Search

BACKGROUND: A watch & wait strategy for patients with rectal cancer with a clinical complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is a valuable alternative for rectal resection. However, there are patients who will have residual tumor or regrowth during watch & wait.OBJECTIVE: The aim was to investigate safety and costs for patients who underwent delayed surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study with prospectively collected data.SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a large teaching hospital.PATIENTS: Between Jan 2015 - May 2020, 622 new rectal cancer patients were seen of which 200 received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Ninety-four patients were included of which 65 patients underwent immediate surgery and 29 patients required delayed surgery after an initial watch & wait approach.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: This included 30-day postoperative morbidity rate, hospital costs and two-year overall and disease-free survival.RESULTS: There was no difference in length of stay (9 vs 8, p = 0.83), readmissions (27.6% vs 10.0%, p = 0.10), surgical re-interventions (15.0% vs 3.4%, p = 0.16) and stoma free rate (52.6% vs 31.0%, p = 0.09) between immediate and delayed surgery groups. Hospital costs were similar in the delayed group (€11913 vs €13769, p = 0.89). Two-year overall survival (93% vs 100%, p = 0.23) and disease-free survival (78% vs 81%, p = 0.47) rates were comparable.LIMITATIONS: Small sample size, follow-up time and retrospective design.CONCLUSION: Delayed surgery for regrowth in a watch & wait program or for persistent residual disease after a repeated assessment is not associated with an increased risk of postoperative morbidity or a significant rise in costs compared to immediate total mesorectal excision. There also appears to be no evident compromise in oncological outcome. Repeated response assessment in patients with a near complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is a useful approach to identify more patients who can benefit from a watch & wait strategy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B836 .

Background: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is characterized by a poor survival rate, which can be improved by systemic treatment. Consensus on the most optimal first- and second-line palliative systemic treatment is lacking. The aim of this study was to describe the use of first- and second-line systemic treatment, overall survival (OS), and time to failure (TTF) of first- and second-line treatment in metastatic PDAC in a real-world setting. Patients and Methods: Patients with synchronous metastatic PDAC diagnosed between 2015 and 2018 who received systemic treatment were selected from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. OS and TTF were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank test and multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses. Results: The majority of 1,586 included patients received FOLFIRINOX (65%), followed by gemcitabine (18%), and gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (13%) in the first line. Median OS for first-line FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, and gemcitabine monotherapy was 6.6, 4.7, and 2.9 months, respectively. Compared to FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel showed significantly inferior OS after adjustment for confounders (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02–1.41), and gemcitabine monotherapy was independently associated with a shorter OS and TTF (HR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.71–2.30 and HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.88–2.83, respectively). Of the 121 patients who received second-line systemic treatment, 33% received gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, followed by gemcitabine (31%) and FOLFIRINOX (10%). Conclusions: Based on population-based data in patients with metastatic PDAC, treatment predominantly consists of FOLFIRINOX in the first line and gemcitabine with or without nab-paclitaxel in the second line. FOLFIRINOX in the first line shows superior OS compared with gemcitabine with or without nab-paclitaxel.

Contains fulltext : 287666.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) There is no consensus on the optimal treatment duration of anti-PD-1 for advanced melanoma. The aim of our study was to gain insight into the outcomes of anti-PD-1 discontinuation, the association of treatment duration with progression and anti-PD-1 re-treatment in relapsing patients. Analyses were performed on advanced melanoma patients in the Netherlands who discontinued first-line anti-PD-1 monotherapy in the absence of progressive disease (n = 324). Survival was estimated after anti-PD-1 discontinuation and with a Cox model the association of treatment duration with progression was assessed. At the time of anti-PD-1 discontinuation, 90 (28%) patients had a complete response (CR), 190 (59%) a partial response (PR) and 44 (14%) stable disease (SD). Median treatment duration for patients with CR, PR and SD was 11.2, 11.5 and 7.2 months, respectively. The 24-month progression-free survival and overall survival probabilities for patients with a CR, PR and SD were, respectively, 64% and 88%, 53% and 82%, 31% and 64%. Survival outcomes of patients with a PR and CR were similar when anti-PD-1 discontinuation was not due to adverse events. Having a PR at anti-PD-1 discontinuation and longer time to first response were associated with progression [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.81 (95% confidence interval, CI = 1.11-2.97) and HR = 1.10 (95% CI = 1.02-1.19; per month increase)]. In 17 of the 27 anti-PD-1 re-treated patients (63%), a response was observed. Advanced melanoma patients can have durable remissions after (elective) anti-PD-1 discontinuation.

The COVID‐19 pandemic had a severe impact on medical care. Our study aims to investigate the impact of COVID‐19 on advanced melanoma care in the Netherlands. We selected patients diagnosed with irresectable stage IIIc and IV melanoma during the first and second COVID‐19 wave and compared them with patients diagnosed within the same time frame in 2018 and 2019. Patients were divided into three geographical regions. We investigated baseline characteristics, time from diagnosis until start of systemic therapy and postponement of anti‐PD‐1 courses. During both waves, fewer patients were diagnosed compared to the control groups. During the first wave, time between diagnosis and start of treatment was significantly longer in the southern region compared to other regions (33 vs 9 and 15 days, P‐value, What's new? Little is known about the effects of COVID‐19 on advanced melanoma care. In this study, the authors examined several quality indicators of care. They observed a worsening in baseline characteristics, longer time between diagnosis and start of treatment and more postponed anti‐PD‐1 antibody courses with differences between the northern, middle and southern regions. Future studies are necessary to assess the long‐term consequences of our observed changes in advanced melanoma care.

Contains fulltext : 232046.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: Anti-PD-1 antibodies and BRAF/MEK inhibitors are the two main groups of systemic therapy in the treatment of BRAF(V600)-mutant advanced melanoma. Until now, data are inconclusive on which therapy to use as first-line treatment. The aim of this study was to use propensity score matching to compare first-line anti-PD-1 monotherapy vs. BRAF/MEK inhibitors in advanced BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma patients. METHODS: We selected patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2017 with advanced melanoma and a known BRAF(V600)-mutation treated with first-line BRAF/MEK inhibitors or anti-PD-1 antibodies, registered in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Patients were matched based on their propensity scores using the nearest neighbour and the optimal matching method. RESULTS: Between 2014 and 2017, a total of 330 and 254 advanced melanoma patients received BRAF/MEK inhibitors and anti-PD-1 monotherapy as first-line systemic therapy. In the matched cohort, patients receiving anti-PD-1 antibodies as a first-line treatment had a higher median and 2-year overall survival compared to patients treated with first-line BRAF/MEK inhibitors, 42.3 months (95% CI: 37.3-NE) vs. 19.8 months (95% CI: 16.7-24.3) and 65.4% (95% CI: 58.1-73.6) vs. 41.7% (95% CI: 34.2-51.0). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that in the matched BRAF(V600)-mutant advanced melanoma patients, anti-PD-1 monotherapy is the preferred first-line treatment in patients with relatively favourable patient and tumour characteristics.

Melanoma of unknown primary (MUP) is considered different from melanoma of known primary (MKP), and it is unclear whether these patients benefit equally from novel therapies. In the current study, characteristics and overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced and metastatic MUP and MKP were compared in the era of novel therapy. Patients were selected from the prospective nation-wide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR). The following criteria were applied: diagnosis of stage IIIc unresectable or IV cutaneous MKP (cMKP) or MUP between July 2012 and July 2017 and treatment with immune checkpoint inhibition and/or targeted therapy. OS was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. The stratified multivariable Cox regression model was used for adjusted analysis. A total of 2706 patients were eligible including 2321 (85.8%) patients with cMKP and 385 (14.2%) with MUP. In comparative analysis, MUP patients more often presented with advanced and metastatic disease at primary diagnosis with poorer performance status, higher LDH, and central nervous system metastases. In crude analysis, median OS of cMKP or MUP patients was 12 months (interquartile range [IQR] 5 – 44) and 14 months (IQR 5 – not reached), respectively (P = 0.278). In adjusted analysis, OS in MUP patients was superior (hazard rate 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.58–0.85; P

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01312-1

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. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Background: Positive results of randomized trials led to the introduction of FOLFIRINOX in 2012 and gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel in 2015 for patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. It is unknown to which extent these new chemotherapeutic regimens have been implemented in clinical practice and what the impact has been on overall survival. Material and methods: Patients diagnosed with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma between 2007–2016 were included from the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. Multilevel logistic regression and Cox regression analyses, adjusting for patient, tumor, and hospital characteristics, were used to analyze variation of chemotherapy use. Results: In total, 8726 patients were included. The use of chemotherapy increased from 31% in 2007–2011 to 37% in 2012–2016 (p

Background: A relationship between quality of life (QoL) and survival has been shown for several types of cancer, mostly in clinical trials with highly selected patient groups. The relationship between QoL and survival for patients with pancreatic or periampullary cancer is unclear. Methods: This study analyzed QoL data from a prospective multicenter patient-reported outcome registry in patients with pancreatic or periampullary carcinoma registered in the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry (2015–2018). Baseline and delta QoL, between baseline and 3-month follow-up, were assessed with the Happiness, EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30), and QLQ-PAN26 questionnaires. The relationship between QoL and survival was assessed using Cox regression models, and additional prognostic value of separate items was assessed using Nagelkerke R2 (explained variance). Results: For the baseline and delta analyses, 233 and 148 patients were available, respectively. Most were diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (n=194; 83.3%) and had stage III disease (n=77; 33.0%), with a median overall survival of 13.6 months. Multivariate analysis using baseline scores indicated several scales to be of prognostic value for the total cohort (ie, happiness today, role functioning, diarrhea, pancreatic pain, and body image; hazard ratios all PP5% of the additional explained variance and were of added prognostic value. Multivariate analysis using delta QoL revealed that only constipation was of prognostic value for the total cohort, whereas no association with survival was found for subgroups with or without resection. Conclusions: In a multicenter cohort of patients with pancreatic or periampullary carcinoma, QoL scores predicted survival regardless of patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics. QoL scores may thus be used for shared decision-making regarding disease management and treatment choice.

Contains fulltext : 225250.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Cutaneous melanoma is a common type of cancer in Adolescents and Young Adults (AYAs, 15-39 years of age). However, AYAs are underrepresented in clinical trials investigating new therapies and the outcomes from these therapies for AYAs are therefore unclear. Using prospectively collected nation-wide data from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR), we compared baseline characteristics, mutational profiles, treatment strategies, grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs), responses and outcomes in AYAs (n = 210) and older adults (n = 3775) who were diagnosed with advanced melanoma between July 2013 and July 2018. Compared to older adults, AYAs were more frequently female (51% versus 40%, p = 0.001), and had a better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG 0 in 54% versus 45%, p = 0.004). BRAF and NRAS mutations were age dependent, with more BRAF V600 mutations in AYAs (68% versus 46%) and more NRAS mutations in older adults (13% versus 21%), p < 0.001. This finding translated in distinct first-line treatment patterns, where AYAs received more initial targeted therapy. Overall, grade 3-4 AE percentages following first-line systemic treatment were similar for AYAs and older adults; anti-PD-1 (7% versus 14%, p = 0.25), anti-CTLA-4 (16% versus 33%, p = 0.12), anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4 (67% versus 56%, p = 0.34) and BRAF/MEK-inhibition (14% versus 23%, p = 0.06). Following anti-CTLA-4 treatment, no AYAs experienced a grade 3-4 colitis, while 17% of the older adults did (p = 0.046). There was no difference in response to treatment between AYAs and older adults. The longer overall survival observed in AYAs (hazard ratio (HR) 0.7; 95% CI 0.6-0.8) was explained by the increased cumulative incidence of non-melanoma related deaths in older adults (sub-distribution HR 2.8; 95% CI 1.5-4.9), calculated by competing risk analysis. The results of our national cohort study show that baseline characteristics and mutational profiles differ between AYAs and older adults with advanced melanoma, leading to different treatment choices made in daily practice. Once treatment is initiated, AYAs and older adults show similar tumor responses and melanoma-specific survival.

Background The aim of this nationwide cohort study was to examine the course of symptoms and trajectories of health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) and psychological distress during follow-up and to identify vulnerable patients. Methods Patients with pathological stage I–III colorectal cancer (CRC) between 2013 and 2018 were included. Baseline characteristics were collected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry, and patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30/CR29, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) questionnaires at the baseline and subsequently at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. Latent class growth and multinomial logistic regression analyses were performed to outline 24-month trajectories in HR-QoL and distress and to identify predictive factors. Results : A total of 1535 patients with colon cancer or rectal cancer were included. Trajectory analysis of HR-QoL identified three patient classes: high HR-QoL (62.7%), improving HR-QoL (29.0%) and low HR-QoL (8.3%). The following patient groups were identified with having low distress (64.0%), moderate distress (26.9%) and high distress (9.1%). Around 13% of the total cohort had either persistent low HR-QoL or high psychological distress throughout follow-up. Patients belonging to this vulnerable group were significantly more likely to be female, to be younger aged, to have lower education, to have disease stage II–III or to have major LARS. Conclusions Although most patients treated for stage I–III CRC fared well, a small but significant proportion of around 13% did not recover during follow-up and reported low HR-QoL and/or high psychological distress levels throughout. This study's findings should be taken into account when organising and selecting patients for tailored follow-up.

Simple Summary: The survival of advanced melanoma patients has improved significantly over the last decade due to the introduction of new systemic therapies. It is unknown whether survival outcomes of advanced melanoma patients differ between melanoma centers in the Netherlands. This research aimed to assess center variation in treatments and 2-year survival probabilities of advanced melanoma patients diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 in the Netherlands. Significant center variation in 2-year survival probabilities of patients diagnosed in 2014-2015 was observed after correcting for case-mix and treatment with new systemic therapies. The different use of new systemic therapies partially explained the observed variation. From 2016 onwards, no significant difference in 2-year survival was observed between centers. This study shows the added value of quality monitoring with a national registry that enables the study of variation between centers.Background: To assure a high quality of care for patients treated in Dutch melanoma centers, hospital variation in treatment patterns and outcomes is evaluated in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. The aim of this study was to assess center variation in treatments and 2-year survival probabilities of patients diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 in the Netherlands. Methods: We selected patients diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 with unresectable IIIC or stage IV melanoma, registered in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Centers' performance on 2-year survival was evaluated using Empirical Bayes estimates calculated in a random effects model. Treatment patterns of the centers with the lowest and highest estimates for 2-year survival were compared. Results: For patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2015, significant center variation in 2-year survival probabilities was observed even after correcting for case-mix and treatment with new systemic therapies. The different use of new systemic therapies partially explained the observed variation. From 2016 onwards, no significant difference in 2-year survival was observed between centers. Conclusion: Our data suggest that between 2014 and 2015, after correcting for patient case-mix, significant variation in 2-year survival probabilities between Dutch melanoma centers existed. The use of new systemic therapies could partially explain this variation. In 2013 and between 2016 and 2017, no significant variation between centers existed.

In this study, we explored the predictive value of serum microRNA (miRNA) expression for early tumor progression during FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy and its association with overall survival (OS) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). A total of 132 PDAC patients of all disease stages were included in this study, of whom 25% showed progressive disease during FOLFIRINOX according to the RECIST criteria. MiRNA expression was analyzed in serum collected before the start and after one cycle of chemotherapy. In the discovery cohort (n = 12), a 352-miRNA RT-qPCR panel was used. In the validation cohorts (total n = 120), miRNA expression was detected using individual RT-qPCR miRNA primers. Before the start of FOLFIRINOX, serum miR-373-3p expression was higher in patients with progressive disease compared to patients with disease control after FOLFIRINOX (Log2 fold difference (FD) 0.88, p = 0.006). MiR-194-5p expression after one cycle of FOLFIRINOX was lower in patients with progressive disease (Log2 FD −0.29, p = 0.044). Both miRNAs were predictors of early tumor progression in a multivariable model including disease stage and baseline CA19-9 level (miR-373-3p odds ratio (OR) 3.99, 95% CI 1.10–14.49, miR-194-5p OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83–0.99). MiR-373-3p and miR-194-5p did not show an association with OS after adjustment for disease stage, baseline CA19-9, and chemotherapy response. In conclusion, high serum miR-373-3p before the start and low serum miR-194-5p after one cycle are associated with early tumor progression during FOLFIRINOX.

Background: The incidence of metastatic melanoma is increasing in all ages. Multiple trials with targeted drugs and immune checkpoint inhibitors showed improved survival in metastatic melanoma. However, patients aged >_75 years are often under-represented in clinical trials, therefore raising questions on safety and efficacy of treatment. Patients and methods: We analyzed a real-world cohort of 3054 patients with metastatic melanoma stratified for age (_ 75 years), and BRAF status, providing data on treatment strategies, toxicity, and survival. Kaplan Meier curves and Cox Proportional Hazard Models were used to present overall survival (OS) and Melanoma Specific Survival (MSS). Results: Overall, 52.2% of patients were _75 years. BRAF mutated tumors were found less often in patients >_75 years: 34.5% versus 65% in patients _75 years received systemic therapy less frequently compared to their younger counterparts independent of the BRAF status. When receiving treatment, no statistical significant difference in grade 3 or 4 toxicity was observed. Three year Overall Survival rate was 13.7% (9.1-19.3) in patients >_75 years versus 26.7% (23.1-30.4) in patients _75 years are less frequently treated, but when treated there is no statistical significant increase in toxicity and only a borderline statistical significant difference in Melanoma Specific Survival was seen, compared to younger patients. (c) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Simple SummaryTrials suggest no differences in immunotherapy treatment between older and younger patients, but mainly young patients with a good performance status were included in these trials. The aim of this study was to describe the treatment patterns and outcomes of "real-world" older patients with metastatic melanoma. We included 2216 patients aged >= 65 years from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry and described outcomes of immunotherapy. The study showed that responses and severe side effects did not differ from previously reported younger populations and randomized trials, even in the oldest patients and in patients with other diseases. However, patients aged >= 75 discontinued treatment due to toxicity more often, resulting in fewer treatment cycles. We therefore conclude that immunotherapy seems to have similar effects in older patients compared to younger patients, but the impact of less severe toxicity on quality of life should be further studied as older patients are more likely to discontinue treatment.Background: Previous trials suggest no differences in immunotherapy treatment between older and younger patients, but mainly young patients with a good performance status were included. The aim of this study was to describe the treatment patterns and outcomes of "real-world" older patients with metastatic melanoma and to identify predictors of outcome. Methods: We included patients aged >= 65 years with metastatic melanoma from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. We described the reasons for hospital admissions and treatment discontinuation. Additionally, we assessed predictors of toxicity and response using logistic regression models and survival using Cox regression models. Results: We included 2216 patients. Grade >= 3 toxicity was not associated with age, comorbidities or WHO status. Patients aged >= 75 discontinued treatment due to toxicity more often, resulting in fewer treatment cycles. Response rates were similar to previous trials (40.3% and 43.6% in patients aged 65-75 and >= 75, respectively, for anti-PD1 treatment) and did not decrease with age or comorbidity. Melanoma-specific survival was not affected by age or comorbidity. Conclusion: Response rates and toxicity outcomes of checkpoint inhibitors did not change with increasing age or comorbidity. However, the impact of grade I-II toxicity on quality of life deserves further study as older patients discontinue treatment more frequently.

Introduction: The relation between the primary origin of metastasised pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)—head, body or tail—metastatic patterns and outcomes has not yet been investigated in large population-based studies. Methods: Patients with metastasised PDAC at diagnosis from the Netherlands Cancer Registry were included (2005–2015). We compared number of metastatic organ sites (1, 2, ≥3) and specific metastatic organ sites (peritoneum, liver, lung and extra-regional lymph nodes) for the different primary tumour locations. Cox regression analyses were used to determine the association of tumour location and metastatic organ site(s) with overall survival. Results: Overall, we included 9952 patients with metastasised PDAC. The primary origin was head in 5644 (57%), body in 1671 (17%) and tail in 2637 (26%) patients. Differences between primary origins were the number of metastatic organ sites (proportions ≥3 sites for head: 4%, for body: 8% and for tail: 13%, p < 0.0001) and peritoneal metastases (present in 13% for head, 24% for body and 30% for tail; p < 0.0001). Median overall survival was 2.6 months for head PDAC (reference), 2.4 months for body PDAC (HR 1.02 [0.97–1.08]) and 1.9 months for tail PDAC (HR 1.20 [1.15–1.26]). Of patients with one metastatic organ site, the worst survival compared with other sites was seen with liver only metastases (2.5 months vs. 2.7–5.1 months), and the best survival for patients, with extra-regional lymph node only metastases (5.1 months). Conclusion: Metastatic patterns differ among the primary origins for PDAC with metastasised tail tumours having more metastatic sites, more often peritoneal metastases and worse survival.

PURPOSE BRAF/MEK inhibition is a standard of care for patients with BRAF V600E/K–mutated metastatic melanoma. For patients with less frequent BRAF mutations, however, efficacy data are limited. METHODS In the current study, 103 patients with metastatic melanoma with rare, activating non-V600E/K BRAF mutations that were treated with either a BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi), MEK inhibitor (MEKi), or the combination were included. BRAF mutation, patient and disease characteristics, response, and survival data were analyzed. RESULTS Fifty-eight patient tumors (56%) harbored a non-E/K V600 mutation, 38 (37%) a non-V600 mutation, and seven had both V600E and a rare BRAF mutation (7%). The most frequent mutations were V600R (43%; 44 of 103), L597P/Q/R/S (15%; 15 of 103), and K601E (11%; 11 of 103). Most patients had stage IV disease and 42% had elevated lactate dehydrogenase at BRAFi/MEKi initiation. Most patients received combined BRAFi/MEKi (58%) or BRAFi monotherapy (37%). Of the 58 patients with V600 mutations, overall response rate to BRAFi monotherapy and combination BRAFi/MEKi was 27% (six of 22) and 56% (20 of 36), respectively, whereas median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.7 months and 8.0 months, respectively ( P = .002). Of the 38 patients with non-V600 mutations, overall response rate was 0% (zero of 15) to BRAFi, 40% (two of five) to MEKi, and 28% (five of 18) to combination treatment, with a median PFS of 1.8 months versus 3.7 months versus 3.3 months, respectively. Multivariable analyses revealed superior survival (PFS and overall survival) with combination over monotherapy in rare V600 and non-V600 mutated melanoma. CONCLUSION Patients with rare BRAF mutations can respond to targeted therapy, however, efficacy seems to be lower compared with V600E mutated melanoma. Combination BRAFi/MEKi seems to be the best regimen for both V600 and non-V600 mutations. Yet interpretation should be done with care because of the heterogeneity of patients with small sample sizes for some of the reported mutations.

e21523 Background: Little is known about the outcome of adjuvant therapy in melanoma patients beyond the clinical trial setting. The Dutch Melanoma treatment Registry (DMTR) is a population-based registry, set up in July 2013 to monitor the safety and quality of melanoma care. Since 2019, adjuvant treated melanoma patients have also been registered in the DMTR, following approval and reimbursement of adjuvant treatment in the Netherlands in December 2018. Methods: Analyses were performed on melanoma patients treated with adjuvant anti-PD1 therapy included in the DMTR between 01-07-2018 and 31-12-2019. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze patient-, and treatment characteristics, and death as well as relapse rates. Results: Six hundred and fifty-seven patients treated with adjuvant systemic therapy were included in the DMTR. The majority (94%) of these patients was treated with anti-PD1. Twenty percent of the anti-PD1-treated patients developed grade ≥3 toxicity. Of the 279 patients with a minimum follow-up of one year after start of anti-PD1, 170 (61%) prematurely discontinued therapy. Relapse and death occurred in respectively, 38% and 12% of patients within one year of follow-up. Relapse was significantly more frequent in older patients, with high Breslow thickness and ulcerated melanomas. Conclusions: These data show more frequent premature discontinuation of adjuvant anti-PD1 in daily clinical practice than reported in the registration trials. Moreover, incidence of severe toxicity, relapse and death during adjuvant treatment appears higher in the real-world setting.

9544 Background: Checkpoint inhibitors have strongly improved survival of patients with metastatic melanoma. Trials suggest no differences in outcomes between older and younger patients, but only relatively young patients with a good performance status were included in these trials. The aim of this study was to describe treatment patterns and outcomes of older adults with metastatic melanoma, and to identify predictors of outcome. Methods: We included all patients aged ≥65 years with metastatic melanoma between 2013 and 2020 from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment registry (DMTR), in which detailed information on patients, treatments and outcomes is available. We assessed predictors of grade ≥3 toxicity and 6-months response using logistic regression models, and melanoma-specific and overall survival using Cox regression models. Additionally, we described reasons for hospital admissions and treatment discontinuation. Results: A total of 2216 patients were included. Grade ≥3 toxicity did not increase with age, comorbidity or WHO performance status, in patients treated with monotherapy (anti-PD1 or ipilimumab) or combination treatment. However, patients aged ≥75 were admitted more frequently and discontinued treatment due to toxicity more often. Six months-response rates were similar to previous randomized trials (40.3% and 43.6% in patients aged 65-75 and ≥75 respectively for anti-PD1 treatment) and were not affected by age or comorbidity. Melanoma-specific survival was not affected by age or comorbidity, but age, comorbidity and WHO performance status were associated with overall survival in multivariate analyses. Conclusions: Toxicity, response and melanoma-specific survival were not associated with age or comorbidity status. Treatment with immunotherapy should therefore not be omitted solely based on age or comorbidity. However, the impact of grade I-II toxicity in older patients deserves further study as older patients discontinue treatment more frequently and receive less treatment cycles.[Table: see text]

e21527 Background: Recent data in Japanese patients suggest poor outcomes for anti-PD1 in acral melanoma (AM), with no data available on combination treatment. The objective of this study was to analyze the efficacy of anti-PD1 monotherapy and anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA4 combination therapy in these patients. Methods: Our study population consisted of patients registered in the nationwide prospective Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry between 2014 and 2020. We calculated objective response rate (ORR) in all unresectable stage III and IV AM and nonacral cutaneous melanoma (NAM) patients treated with anti-PD1, and combination anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA4. Progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated for first-line treated patients. A Cox proportional hazard analysis was performed to adjust for potential confounders. Results: Nighty-five AM patients received at least one dose of anti-PD1 monotherapy, of whom 58 (61%) as first-line treatment. ORR was 28% (complete response 11%; partial response 18%). Median PFS and OS in patients with first-line treatment were 5.5 months (95% CI 3.5-8.4) and 14 months (95% CI 9.3-25.0). In patients with NAM (n = 1259) ORR was 48% (complete response 18%; partial response 31%). Six-hundred and eighty-eight (55%) patients received anti-PD1 as first-line treatment. Median PFS was 11.7 months (95% CI 9.1-14.9) and median OS was 24 months (95% CI 20.0-29.3) in these patients. Older age, higher ECOG scores, elevated LDH levels, liver metastasis and brain metastasis were significantly associated with lower OS. After adjustment for covariates, acral subtype remained associated with shorter PFS (Hazard Ratio 1.76, 95% CI 1.25-2.48) and OS (Hazard Ratio 1.70, 95% CI 1.17-2.45). Twenty-four AM patients received at least one dose of anti-PD1 plus anti-CTLA4, of which 15 as first-line treatment. ORR was 25% (complete response 4%; partial response 20%). AM patients treated with first-line combination therapy had a median PFS of 3.8 months (95% CI 2.8-NR) and median OS of 7.63 months (95% CI 6.12-NR). ORR in NAM patients treated with combination therapy (n = 599) was 41% (complete response 8%; partial response 33%). Forty-six percent of these patients were treated in the first-line, with a median PFS of 9.7 months (95% CI 6.6-17.1) and median OS of 21.3 months (95% CI 14.6-36.5). Elevated LDH levels and the presence of BRAF mutation were significantly associated with lower OS. No significant association was found between acral subtype and PFS, or OS after adjustment for covariates. Conclusions: This study shows limited efficacy of anti-PD1 for advanced AM, with clinically relevant lower response rates compared to nonacral melanoma types. Although caution is needed because of relatively small numbers and the observational nature of our study, our data confirm limited efficacy of checkpoint inhibition in AM.

Background Checkpoint inhibitor-induced hepatitis is an immune-related adverse event of programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibition, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated 4 (CTLA-4) inhibition or the combination of both. Aim of this study was to assess whether checkpoint inhibitor-induced hepatitis is related to liver metastasis and outcome in a real-world nationwide cohort. Methods Data from the prospective nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR) was used to analyze incidence, risk factors of checkpoint inhibitor-induced grade 3–4 hepatitis and outcome. Results 2561 advanced cutaneous melanoma patients received 3111 treatments with checkpoint inhibitors between May 2012 and January 2019. Severe hepatitis occurred in 30/1620 (1.8%) patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors, in 29/1105 (2.6%) patients treated with ipilimumab and in 80/386 (20.7%) patients treated with combination therapy. Patients with hepatitis had a similar prevalence of liver metastasis compared to patients without hepatitis (32% vs. 27%; p = 0.58 for PD-1 inhibitors; 42% vs. 29%; p = 0.16 for ipilimumab; 38% vs. 43%; p = 0.50 for combination therapy). There was no difference in median progression free and overall survival between patients with and without hepatitis (6.0 months vs. 5.4 months progression-free survival; p = 0.61; 17.0 vs. 16.2 months overall survival; p = 0.44). Conclusion Incidence of hepatitis in a real-world cohort is 1.8% for PD-1 inhibitor, 2.6% for ipilimumab and 20.7% for combination therapy. Checkpoint inhibitor-induced hepatitis had no relation with liver metastasis and had no negative effect on the outcome.

Objective:The aim of this study was to evaluate treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) of patients with BRAFV600wild-type and BRAFV600-mutant advanced melanoma in the Netherlands.Methods:We selected patients of 18 years and over, diagnosed between 2016 and 2017 with unresectable stage IIIC or IV melanoma, registered in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. To assess the association of BRAFV600-mutation status with OS we used the Cox proportional-hazards model.Results:A total of 642 BRAFV600wild-type and 853 mutant patients were included in the analysis. Median OS did not differ significantly between both groups, 15.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 13.2-19.2) versus 20.6 months (95% CI: 18.3-25.0). Survival rates at 6 and 12 months were significantly lower for BRAFV600wild-type patients compared with BRAFV600-mutant patients, 72.0% (95% CI: 68.6-75.6) and 56.0% (95% CI: 52.2-60.0) versus 83.4% (95% CI: 80.9-85.9) and 65.7% (95% CI: 62.6-69.0). Two-year survival was not significantly different between both groups, 41.1% (95% CI: 37.2-45.3) versus 47.0% (95% CI: 43.6-60.6). Between 0 and 10 months, BRAFV600wild-type patients had a decreased survival with a hazard ratio for OS of 2.00 (95% CI: 1.62-2.46) but this effect disappeared after 10 months. At 12 months, BRAFV600-mutant patients had started with second-line systemic treatment more often compared with BRAFV600wild-type patients (50% vs. 19%).Conclusion:These results suggest that advanced BRAFV600wild-type melanoma patients have worse survival than BRAFV600-mutated patients during the first 10 months after diagnosis because of less available treatment options.

BackgroundMetastatic colorectal cancer patients with deficient mismatch repair (dMMR mCRC) benefit from immunotherapy. Interpretation of the single-arm immunotherapy trials is complicated by insignificant survival data during systemic non-immunotherapy. We present survival data on a large, comprehensive cohort of dMMR mCRC patients, treated with or without systemic non-immunotherapy.MethodsTwo hundred and eighty-one dMMR mCRC patients (n = 54 from three prospective Phase 3 CAIRO trials;n = 227 from the Netherlands Cancer Registry). Overall survival was analysed from diagnosis of mCRC (OS), from initiation of first-line (OS1) and second-line (OS2) systemic treatment. Cox regression analysis examined prognostic factors. As comparison for OS 2746 MMR proficient mCRC patients were identified.ResultsOf 281 dMMR patients, 62% received first-line and 26% second-line treatment. Median OS was 16.0 months (13.8–19.6) with antitumour therapy and 2.5 months (1.8–3.5) in untreated patients. OS1 was 12.8 months (10.7–15.2) and OS2 6.2 months (5.4–8.9) in treated dMMR patients. Treated dMMR patients had a 7.6-month shorter median OS than pMMR patients.ConclusionAvailable data from immunotherapy trials lack a control arm with standard systemic treatment. Given the poor outcome compared to the immunotherapy results, our data strongly suggest a survival benefit of immunotherapy in dMMR mCRC patients.

Simple Summary Rectal cancer patients with an initial (near) complete clinical response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy can be repeatedly assessed to see if a complete response endures. Up to 75% of these patients are able to avoid surgery and its related complications. However, the remaining 25% who ‘fail’ will eventually have to undergo surgery. Although recent studies have shown that patients undergoing delayed surgery have promising surgical and oncological outcomes, it is not known how these patients fare in terms of quality of life. The aim of this study was to compare quality of life between these immediate and delayed surgery groups through validated questionnaires. Our study including 51 patients shows no difference in quality of life, worry for cancer, or decision regret. Therefore, from a quality of life perspective, this study supports a repeated response assessment strategy after chemoradiotherapy for rectal carcinoma to identify all complete responders. Abstract Non operative management of complete clinical responders after neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer enjoys an increasing popularity because of the increased functional outcome results. Even a near complete response can evolve in a cCR, and therefore further delaying response assessment is accepted. However, up to 40% of patients will develop a regrowth and will eventually require delayed surgery. It is presently unknown if and to what extent quality of life of these patients is affected, compared to patients who undergo immediate surgery. Between January 2015-May 2020, 200 patients were treated with neoadjuvant therapy of whom 94 received TME surgery. Fifty-one (59%) of 87 alive patients returned the questionnaires: 33 patients who underwent immediate and 18 patients who underwent delayed surgery. Quality of life was measured through the QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29, and Cancer Worry Scale questionnaires. Regret to participate in repeated response assessment protocol was assessed through the Decision Regret Scale. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and a ‘known groups comparison’ was performed to assess QLQ questionnaires validity in this sample. Higher mean physical function scores (89.2 vs. 77.6, p = 0.03) were observed in the immediate surgery group, which lost significance after correction for operation type (p = 0.25). Arousal for men was higher in the delayed surgery group (20.0 vs. 57.1, p = 0.02). There were no differences between surgical groups for the other questionnaire items. Worry for cancer was lower in the delayed surgery group (10.8 vs. 14.0, p = 0.21). Regret was very low (12–16%). EFA reproduced most QLQ C-30 and CR29 subscales with good internal consistency. Quality of life is not impaired in patients undergoing delayed TME surgery after neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer. Moreover, there is very low regret and no increase in worry for cancer. Therefore, from a quality of life perspective, this study supports a repeated response assessment strategy after CRTx for rectal carcinoma to identify all complete responders.

For patients with newly diagnosed metastatic melanoma, rapid BRAF mutation (mBRAF) assessment is vital to promptly initiate systemic therapy. Additionally, blood-based biomarkers are desired to monitor and predict treatment response. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has shown great promise for minimally invasive mBRAF assessment and treatment monitoring, but validation studies are needed. This prospective study utilized longitudinal plasma samples at regular timepoints (0, 6, 12, 18 weeks) to address the clinical validity of ctDNA measurements in stage IV melanoma patients with elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH &gt, 250U/L) starting first-line systemic treatment. Using droplet digital PCR, the plasma mBRAF abundance was assessed in 53 patients with a BRAFV600 tissue mutation. Plasma mBRAF was detected in 50/51 patients at baseline (98% sensitivity, median fraction abundance of 19.5%) and 0/17 controls (100% specificity). Patients in whom plasma mBRAF became undetectable during the first 12–18 weeks of treatment had a longer progression-free survival (30.2 vs. 4.0 months, p &lt, 0.001) and cancer-specific survival (not reached vs. 10.2 months, 0.001) compared to patients with detectable mBRAF. The ctDNA dynamics outperformed LDH and S100 dynamics. These results confirm the clinical validity of ctDNA measurements as a minimally invasive biomarker for the diagnostic and monitoring trajectory of patients with LDH-high stage IV melanoma.

Introduction: Since current studies on locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) mainly report from single, high-volume centers, it is unclear if outcomes can be translated to daily clinical practice. This study provides treatment strategies and clinical outcomes within a multicenter cohort of unselected patients with LAPC.Materials and methods: Consecutive patients with LAPC according to Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group criteria, were prospectively included in 14 centers from April 2015 until December 2017. A centralized expert panel reviewed response according to RECIST v1.1 and potential surgical resectability. Primary outcome was median overall survival (mOS), stratified for primary treatment strategy.Results: Overall, 422 patients were included, of whom 77% (n = 326) received chemotherapy. The majority started with FOLFIRINOX (77%, 252/326) with a median of six cycles (IQR 4-10). Gemcitabine monotherapy was given to 13% (41/326) of patients and nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine to 10% (33/326), with a median of two (IQR 3-5) and three (IQR 3-5) cycles respectively. The mOS of the entire cohort was 10 months (95%CI 9-11). In patients treated with FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine monotherapy, or nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine, mOS was 14 (95%CI 13-15), 9 (95%CI 8-10), and 9 months (95%CI 8-10), respectively. A resection was performed in 13% (32/252) of patients after FOLFIRINOX, resulting in a mOS of 23 months (95%CI 12-34).Conclusion: This multicenter unselected cohort of patients with LAPC resulted in a 14 month mOS and a 13% resection rate after FOLFIRINOX. These data put previous results in perspective, enable us to inform patients with more accurate survival numbers and will support decision-making in clinical practice. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Simple Summary Melanoma is a malignant form of skin cancer. The overall survival of patients with advanced stages of disease were initially low. Fortunately, in recent years systemic treatment with immunotherapy has prolonged survival. We set out to answer the question whether men and women with advanced melanoma differ in prognostic factors, tumor-response to immunotherapy, and treatment-related adverse events. All patients in the Netherlands were registered between July 2013 and July 2018. We showed that although clinical and tumor characteristics differ, the safety profile of immunotherapy is comparable. Furthermore, overall, a 10% survival advantage for women was seen. Following immunotherapy there was no survival difference. Abstract Recent meta-analyses show conflicting data on sex-dependent benefit following systemic treatment for advanced melanoma patients. We examined the nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (July 2013–July 2018), assessing sex-dependent differences in advanced melanoma patients (stage IIIC/IV) with respect to clinical characteristics, mutational profiles, treatments initiated, grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs), treatment responses, and mortality. We included 3985 patients, 2363 men (59%) and showed that although men and women with advanced melanoma differ in clinical and tumor characteristics, the safety profile of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) is comparable. The data suggest a 10% survival advantage for women, mainly seen in patients ≥60 years of age and patients with BRAF V600 mutant melanoma. Following ICI there was no survival difference.

Contains fulltext : 229623.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) can cause severe and sometimes fatal immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Since these irAEs mimick immunological disease, a female predominance has been speculated on. Nevertheless, no demographic or tumour-related factors associated with an increased risk of irAEs have been identified until now. METHODS: Risk ratios of severe (grade ≥3) irAEs for age, sex, WHO performance status, number of comorbidities, stage of disease, number of metastases and serum lactate dehydrogenases (LDH) were estimated using data from anti-PD1-treated patients with advanced melanoma in the prospective nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. RESULTS: 111 (11%) out of 819 anti-programmed cell death 1 treated patients experienced severe irAEs. Patients with non-lung visceral metastases (stage IV M1c or higher) less often experienced severe irAEs (11%) compared with patients with only lung and/or lymph node/soft tissue involvement (stage IV M1b or lower; 19%; adjusted risk ratio (RR(adj)) 0.63; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.94). Patients with LDH of more than two times upper limit of normal had a non-significantly lower risk of developing severe irAEs than those with normal LDH (RR(adj) 0.65; 95% CI 0.20 to 2.13). None of the other variables were associated with severe irAEs. CONCLUSION: In patients with melanoma, more advanced disease is associated with a lower rate of severe irAEs. No association with sex was found.

Opportunities for surgical treatment in metastatic melanoma patients have re-emerged due to the development of novel systemic therapeutics over the past decade. The aim of this study is to present data on outcomes of surgery in patients with unresectable stage IIIC and IV melanoma, who have previously been treated with immunotherapy or targeted therapy. Data was extracted from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR) on 154 patients obtaining disease control to systemic therapy and undergoing subsequent surgery. Disease control was defined as a complete response (CR), which was seen in 3.2% of patients, a partial response (PR), seen in 46.1% of patients, or stable disease (SD), seen in 44.2% of patients. At a median follow-up of 10.0 months (interquartile range 4&ndash, 22) after surgery, the median overall survival (OS) had not been reached in our cohort and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.0 months (95% CI 6.3&ndash, 11.7). A CR or PR at first follow-up after surgery was associated with both a better OS and PFS compared to stable or progressive disease (p &lt, 0.001). We conclude that selected patients can benefit from surgery after achieving disease control with systemic therapy.

Immunotherapeutic and targeted drugs improved survival of patients with metastatic melanoma. There is, however, a lack of evidence regarding their healthcare costs in clinical practice. The aim of our study was to provide insight into real-world healthcare costs of patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma. Data were obtained from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry for patients who were registered between July 2012 and December 2018. Mean total/monthly costs per patient were reported for all patients, patients who did not receive systemic therapy, and patients who received systemic therapy. Furthermore, mean episode/monthly costs per line of therapy and drug were reported for patients who received systemic therapy. Mean total/monthly costs were &euro, 89,240/&euro, 6809: &euro, 7988/&euro, 2483 for patients who did not receive systemic therapy (n = 784) and &euro, 105,078/&euro, 7652 for patients who received systemic therapy (n = 4022). Mean episode/monthly costs were the highest for nivolumab plus ipilimumab (&euro, 79,675/&euro, 16,976), ipilimumab monotherapy (&euro, 79,110/&euro, 17,252), and dabrafenib plus trametinib (&euro, 77,053/&euro, 12,015). Dacarbazine yielded the lowest mean episode/monthly costs (&euro, 6564/&euro, 2027). Our study showed that immunotherapeutic and targeted drugs had a large impact on real-world healthcare costs. As new drugs continue entering the treatment landscape for (metastatic) melanoma, it remains crucial to monitor whether the benefits of these drugs outweigh their costs.

Background Thyroid nodules are very common in general medical practice, but rarely turn out to be a medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC). Calcitonin is a sensitive tumour marker for the detection of MTC (basal calcitonin). Sometimes a stimulation test is used to improve specificity (stimulated calcitonin). Although the European Thyroid Association's guideline advocates calcitonin determination in people with thyroid nodules, the role of routine calcitonin testing in individuals with thyroid nodules is still questionable. Objectives The objective of this review was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of basal and/or stimulated calcitonin as a triage or add-on test for detection of MTC in people with thyroid nodules. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science from inception to June 2018. Selection criteria We included all retrospective and prospective cohort studies in which all participants with thyroid nodules had undergone determination of basal calcitonin levels (and stimulated calcitonin, if performed). Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently scanned all retrieved records. We extracted data using a standard data extraction form. We assessed risk of bias and applicability using the QUADAS-2 tool. Using the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model, we estimated summary curves across different thresholds and also obtained summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity at a common threshold when possible. Main results In 16 studies, we identified 72,368 participants with nodular thyroid disease in whom routinely calcitonin testing was performed. All included studies performed the calcitonin test as a triage test. Median prevalence of MTC was 0.32%. Sensitivity in these studies ranged between 83% and 100% and specificity ranged between 94% and 100%. An important limitation in 15 of the 16 studies (94%) was the absence of adequate reference standards and follow-up in calcitonin-negative participants. This resulted in a high risk of bias with regard to flow and timing in the methodological quality assessment. At the median specificity of 96.6% from the included studies, the estimated sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI)) from the summary curve was 99.7% ( 68.8% to 100%). For the median prevalence of MTC of 0.23%, the positive predictive value (PPV) for basal calcitonin testing at a threshold of 10 pg/mL was 7.7% (4.9% to 12.1%). Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity for the threshold of 10 pg/mL of basal calcitonin testing was 100% (95% CI 99.7 to 100) and 97.2% (95% CI 95.9 to 98.6), respectively. For combined basal and stimulated calcitonin testing, sensitivity ranged between 82% and 100% with specificity between 99% and 100%. The median specificity was 99.8% with an estimated sensitivity of 98.8% (95% CI 65.8 to 100) . Authors' conclusions Both basal and combined basal and stimulated calcitonin testing have a high sensitivity and specificity. However, this may be an overestimation due to high risk of bias in the use and choice of reference standard The value of routine testing in patients with thyroid nodules remains questionable, due to the low prevalence, which results in a low PPV of basal calcitonin testing. Whether routine calcitonin testing improves prognosis in MTC patients remains unclear.

Vaccination with autologous dendritic cells (DC) loaded ex vivo with melanoma-associated antigens is currently being tested as an adjuvant treatment modality for resected locoregional metastatic (stage III) melanoma. Based on its mechanism of action, DC vaccination might potentiate the clinical efficacy of concurrent or sequential immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI). The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of ICI administered following recurrent disease during, or after, adjuvant DC vaccination. To this end, we retrospectively analyzed clinical responses of 51 melanoma patients with either irresectable stage III or stage IV disease treated with first- or second-line ICI following recurrence on adjuvant DC vaccination. Patients were analyzed according to the form of ICI administered: PD-1 inhibition monotherapy (nivolumab or pembrolizumab), ipilimumab monotherapy or combined treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab. Treatment with first- or second-line PD-1 inhibition monotherapy after recurrence on adjuvant DC vaccination resulted in a response rate of 52%. In patients treated with ipilimumab monotherapy and ipilimumab-nivolumab response rates were 35% and 75%, respectively. In conclusion, ICI is effective in melanoma patients with recurrent disease on adjuvant DC vaccination.

Contains fulltext : 225776.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) The efficacy of anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) monotherapy for advanced melanoma has been established, but it is unknown to what extent patients benefit in the real world. In this observational study with nationwide population-based data from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry, we analyzed real-world outcomes of first-line anti-PD-1 monotherapy in advanced melanoma patients diagnosed in 2015 to 2016. Overall survival (OS) was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Competing risks analysis was used to estimate probabilities for second-line treatment, with death as competing risk. With a Cox model, the association of factors with OS was estimated. Patients who received anti-PD-1 monotherapy (n=550) had a median age of 65 years and 502 (95%) patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0-1, 383 (70%) had normal lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), 370 (67%) had stage IV-M1c disease, and in 441 (81%), brain metastases were absent. The median OS was 24 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 20-30 mo]. The median OS of patients normally eligible for phase III trial participation was 31 months (95% CI: 23-not estimable). The BRAF mutation was associated with superior OS. ECOG PS of ≥1, symptomatic brain metastases, and liver metastases were associated with inferior OS and, together with elevated LDH, with death before second-line treatment. Patients with a complete response had a 2-year OS probability from first reported complete response of 92% (95% CI: 86%-99%). Real-world advanced melanoma patients in the Netherlands have benefitted from anti-PD-1 monotherapy. ECOG PS ≥1, symptomatic brain metastasis, liver metastasis, and elevated LDH are important prognostic factors for survival. The additional information that this study provides could help to improve more effective use in the real world.

Contains fulltext : 215533.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) The prognosis of patients with advanced melanoma has improved dramatically. However, the clinical outcomes of patients with highly elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) remain very poor. The aim of this study was to explore whether patients with normalized LDH after targeted therapy could benefit from subsequent treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI). Data from all patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma with a highly elevated serum LDH at baseline (>/=2x upper limit of normal) receiving first-line targeted therapy between 2012 and 2019 in the Netherlands were collected. Patients were stratified according to response status to targeted therapy and change in LDH at start of subsequent treatment with ICI. Differences in overall survival (OS) between the subgroups were compared using log-rank tests. After a median follow-up of 35.1 months, median OS of the total study population (n = 360) was 4.9 months (95% CI 4.4-5.4). Of all patients receiving subsequent treatment with ICI (n = 113), survival from start of subsequent treatment was significantly longer in patients who had normalized LDH and were still responding to targeted therapy compared to those with LDH that remained elevated (median OS 24.7 vs. 1.1 months). Our study suggests that introducing ICI upon response to targeted therapy with normalization of LDH could be an effective strategy in obtaining long-term survival in advanced melanoma patients with initial highly elevated serum LDH.

There is limited evidence on the costs associated with ipilimumab. We investigated healthcare costs of all Dutch patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma who were treated with ipilimumab. Data were retrieved from the nation-wide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Costs were determined by applying unit costs to individual patient resource use. A total of 807 patients who were diagnosed between July 2012 and July 2015 received ipilimumab in Dutch practice. The mean (median) episode duration was 6.27 (4.61) months (computed from the start of ipilimumab until the start of a next treatment, death, or the last date of follow-up). The average total healthcare costs amounted toOV0556;81 484, but varied widely (range:OV0556;18 131-OV0556;160 002). Ipilimumab was by far the most important cost driver (OV0556;73 739). Other costs were related to hospital admissions (OV0556;3323), hospital visits (OV0556;1791), diagnostics and imaging (OV0556;1505), radiotherapy (OV0556;828), and surgery (OV0556;297). Monthly costs for resource use other than ipilimumab wereOV0556;1997 (SD:OV0556;2629). Treatment-naive patients (n=344) had higher total costs compared with previously-treated patients (n=463;OV0556;85 081 vs.OV0556;78 811). Although patients with colitis (n=106) had higher costs for resource use other than ipilimumab (OV0556;11 426) compared with patients with other types of immune-related adverse events (n=90;OV0556;9850) and patients with no immune-related adverse event (n=611;OV0556;6796), they had lower total costs (OV0556;76 075 vs.OV0556;87 882 andOV0556;81 480, respectively). In conclusion, this nation-wide study provides valuable insights into the healthcare costs of advanced cutaneous melanoma patients who were treated with ipilimumab in clinical practice. Most of the costs were attributable to ipilimumab, but the costs and its distribution varied considerably across subgroups.

Contains fulltext : 174807.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: In recent years, the treatment of metastatic melanoma has changed dramatically due to the development of immune checkpoint and mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase inhibitors. A population-based registry, the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR), was set up in July 2013 to assure the safety and quality of melanoma care in the Netherlands. This article describes the design and objectives of the DMTR and presents some results of the first 2 years of registration. METHODS: The DMTR documents detailed information on all Dutch patients with unresectable stage IIIc or IV melanoma. This includes tumour and patient characteristics, treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, quality of life, healthcare utilisation, informal care and productivity losses. These data are used for clinical auditing, increasing the transparency of melanoma care, providing insights into real-world cost-effectiveness and creating a platform for research. RESULTS: Within 1 year, all melanoma centres were participating in the DMTR. The quality performance indicators demonstrated that the BRAF inhibitors and ipilimumab have been safely introduced in the Netherlands with toxicity rates that were consistent with the phase III trials conducted. The median overall survival of patients treated with systemic therapy was 10.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.1-11.1) in the first registration year and 12.7 months (95% CI 11.6-13.7) in the second year. CONCLUSION: The DMTR is the first comprehensive multipurpose nationwide registry and its collaboration with all stakeholders involved in melanoma care reflects an integrative view of cancer management. In future, the DMTR will provide insights into challenging questions regarding the definition of possible subsets of patients who benefit most from the new drugs.

Introduction Local treatment of metastases is frequently performed in patients with multiorgan metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) analogous to selected patients with oligometastatic disease for whom this is standard of care. The ORCHESTRA trial (NCT01792934) was designed to prospectively evaluate overall survival benefit from tumor debulking in addition to chemotherapy in patients with multiorgan mCRC. Here, we report the preplanned safety and feasibility evaluation after inclusion of the first 100 patients. Methods Patients were eligible if at least 80% tumor debulking was deemed feasible by resection, radiotherapy and/or thermal ablative therapy. In case of clinical benefit after three or four cycles of respectively 5‐fluorouracil/leucovorin or capecitabine and oxaliplatin ± bevacizumab patients were randomized to tumor debulking followed by chemotherapy in the intervention arm, or standard treatment with chemotherapy. Results Twelve patients dropped out prior to randomization for various reasons. Eighty‐eight patients were randomized to the standard (n = 43) or intervention arm (n = 45). No patients withdrew after randomization. Debulking was performed in 82% (n = 37). Two patients had no lesions left to treat, five had progressive disease, and one patient died prior to local treatment. In 15 patients (40%) 21 serious adverse events related to debulking were reported. Postoperative mortality was 2.7% (n = 1). After debulking chemotherapy was resumed in 89% of patients. Conclusion Tumor debulking is feasible and does not prohibit administration of palliative chemotherapy in the majority of patients with multiorgan mCRC, despite the occurrence of serious adverse events related to local treatment. Implications for Practice This first prospective randomized trial on tumor debulking in addition to chemotherapy shows that local treatment of metastases is feasible in patients with multiorgan metastatic colorectal cancer and does not prohibit administration of palliative systemic therapy, despite the occurrence of serious adverse events related to local treatment. The trial continues accrual, and overall survival (OS) data and quality of life assessment are collected to determine whether the primary aim of >6 months OS benefit with preserved quality of life will be met. This will support evidence‐based decision making in multidisciplinary colorectal cancer care and can be readily implemented in daily practice., The ORCHESTRA trial was designed to prospectively evaluate overall survival benefit from tumor debulking in addition to chemotherapy in patients with multi‐organ metastatic colorectal cancer. This article reports the preplanned safety and feasibility evaluation after inclusion of the first 100 patients.

Background Regorafenib prolonged overall survival (OS) versus placebo in patients with treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in phase III trials. We conducted an observational study of regorafenib for patients with mCRC in real-world clinical practice. Methods The international, prospective, CORRELATE study recruited patients with mCRC previously treated with approved therapies, for whom the decision to treat with regorafenib was made by the treating physician according to the local health authority approved label. The primary objective was safety, assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03). Results A total of 1037 patients were treated. The median age was 65 years (range: 24–93); 87% of patients had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0–1, 56% of patients had KRAS, 7% had NRAS and 4% had BRAF mutations. The initial regorafenib dose was 160 mg/day in 57% of patients. The most common grade III or IV drug-related TEAEs were fatigue (9%), hand–foot skin reaction (7%) and hypertension (6%). Drug-related grade V (fatal) TEAEs occurred in 1% of patients. Dose reductions for drug-related TEAEs occurred in 24% of patients. Median OS was 7.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.2–8.3), and median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.9 months (95% CI: 2.8–3.0). Conclusions In this real-world, observational study of patients with mCRC, the regorafenib toxicity profile was similar to that reported in phase III trials. The starting dose for almost half of patients was less than the approved 160-mg dose, and the median OS and PFS were in the range observed in phase III trials. Trial registration: NCT02042144.

Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary intraocular tumor in adults. Up to 50% of UM patients will develop metastases. We present data of 175 metastatic UM patients diagnosed in the Netherlands between July 2012 and March 2018. In our cohort, elevated lactate dehydrogenase level (LDH) is an important factor associated with poorer survival (Hazard Ratio (HR) 9.0, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 5.63&ndash, 14.35), and the presence of liver metastases is negatively associated with survival (HR 2.09, 95%CI 1.07&ndash, 4.08). We used data from the nation-wide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR) providing a complete overview of the location of metastases at time of stage IV disease. In 154 (88%) patients, the liver was affected, and only 3 patients were reported to have brain metastases. In 63 (36%) patients, mutation analysis was performed, showing a GNA11 mutation in 28.6% and a GNAQ mutation in 49.2% of the analyzed patients. In the absence of standard care of treatment options, metastatic UM patients are often directed to clinical trials. Patients participating in clinical trials are often subject to selection and usually do not represent the entire metastatic UM population. By using our nation-wide cohort, we are able to describe real-life treatment choices made in metastatic UM patients and 1-year survival rates in selected groups of patients.

Background Dual inhibition of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway with BRAF/MEK inhibitor (BRAFi/MEKi) therapy is a standard treatment for BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma and has historically been associated with grade III pyrexia or photosensitivity depending on the combination used. The objective of this study was to fully describe adverse events from the COLUMBUS study evaluating the most recent BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination encorafenib+binimetinib. Patients and methods Patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic BRAFV600-mutant melanoma were randomised to receive encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily, encorafenib 300 mg once daily or vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily. Adverse events that represent known effects of available BRAFi and/or MEKi were evaluated. Results The safety population included a total of 570 patients (encorafenib+binimetinib = 192; encorafenib = 192; vemurafenib = 186). Median duration of exposure was longer with encorafenib+binimetinib (51 weeks) than with encorafenib (31 weeks) or vemurafenib (27 weeks). Common BRAFi/MEKi toxicities with encorafenib+binimetinib were generally manageable, reversible and infrequently associated with discontinuation. Pyrexia was less frequent with encorafenib+binimetinib (18%) and encorafenib (16%) than with vemurafenib (30%) and occurred later in the course of therapy with encorafenib+binimetinib (median time to first onset: 85 days versus 2.5 days and 19 days, respectively). The incidence of photosensitivity was lower with encorafenib+binimetinib (5%) and encorafenib (4%) than with vemurafenib (30%). The incidence of serous retinopathy was higher with encorafenib+binimetinib (20%) than with encorafenib (2%) or vemurafenib (2%), but no patients discontinued encorafenib+binimetinib because of this event. Conclusion Encorafenib+binimetinib is generally well tolerated and has a low discontinuation rate in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma, with a distinct safety profile as compared with other anti-BRAF/MEK targeted therapies. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT01909453 ) and with EudraCT (number 2013-001176-38).

Neoadjuvant treatment consisting of five cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel with concurrent radiotherapy (41.4 Gy), followed by esophagectomy, is the standard treatment for resectable esophageal cancer in The Netherlands. It remains unclear whether intensification of neoadjuvant therapy leads to better outcomes. This study analyzed the outcomes of intensified chemoradiotherapy. We included patients who were deemed eligible for esophagectomy between January 2008 and December 2014. Neoadjuvant therapy consisted of six cycles of carboplatin (area under the curve = 2 mg/mL/min) and paclitaxel (50 mg/m2 of body surface area) and concurrent radiotherapy (50.4 Gy administered in 28 fractions of 1.8 Gy each, 5 days per week), followed by esophagectomy. Of the 176 patients included in this study, 73% underwent a resection. At a median follow-up of 29.3 months for the total cohort, median disease-free survival (DFS) was 22.5 months. DFS at 3 and 5 years was 42% and 36%, respectively, while the overall survival (OS) rates were 47% and 38%, respectively. In addition, the 5-year DFS and OS rates of our resection group were 44% and 48%, respectively. In 102 patients (58%), grade 3 or higher adverse events were observed, mainly hematological. The postoperative mortality rate within 30 days was 4%, and pathological complete response was achieved in 35% of patients. Intensification of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for patients with potentially resectable esophageal cancer is well tolerated, yielding high pathological complete response rates, but adverse events occurred frequently, and survival compared with conventional neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy seems similar. Therefore, intensification of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy should not be routinely used.

Contains fulltext : 209001.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of restaging completely resected stage IIIB/C melanoma prior to start of adjuvant therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty patients with stage IIIB or IIIC (AJCC 2009) melanoma who underwent complete surgical resection were screened for inclusion in our trial investigating adjuvant dendritic cell therapy (NCT02993315). All patients underwent imaging to exclude local relapse or metastasis before entering the trial. The frequency of recurrent disease within 12 weeks after resection and the method of detection were investigated. RESULTS: Sixty-nine (58%) stage IIIB and 51 (43%) stage IIIC melanoma patients were screened. Median age was 54 (range 27-79) years. Twenty-two (18%) of 120 patients with completely resected stage IIIB/C melanoma had evidence of early recurrent disease, despite exclusion thereof by prior imaging. Median interval between resection and detection of relapse was 7.4 (range 4.3-10.7) weeks. Recurrence was asymptomatic in 17 (77%) patients, but metastasis was noticed by the patient or physician in 5 (23%). Eight patients with local relapse received local treatment with curative intent, and one was treated with systemic therapy. The remaining patients had distant metastasis, 1 of whom underwent resection of a solitary liver metastasis while 12 patients received systemic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with completely resected stage IIIB/C melanoma have high risk of early recurrence before start of adjuvant therapy. Restaging should be considered for high-risk melanoma patients before start of adjuvant therapy.

TPS1589 Background: The emergence of immune checkpoint inhibitors has improved survival outcomes for patients with advanced melanoma. However, these treatment modalities are also associated with specific immune-related toxicities. These are often reversible after prompt recognition and initiation of appropriate management, but can result in severe morbidity and hamper health-related quality of life (HRQoL) if left undetected. Hence, accurate and regular monitoring of these patients is critical. Recent advances in mHealth technologies and the rapidly expanding armamentarium of wearable devices allow for real-time objective (vital signs and physical activity) data and patient-reported outcome measurement (PROMs) collection and, hence, serve this purpose. We hypothesize that collection of real-time objective data adds to the early detection of disease- and treatment-related adverse events. The primary objective of this study is to determine the feasibility of collecting real-time PROMs, vital signs, and physical activity data in advanced melanoma patients receiving immunotherapy using a comprehensive ambulatory monitoring platform (CAMP) that consists of a smartphone app, activity monitor, digital thermometer, and online dashboard for physicians. Methods: In this prospective multi-center trial, patients (n = 50) with advanced melanoma, scheduled to receive immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors, and with access to a smartphone are eligible for inclusion. Consenting patients will be asked to wear a FitBit Versa 2.0 during waking hours, collect daily temperature measurements using a Withings Smart Temporal thermometer, and answer weekly toxicity questionnaires (NCI PRO-CTCAE) using the smartphone app for the duration of the study (12 weeks). Primary outcome is feasibility in terms of (i) participation rates, (ii) wear-time, (iii) compliance rates with in-app questionnaires and temperature measurements, and (iv) satisfaction with the platform. Secondary exploratory outcomes include associations between CAMP-derived parameters and clinical outcomes: performance status (PS), HR-QoL scores (EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire), unplanned hospitalizations, physician-assessed adverse events, and 1-year survival outcomes. PS and HR-QoL will be rated at baseline, mid-study, and end-of-study. The occurrence of adverse events will be documented up to 12 months from baseline. Survival outcomes will be compared to a propensity score matched group from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Accrual has started in February 2021. Clinical trial information: NL8827.

10012 Background: Treatment of patients with BRAF V600–mutant melanoma includes BRAF/MEK-inhibitor combinations based on demonstrated benefits on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). To better understand the proportion of patients who derive long-lived benefit and their characteristics, we performed an updated analysis of OS and other endpoints from the COLUMBUS trial. Methods: In Part 1 of COLUMBUS, 577 patients with advanced/metastatic BRAF V600‒mutant melanoma, untreated or progressed after first-line immunotherapy, were randomized 1:1:1 to ENCO 450 mg QD + BINI 45 mg BID (COMBO450) vs VEM 960 mg BID (VEM) or ENCO 300 mg QD (ENCO300). An updated analysis including PFS, OS, objective response rate (ORR), and safety was conducted after an additional 24 months’ follow-up from the initial analysis. The study is ongoing. Results: At data cutoff (November 2019, as-is data), events had occurred in 65%, 59%, and 75% of patients in the COMBO450, ENCO300, and VEM treatment arms, respectively. Across arms, median follow-up for OS was 60.6 months (mo), with median OS of 33.6 mo (95% CI, 24.4–39.2) for COMBO450, 23.5 mo (95% CI, 19.6–33.6) for ENCO300, and 16.9 mo (95% CI, 14.0–24.5) for VEM. Compared to VEM, COMBO450 decreased the risk of death by 38% (HR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.49–0.79]). Updated median PFS was COMBO450, 14.9 mo (95% CI, 11.0–20.2), ENCO300, 9.6 mo (95% CI, 7.4–14.8), and VEM, 7.3 mo (95% CI, 5.6–7.9). PFS was longer for COMBO450 vs VEM (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.40–0.67]). A landmark analysis showed a higher rate of OS for COMBO450 at each year analyzed, with OS rates at 4 years of 39%, 37%, and 26% COMBO450, ENCO300, and VEM, respectively. Updated safety analysis confirmed the beneficial long-term tolerability of COMBO450. Conclusions: In the COLUMBUS trial, results for updated PFS and OS with COMBO450 continue to demonstrate long-term benefits in patients with BRAF V600‒mutated melanoma. Clinical trial information: NCT01909453.

10042 Background: A large proportion of patients with advanced melanoma is not represented in phase III clinical trials, due to ineligibility. Real-world efficacy evidence of immune- and targeted therapies in these patients is lacking. We aimed to provide insight in survival outcomes of systemically treated patients who were not represented in the phase III trials in order to support clinical decision-making. Methods: Systemically treated ineligible patients with advanced melanoma diagnosed between 2014-2017 were analyzed. Prognostic importance of factors associated with overall survival (OS) was assessed by Kaplan Meier method, Cox regression models, predicted OS probabilities of prognostic subgroups and a conditional inference survival (decision) tree. Results: Of 2,536 systemically treated patients with advanced melanoma, 1,004 (40%) patients were ineligible for phase IIII trials. Ineligible patients had a poorer median OS (mOS) compared to eligible patients (8.8 vs 23 months). Eligibility criteria most strongly correlated with survival in ineligible systemically treated patients with ECOG Performance Score (PS) ≥2 vs PS 0-1 (HR 1.95 (95%CI: 1.52-2.5)), symptomatic brain metastases (BM) vs absent BM (HR 1.71 (95%CI: 1.34-2.18)) and LDH > 500 U/l vs normal (HR 1.89 (95%CI: 1.49-2.41)). All other factors for ineligibility were not associated with OS. By combining ECOG PS, BM and LDH, 18 subgroups were created. The 3-year survival probability of patients with ECOG PS ≤1, asymptomatic BM and normal LDH was 35.1%. Patients with ECOG PS of ≥2 with or without symptomatic BM had a mOS of 6.5 and 11.3 months and a 3-year survival probability of 9.3% and 23.6% respectively. In the decision tree, the covariate with the strongest predictive distinctive character for survival was LDH, followed by ECOG PS. Prognosis of LDH of > 500 U/L is infaust, although still long-term survival is possible (3-year survival probability of 15.3%). The decision tree showed the prognosis of patients with symptomatic BM can be good if ECOG PS is 0 and patients are aged ≤55 years (mOS of 22.3 months). Conclusions: Patients with advanced melanoma not represented in phase III trials treated with systemic therapy can achieve long term survival. LDH was the strongest predictive factor associated with survival, followed by ECOG PS and symptomatic BM. Other factors for ineligibility were not associated with OS. These results, together with the decision tree, can be used to provide insight in outcomes to facilitate the shared decision-making process when comparative studies are not available.

The aim of this population-based study was to identify the factors associated with clinical outcomes in vemurafenib-treated patients and to evaluate outcomes across subgroups of patients with different risk profiles. Data were retrieved from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Time to next treatment (TTNT) and overall survival (OS) of all metastatic melanoma patients who received vemurafenib between 2012 and 2015 were assessed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. A risk score was developed on the basis of all prognostic factors associated with TTNT and OS derived from multivariable Cox regression analyses. Patients were stratified according to the presence of prognostic risk factors by counting the number of factors, ranging from 0 to 6. A total of 626 patients received vemurafenib with a median follow-up of 35.8 months. The median TTNT and OS were 4.7 months [95% confidence intervals (CI): 4.4-5.1] and 7.3 months (95% CI: 6.6-8.0). The strongest prognostic factors were serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score, number of organ sites involved and brain metastases. Patients with a favourable risk profile (no risk factors) had a median TTNT and OS of 7.1 (95% CI: 5.8-8.5) and 15.4 months (95% CI: 10.0-20.9). The median OS more than halved for patients with greater than or equal to 2 risk factors compared with patients with no risk factors. The clinical outcomes of vemurafenib in metastatic melanoma patients with a favourable risk profile are comparable with the results of the trials. Combining prognostic factors into a risk score could be valuable to stratify patients into favourable and poor-prognosis groups. Copyright (c) 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

539 Background: The anatomical location of the primary tumor has been associated with different prognosis and outcomes in mCRC. REG significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus placebo in patients with mCRC who progressed on standard therapies in phase 3 trials. We report the final results of outcomes in patients with mCRC with left-sided (L) or right-sided (R) primary tumors who were treated with REG in the real-world CORRELATE study. Methods: CORRELATE (NCT02042144) was a prospective, observational study designed to characterize the safety and effectiveness of REG in patients previously treated with approved therapies and for whom the decision to treat with REG was made by the treating physician according to the local health authority label. Patients with tumor location unknown or tumors in both regions were excluded (n = 62). OS was analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Overall, 975 patients were included in the analysis: L = 768 (79%) and R = 207 (21%). Most patients were ECOG PS 0–1 (L: 86%; R: 87%). Median time from initial diagnosis and from diagnosis of metastatic disease to REG treatment was slightly longer in L versus R tumors (34 vs 30 months and 27 vs 23 months, respectively). A higher proportion of patients with L versus R tumors, respectively, had prior radiotherapy (34% vs 15%) and a lower proportion had a partial colectomy (44% vs 75%). Both groups received a median of three prior regimens. REG treatment duration was similar in the two groups (median duration: L 2.6 months vs R 2.3 months), as was median progression-free survival (95% CI): 2.8 months (2.6, 2.9) for L tumors versus 2.7 months (2.5, 3.1) for R tumors. Median OS (95% CI) was 7.4 months (6.7, 8.0) for L tumors versus 8.2 months (6.6, 9.3) for R tumors; one-year OS rates were 32% versus 34%, respectively. Conclusions: Results from this observational study suggest that OS is similar in patients with L and R tumors treated with REG. Clinical trial information: NCT02042144.