fabre. A.A.M.v.d.V. reports having consultancy relationships with Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Roche, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Sanofi, Ipsen, and Eisai. J.B.A.G.H. reports having advisory relationships with Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celsius Therapeutics, GSK, Immunocore, Ipsen, MSD, Merck Serono, Novartis, Neon Therapeutics, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics and receiving research grants not related to this paper from Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Neon Therapeutics. All grants were paid to the institutions. The funders had no role in the writing of this article or decision to submit it for publication. Authors have full control of all primary data. They agree to allow the journal to review the data if requested., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)