Search

Background: Tebentafusp, a T-cell receptor-bispecific molecule that targets glycoprotein 100 and CD3, is approved for adult patients who are positive for HLA-A*02:01 and have unresectable or metastatic uveal melanoma. The primary analysis in the present phase 3 trial supported a long-term survival benefit associated with the drug., Methods: We report the 3-year efficacy and safety results from our open-label, phase 3 trial in which HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive tebentafusp (tebentafusp group) or the investigator's choice of therapy with pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine (control group), with randomization stratified according to the lactate dehydrogenase level. The primary end point was overall survival., Results: At a minimum follow-up of 36 months, median overall survival was 21.6 months in the tebentafusp group and 16.9 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.54 to 0.87). The estimated percentage of patients surviving at 3 years was 27% in the tebentafusp group and 18% in the control group. The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade in the tebentafusp group were rash (83%), pyrexia (76%), pruritus (70%), and hypotension (38%). Most tebentafusp-related adverse events occurred early during treatment, and no new adverse events were observed with long-term administration. The percentage of patients who discontinued treatment because of adverse events continued to be low in both treatment groups (2% in the tebentafusp group and 5% in the control group). No treatment-related deaths occurred., Conclusions: This 3-year analysis supported a continued long-term benefit of tebentafusp for overall survival among adult HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with previously untreated metastatic uveal melanoma. (Funded by Immunocore; IMCgp100-202 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03070392; EudraCT number, 2015-003153-18.)., (Copyright © 2023 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Purpose: We evaluated the activity of intratumoral Coxsackievirus A21 (V937) in 57 patients with unresectable stage IIIC or IV melanoma., Patients and Methods: In this multicenter, open-label, phase II study, patients received up to a total V937 dose of 3 × 10 8 TCID 50 (50% tissue culture infectious dose) in a maximum 4.0-mL volume by intratumoral injection. Ten sets of V937 injections were administered between days 1 and 127 (NCT01227551). Patients who had stable disease or were responding could continue treatment in an extension study (NCT01636882). Response and progression status were based on contrast-enhanced computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or caliper measurement and were categorized using immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (irRECIST). Other evaluations included monitoring of adverse events and serum levels of V937 and anti-V937 antibody titers. The primary efficacy end point was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate per irRECIST., Results: The primary efficacy end point, 6-month PFS rate per irRECIST, was 38.6% (95% CI, 26.0 to 52.4). Durable response rate (partial or complete response for ≥ 6 months) was 21.1% per irRECIST. Best overall response rate (complete plus partial response) was 38.6% (unconfirmed) and 28.1% (confirmed) per irRECIST. Regression of melanoma was observed in noninjected lesions. Based on Kaplan-Meier estimation, 12-month PFS was 32.9% (95% CI, 19.5 to 46.9) per irRECIST and 12-month overall survival was 75.4% (95% CI, 62.1 to 84.7). No treatment-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred. Viral RNA was detected in serum within 30 minutes of administration. Neutralizing antibody titers increased to > 1:16 in all patients after day 22, without effect on clinical or immunologic response., Conclusion: V937 was well tolerated and warrants further investigation for treatment of patients with unresectable melanoma. Studies of combination approaches with V937 and immune checkpoint inhibitors are ongoing., Competing Interests: Robert H. I. AndtbackaEmployment: Novartis, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Seven and Eight BiopharmaceuticalsStock and Other Ownership Interests: Novartis, Merck Sharp & Dohme Brendan CurtiHonoraria: Clinigen Group, NektarConsulting or Advisory Role: MerckResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb, Galectin Therapeutics, Clinigen GroupPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Biomarkers for OX40 responseTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Agonox Gregory A. DanielsHonoraria: Sanofi/RegeneronConsulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi/RegeneronSpeakers' Bureau: Regeneron, Array BioPharma, Sanofi/RegeneronResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb, Amgen, Viralytics, Nektar, Merck Sigrun HallmeyerLeadership: Association of Community Cancer Centers (ACCC)Honoraria: Cardinal HealthConsulting or Advisory Role: Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardinal Health, Array PharamceuticalSpeakers' Bureau: Bristol Myers SquibbTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Cardinal Health, Bristol Myers SquibbUncompensated Relationships: Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer Eric D. WhitmanConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol Myers Squibb, Castle Biosciences, Novartis, Eisai, PfizerSpeakers' Bureau: Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Castle Biosciences, Sanofi/RegeneronResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Castle Biosciences, Genentech/Roche, Amgen, TRACON Pharma, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Provectus, Oncolys BioPharma, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Dynavax Technologies, OncoSec, Toray Industries, Array BioPharmaPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Nerve monitoring dissection device, Lighted Polyhedral surgical retractor Jose LutzkyConsulting or Advisory Role: Castle Biosciences, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Replimune, RegeneronResearch Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Immunocore, Regeneron, Replimune, Vyriad Lynn E. SpitlerLeadership: Nuclear RNA Networks IncStock and Other Ownership Interests: Nuclear RNA Networks Inc Praveen K. BommareddyEmployment: ReplimuneStock and Other Ownership Interests: Replimune Mark GroseConsulting or Advisory Role: ImmVirX Meihua WangEmployment: MerckStock and Other Ownership Interests: Merck Cai WuEmployment: Merck (at the time the work was conducted)Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Merck Sharp & Dohme Howard L. KaufmanEmployment: ImmuneeringLeadership: ImmuneeringStock and Other Ownership Interests: ImmuneeringHonoraria: Society for Immunotherapy of CancerNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Background: Most patients with advanced melanomas relapse after checkpoint blockade therapy. Thus, immunotherapies are needed that can be applied safely early, in the adjuvant setting. Seviprotimut-L is a vaccine containing human melanoma antigens, plus alum. To assess the efficacy of seviprotimut-L, the Melanoma Antigen Vaccine Immunotherapy Study (MAVIS) was initiated as a three-part multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial. Results from part B1 are reported here., Methods: Patients with AJCC V.7 stage IIB-III cutaneous melanoma after resection were randomized 2:1, with stage stratification (IIB/C, IIIA, IIIB/C), to seviprotimut-L 40 mcg or placebo. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was the primary endpoint. For an hypothesized HR of 0.625, one-sided alpha of 0.10, and power 80%, target enrollment was 325 patients., Results: For randomized patients (n=347), arms were well-balanced, and treatment-emergent adverse events were similar for seviprotimut-L and placebo. For the primary intent-to-treat endpoint of RFS, the estimated HR was 0.881 (95% CI: 0.629 to 1.233), with stratified logrank p=0.46. However, estimated HRs were not uniform over the stage randomized strata, with HRs (95% CIs) for stages IIB/IIC, IIIA, IIIB/IIIC of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.37 to 1.19), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.35 to 1.50), and 1.19 (95% CI: 0.72 to 1.97), respectively. In the stage IIB/IIC stratum, the effect on RFS was greatest for patients <60 years old (HR=0.324 (95% CI: 0.121 to 0.864)) and those with ulcerated primary melanomas (HR=0.493 (95% CI: 0.255 to 0.952))., Conclusions: Seviprotimut-L is very well tolerated. Exploratory efficacy model estimation supports further study in stage IIB/IIC patients, especially younger patients and those with ulcerated melanomas., Trial Registration Number: NCT01546571., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CLS discloses research funding to his University from Merck, Celldex, and GlaxoSmithKline; research support in kind to his University from Theraclion, 3M, Merck, and Celldex; Scientific Advisory Board role with Immatics (prior), and Curevac; principal investigator role for Polynoma with compensation to his university, related to this manuscript; and patent royalties as co-inventor of peptides for use in cancer vaccines (patents held by the UVA Licensing and Ventures Group). KDL received research funding from Polynoma. JH served on an advisory board for Nektar and BMS in 2020. SNM has received research grants from BMS and from Sorrento Pharma. TB is receiving time and effort support from Genentech for a melanoma prevention study and is the principal investigator for melanoma clinical studies sponsored by Genentech, Amgen, and Replimune. JC serves as consultant/speaker for Amgen, BMS, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche. SGH serves as an advisor to Incyte. BC has received honoraria from Merck (DSMB member), Clinigen (Ad board), Nektar (Ad Board), research support from Galectin Therapeutics, Clinigen. BMS (to Institution) and AstraZeneca (to Institution). MOB discloses roles on Advisory boards (Merck, BMS, Novartis, EMD Serono, Sanofi, Pfizer, Immunocore, GSK); safety Review Committees (GSK, Adaptimmune), and research funding from Merck and Takara Bio. JL has received research funding to his institution from BMS, Immunocore, Polynoma, Iovance and has participated in advisory boards from Regeneron and Array. DM directly is on speaker’s bureaus for Pfizer, Merck, Astellas, and SeaGen. TS serves on Advisory boards for Immunocore and Castle Biosciences. EH is on the speakers’ bureaus for Amgen and Castle Biosciences. SK is on the speakers’ bureau for Janssen, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech, AstraZeneca. RW is on a Speaker’s bureau for AstraZeneca. ABe has served as an advisor to Cardinal Health and Castle Biosciences. ABa is a consultant/speaker for Regeneron, Castle Biosciences, and receives research funding to her institution from Polynoma, Castle Biosciences, Pellepharm. CM has received grants, ad board and speaker fees from Novartis, BMS, Merck and Pfizer. VG is an investor in Medocity. DB: Research support- Natera; served on advisory boards for Merck, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Oncocyte; speaker’s bureau-Janssen, Guardant. JJP is a paid consultant for Polynoma., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Uveal melanoma is a disease that is distinct from cutaneous melanoma, with a low tumor mutational burden and a 1-year overall survival of approximately 50% in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. Data showing a proven overall survival benefit with a systemic treatment are lacking. Tebentafusp is a bispecific protein consisting of an affinity-enhanced T-cell receptor fused to an anti-CD3 effector that can redirect T cells to target glycoprotein 100-positive cells., Methods: In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned previously untreated HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with metastatic uveal melanoma in a 2:1 ratio to receive tebentafusp (tebentafusp group) or the investigator's choice of therapy with single-agent pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine (control group), stratified according to the lactate dehydrogenase level. The primary end point was overall survival., Results: A total of 378 patients were randomly assigned to either the tebentafusp group (252 patients) or the control group (126 patients). Overall survival at 1 year was 73% in the tebentafusp group and 59% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37 to 0.71; P<0.001) in the intention-to-treat population. Progression-free survival was also significantly higher in the tebentafusp group than in the control group (31% vs. 19% at 6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.94; P = 0.01). The most common treatment-related adverse events in the tebentafusp group were cytokine-mediated events (due to T-cell activation) and skin-related events (due to glycoprotein 100-positive melanocytes), including rash (83%), pyrexia (76%), and pruritus (69%). These adverse events decreased in incidence and severity after the first three or four doses and infrequently led to discontinuation of the trial treatment (2%). No treatment-related deaths were reported., Conclusions: Treatment with tebentafusp resulted in longer overall survival than the control therapy among previously untreated patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. (Funded by Immunocore; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03070392; EudraCT number, 2015-003153-18.)., (Copyright © 2021 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: A pilot study of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) followed by high-dose interleukin-2 (IL-2) showed a higher than anticipated objective response rate (ORR) among patients with metastatic melanoma (MM). We performed a prospective randomized study to determine if the ORR of SBRT + IL-2 was greater than IL-2 monotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma., Methods: Patients with MM who had adequate physiological reserve for IL-2 and at least one site suitable for SBRT were eligible. There was a 1:1 randomization to SBRT + IL-2 or IL-2 monotherapy. Patients received one or two doses of SBRT (20 Gy per fraction) with the last dose administered 3 days before starting the first cycle of IL-2. IL-2 (600,000 IU per kg via intravenous bolus infusion) was given every 8 hours for a maximum of 14 doses with a second cycle after a 2-week rest. Responding patients received up to six IL-2 cycles. Patients assigned to IL-2 monotherapy who exhibited progression of melanoma after cycle 2 were allowed to crossover and receive SBRT and additional IL-2. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 criteria were applied to non-irradiated lesions for response assessment., Results: 44 patients were included in the analysis. The ORR in the SBRT + IL-2 group was 54%: 21% complete response (CR), 33% partial response (PR), 21% stable disease (SD) and 25% progressive disease (PD). The ORR in patients receiving IL-2 monotherapy was 35%: 15% CR, 20% PR, 25% SD and 40% PD. Seven patients assigned to IL-2 subsequently received SBRT + IL-2. One CR and two PRs were observed in the crossover group. There was no difference in progression-free or overall survival (OS). At 5 years the OS was 26% in the SBRT + IL-2 group and 25% in the IL-2 monotherapy group. The disease control rate (DCR) was higher in the SBRT + IL-2 group (75% vs 60%, p=0.34)., Conclusions: SBRT + IL-2 induced more objective responses with a higher DCR compared to IL-2 monotherapy in MM. IL-2 monotherapy resulted in a significantly higher ORR than anticipated. Some patients in the crossover group also achieved objective responses., Trial Registration Number: NCT01416831., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The safety, efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of the anti-programmed cell death-1 antibody MEDI0680 were evaluated in a phase I, multicenter, dose-escalation study in advanced solid malignancies., Methods: MEDI0680 was administered intravenously once every 2 weeks (Q2W) or once every 3 weeks at 0.1, 0.5, 2.5, 10 or 20 mg/kg. Two cohorts received 20 mg/kg once a week for 2 or 4 weeks, then 20 mg/kg Q2W. All were treated for 12 months or until progression. The primary endpoint was safety. Secondary endpoints were efficacy and pharmacokinetics. Exploratory endpoints included pharmacodynamics., Results: Fifty-eight patients were treated. Median age was 62.5 years and 81% were male. Most had kidney cancer (n = 36) or melanoma (n = 9). There were no dose-limiting toxicities. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 83% and were grade ≥ 3 in 21%. Objective clinical responses occurred in 8/58 patients (14%): 5 with kidney cancer, including 1 with a complete response, and 3 with melanoma. The relationship between dose and serum levels was predictable and linear, with apparent receptor saturation at 10 mg/kg Q2W and all 20 mg/kg cohorts., Conclusions: MEDI0680 induced peripheral T-cell proliferation and increased plasma IFNγ and associated chemokines regardless of clinical response. CD8+ T-cell tumor infiltration and tumoral gene expression of IFNG, CD8A, CXCL9, and granzyme K (GZMK) were also increased following MEDI0680 administration., Trial Registration: NCT02013804 ; date of registration December 12, 2013.

Background: Preclinical studies suggest that BRAF inhibitors enhance anti-tumor immunity and antigen presentation. Combination BRAF inhibition with immunotherapy is an appealing therapeutic approach. We sequenced vemurafenib with HD IL-2 in patients with BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma to improve long term outcomes., Methods: Eligible patients were HD IL-2 eligible with metastatic BRAF V600 mutated melanoma. Cohort 1 was treatment naïve and received vemurafenib 960 mg BID for 6 weeks before HD IL-2. Cohort 2 received vemurafenib for 7-18 weeks before enrollment. Both cohorts received HD IL-2 at 600,000 IU/kg every 8 h days 1-5 and days 15-19. The primary objective was to assess complete responses (CR) at 10 weeks ±3 (assessment 1) and 26 weeks ±3 (assessment 2) from the start of HD IL-2., Results: Fifty-three patients were enrolled, (cohort 1, n = 38; cohort 2, n = 15). Of these, 39 underwent assessment 1 and 15 assessment 2. The CR rate at assessment 1 was 10% (95% CI 3-24) for both cohorts combined, and 27% (95% CI 8-55) at assessment 2. Three-year survival was 30 and 27% for cohort 1 and cohort 2, respectively. No unexpected toxicities occurred. A shift in the melanoma treatment landscape during this trial adversely affected accrual, leading to early trial closure., Conclusions: Vemurafenib in sequence with HD IL-2 did not change the known toxicity profile for either agent. Lower than expected response rates to vemurafenib were observed. Overall response rates and durability of responses appear similar to that observed with HD IL-2 alone., Trial Registration: NCTN, NCT01683188. Registered 11 September 2012, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/NCT01683188.

Talimogene laherparepvec is a genetically modified herpes simplex virus-1-based oncolytic immunotherapy for the local treatment of unresectable cutaneous, subcutaneous, and nodal tumors in patients with melanoma recurrence following surgery. We aim to describe the safety of talimogene laherparepvec. Intralesional talimogene laherparepvec was administered at less than or equal to 4 ml×10 PFU/ml at protocol day 1, then less than or equal to 4 ml×10 PFU/ml 21 days later, and then every 14 days. Treatment continued until complete response, absence of injectable tumors, progressive disease, intolerance, or US Food and Drug Administration approval. Adverse events were graded during and 30 days after the end of treatment. Lesions suspected to have herpetic origin were tested for talimogene laherparepvec DNA by quantitative PCR (qPCR). Between September 2014 and October 2015, 41 patients were enrolled with stage IIIB (22%), IIIC (37%), IVM1a (34%), IVM1b (5%), and IVM1c (2%) melanoma. The median age was 72 (range: 32-96) years and 54% of the patients were men. Patients had an ECOG performance status of 0 (68%) or 1 (32%). The median treatment duration was 13.1 (3.0-41.1) weeks. Treatment-related adverse events of greater than or equal to grade 3 were reported in three (7.3%) patients and included vomiting, upper abdominal pain, chills, hyperhidrosis, nausea, pyrexia, and wound infection. Suspected herpetic lesions were swabbed in five (12%) patients. One of the five tested positive for talimogene laherparepvec DNA by qPCR, but this lesion had been injected previously with talimogene laherparepvec. During the study, five patients completed treatment because of complete response per investigators. In the clinical practice setting, talimogene laherparepvec has a safety profile comparable to that observed in previous clinical trials. Talimogene laherparepvec (IMLYGIC) is now approved in the US, European Union, and Australia.

Background: Immune related adverse events (irAEs) are associated with immunotherapy for cancer and while results suggest improvement in tumor control and overall survival in those experiencing irAEs, the long-term impact is debated. We evaluated irAE reports related to high dose interleukin-2 therapy (IL-2) documented in the PROCLAIM SM registry data base from 2008 to 2016 (NCT01415167, August 9, 2011)., Methods: Reports on 1535 patients, including 623 with metastatic melanoma (mM) and 919 with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC) (7 patients had both diseases), were queried for irAEs. The timing of the event was categorized as occurring before, during or after IL-2 or related to any checkpoint inhibitor (CPI). mM patients and mRCC patients were analyzed separately. Tumor control [complete + partial response + stable disease (CR + PR + SD) was compared between those experiencing no irAE versus those with the development of irAEs. Survival was analyzed by tumor type related to timing of irAE and IL-2, and in those with or without exposure to CPI., Results: Median follow-up was 3.5+ years (range 1-8+ years), 152 irAEs were reported in 130 patients (8.4% of all PROCLAIM SM patients): 99 (16%) in mM and 53 (5.8%) in mRCC patients. 31 irAEs occurred prior to IL-2, 24 during IL-2, and 97 after IL-2 therapy. 74 irAEs were attributed to IL-2 only (during/ after IL-2). Of the 97 post IL-2 irAEs, 24 were attributed to CPI, and 15 could not be distinguished as caused by IL-2 or CPI. Tumor control was 71% for those experiencing irAE, and 56% for those with no irAE (p = 0.0008). Overall survival was significantly greater for those experiencing irAEs during/ after IL-2 therapy, compared to those with no irAE or irAE before IL-2 therapy, in mM patients, median 48 months vs 18 months (p < 0.0001), and in mRCC patients, median 60 months vs 40 months (p = 0.0302), independent of CPI-related irAEs. IL-2-related irAEs were primarily vitiligo and thyroid dysfunction (70% of IL-2 related irAEs), with limited further impact., Conclusions: irAEs following IL-2 therapy are associated with improved tumor control and overall survival. IrAEs resulting from IL-2 and from CPIs are qualitatively different, and likely reflect different mechanisms of action of immune activation and response.

High-dose interleukin-2 (HD IL-2) was approved for treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in 1992 and for metastatic melanoma (mM) in 1998, in an era predating targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibitors. The PROCLAIM SM registry was established to collect and analyze data for patients treated with HD IL-2 in the current era. This analysis includes 170 patients with mM and 192 patients with mRCC treated between 2005 and 2012 with survival data current as of July 27, 2015. For patients with mM, complete response (CR) was observed in 5 %, partial response (PR) in 10 %, stable disease (SD) in 22 %, and 63 % had progressive disease (PD). The median overall survival (mOS) for these patients was 19.6 months, with a median follow-up of 43.1 months. The mOS was not reached for patients achieving CR or PR, and was 33.4 months for patients with SD. For patients with mRCC, 6 % achieved CR, 9 % had PR, 22 % had SD, and 62 % had PD. The mOS was 41 months, with a median follow-up of 46.6 months. The mOS for patients who had CR and PR was not reached and was 49.6 months for patients with SD. There were no treatment-related deaths among 362 patients. The duration of mOS for patients with mM and mRCC is longer than historically reported. These data support a continued role for IL-2 in the treatment of eligible patients with mM or mRCC and warrant further evaluation of HD IL-2 in combination or sequence with other therapeutic agents., Competing Interests: M. Wong, J. Clark, D. McDermott, H. Kaufman, G. Daniels, M. Morse, and J. Dutcher, author(s) of this publication serve as consultants for Prometheus Laboratories Inc., which markets the product related to the research being reported. A. Alva served as an advisory board member for Bayer, Eisai and Prometheus and has received research funding from Bayer, Genentech, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis, BMS, and Prometheus. H. Kaufman has received honoraria from Alkermes, Amgen, EMD Serono, Merck, Prometheus and Sanofi; served as an advisory board member at Prometheus and consultant for Alkermes, Amgen, EMD Serono, Merck and Sanofi; and served on the Merck Speaker’s Bureau. A. Morse has received honoraria from Genentech, Prometheus, Celgene, Ipsen, Novartis, and Lexxicon; has served as an advisory board member for Genentech, Prometheus, Celgene, Ipsen, Novartis, and Lexxicon; and served on the speaker’s board of Genentech, Prometheus, Celgene, and Novartis. J. Clark has received honoraria from Prometheus, BMS, Pfizer and Merck; has served as an advisory board member for Prometheus and Bayer-Onyx; and served on the speaker’s bureau for Prometheus, BMS and Merck. R. Hauke has received honoraria from Best Doctors for second opinion consultations. B. Curti has received honoraria from Prometheus; is an unpaid consultant for Agonox and Ubivac; served on the speaker’s bureau for Prometheus; has research support from Prometheus and Galectin Therapeutics; and received travel reimbursement from Agonox, BMS and Prometheus. R. Gonzalez has served as advisory board member for Bayer-Onyx, BMS, Genentech, GSK, Prometheus, Roche; has received research funding from Bayer, BMS, Eisai, Genentech, GSK, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus, Roche. M. Fishman has Research support in RCC-related trials from Acceleron, Altor, Aveo, Bayer, Eisai, Exelixis, GSK (now part of Novartis), Merck, Pfizer, Prometheus, Tracon; and participated in RCC-related advisory boards for Aveo, Bayer, Eisai, GSK (now part of Novartis), Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus. T. Logan has served as consulting or advisory role for Argos, Aveo, Bristo Myers Squibb, Celgene, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus, Wyeth; is on speaker’s bureau for BMS, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus; and has research funding from Abbott Labs, Abraxis, Acceleron, Amgen, Argos, AstraZeneca, Aveo, Biovex, BMS, Eisai, Eli Lilly, GSK, Hoffman-LaRoche, Immatics, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Prometheus, Roche, Synta, Threshold Pharmaceuticals, Millenium, Tracon, Cerulean, EMD Serono. JP Dutcher serves on speaker’s bureaus for Prometheus, Novartis, Pfizer; serves as consultant to Prometheus, Nektar, Lion; serves on data safety and monitoring boards for BMS, Tracon, PrECOG. H. Hua is an employee of Prometheus Laboratories Inc. S. Aung was an employee of Prometheus Laboratories Inc. and is currently an employee of Nektar Therapeutics. All other authors declare no conflict of interest. Ethical approval All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study formal consent is not required.

Purpose: Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is a herpes simplex virus type 1-derived oncolytic immunotherapy designed to selectively replicate within tumors and produce granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) to enhance systemic antitumor immune responses. T-VEC was compared with GM-CSF in patients with unresected stage IIIB to IV melanoma in a randomized open-label phase III trial., Patients and Methods: Patients with injectable melanoma that was not surgically resectable were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to intralesional T-VEC or subcutaneous GM-CSF. The primary end point was durable response rate (DRR; objective response lasting continuously ≥ 6 months) per independent assessment. Key secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and overall response rate., Results: Among 436 patients randomly assigned, DRR was significantly higher with T-VEC (16.3%; 95% CI, 12.1% to 20.5%) than GM-CSF (2.1%; 95% CI, 0% to 4.5%]; odds ratio, 8.9; P < .001). Overall response rate was also higher in the T-VEC arm (26.4%; 95% CI, 21.4% to 31.5% v 5.7%; 95% CI, 1.9% to 9.5%). Median OS was 23.3 months (95% CI, 19.5 to 29.6 months) with T-VEC and 18.9 months (95% CI, 16.0 to 23.7 months) with GM-CSF (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.00; P = .051). T-VEC efficacy was most pronounced in patients with stage IIIB, IIIC, or IVM1a disease and in patients with treatment-naive disease. The most common adverse events (AEs) with T-VEC were fatigue, chills, and pyrexia. The only grade 3 or 4 AE occurring in ≥ 2% of T-VEC-treated patients was cellulitis (2.1%). No fatal treatment-related AEs occurred., Conclusion: T-VEC is the first oncolytic immunotherapy to demonstrate therapeutic benefit against melanoma in a phase III clinical trial. T-VEC was well tolerated and resulted in a higher DRR (P < .001) and longer median OS (P = .051), particularly in untreated patients or those with stage IIIB, IIIC, or IVM1a disease. T-VEC represents a novel potential therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Background: The role of sentinel lymph node status (SLNS) in thick melanoma is evolving. The purpose of this study was to determine the prognostic value of SLNS in thick melanoma., Methods: A retrospective analysis of 120 prospectively collected clinically node-negative thick melanomas over 5 years was performed. Patient (age/sex) and tumor (thickness, ulceration, SLNS, mitoses, metastases, and recurrence) features were collected. Multivariate analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazard model., Results: Factors predictive of positive SLN included male sex, ulceration, and high mitoses. Factors associated with positive SLN had higher local-regional recurrence and metastases than negative SLN. SLNS and tumor thickness impacted 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Positive SLN, ulceration, age, and mitoses were independent predictors of DFS/OS., Conclusions: Nonulcerated/lower mitoses thick melanomas had lower positive SLN rates. Positive SLN develop recurrence and metastases and have worse OS/DFS. SLNS is an important prognosticator for OS/DFS. Sentinel lymph node biopsy delineates prognostic groups in thick melanomas and can impact management., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: This open-label, multicenter study was designed to allow access to vemurafenib for patients with metastatic melanoma, bridging the time between end of enrollment in the phase III registration trial (December 2010) and commercial availability following US Food and Drug Administration approval of vemurafenib for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic BRAF-mutated melanoma (August 2011)., Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had metastatic melanoma with a BRAF mutation (detected by the cobas 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test). Unlike previous vemurafenib trials, patients with poor performance status (PS) and treated brain metastases were permitted. Enrolled patients received oral vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily., Results: Of 374 patients enrolled at 29 US sites (December 2010 to October 2011), 371 patients received vemurafenib and were followed up for a median of 2.8 months (the study had a prespecified end upon vemurafenib approval and commercial availability). At baseline, most patients (75%) had stage M1c disease, and 19% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS of 2 or 3; 72% of patients had received prior systemic therapy for metastatic melanoma, 27% received prior ipilimumab, and 29% radiotherapy for prior brain metastases. Because reassessment data to confirm response were not available for most patients, point estimates of objective response rate (ORR) are reported. Among 241 efficacy-evaluable patients, the ORR was 54% (median time to response, 1.9 months). The ORR in non-central nervous system sites in patients with previously treated brain metastases (n = 68) was 53%. The ORR in prior ipilimumab-treated patients (n = 68) was 52%. For patients with PS of 0 or 1 (n = 210) and 2 or 3 (n = 31), the ORRs were 55%, and 42%, respectively. The safety profile observed was consistent with that reported in previous studies. The number of patients with grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events was higher in patients with PS 2 or 3 than in those with PS 0 or 1 (10% vs. 5%, respectively). Adverse events requiring a dose reduction (at least 1 level) occurred in 11% of patients, and 9 patients (2%) experienced events leading to vemurafenib withdrawal, including 2 with repeated QT interval prolongation., Discussion: This study confirmed the established rapid and high tumor response rate achievable with vemurafenib in BRAF mutation-positive metastatic melanoma. Several groups not included in previous studies, including patients with previously treated brain metastases, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS 2 to 3, or previous ipilimumab treatment had benefitted from vemurafenib similar to the overall population. No new safety signals were detected.

Immunotherapy is associated with durable clinical benefit in patients with melanoma. The goal of this article is to provide evidence-based consensus recommendations for the use of immunotherapy in the clinical management of patients with high-risk and advanced-stage melanoma in the USA. To achieve this goal, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer sponsored a panel of melanoma experts--including physicians, nurses, and patient advocates--to develop a consensus for the clinical application of tumour immunotherapy for patients with melanoma. The Institute of Medicine clinical practice guidelines were used as a basis for this consensus development. A systematic literature search was performed for high-impact studies in English between 1992 and 2012 and was supplemented as appropriate by the panel. This consensus report focuses on issues related to patient selection, toxicity management, clinical end points and sequencing or combination of therapy. The literature review and consensus panel voting and discussion were used to generate recommendations for the use of immunotherapy in patients with melanoma, and to assess and rate the strength of the supporting evidence. From the peer-reviewed literature the consensus panel identified a role for interferon-α2b, pegylated-interferon-α2b, interleukin-2 (IL-2) and ipilimumab in the clinical management of melanoma. Expert recommendations for how to incorporate these agents into the therapeutic approach to melanoma are provided in this consensus statement. Tumour immunotherapy is a useful therapeutic strategy in the management of patients with melanoma and evidence-based consensus recommendations for clinical integration are provided and will be updated as warranted.

Background: Stimulating an immune response against cancer with the use of vaccines remains a challenge. We hypothesized that combining a melanoma vaccine with interleukin-2, an immune activating agent, could improve outcomes. In a previous phase 2 study, patients with metastatic melanoma receiving high-dose interleukin-2 plus the gp100:209-217(210M) peptide vaccine had a higher rate of response than the rate that is expected among patients who are treated with interleukin-2 alone., Methods: We conducted a randomized, phase 3 trial involving 185 patients at 21 centers. Eligibility criteria included stage IV or locally advanced stage III cutaneous melanoma, expression of HLA*A0201, an absence of brain metastases, and suitability for high-dose interleukin-2 therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive interleukin-2 alone (720,000 IU per kilogram of body weight per dose) or gp100:209-217(210M) plus incomplete Freund's adjuvant (Montanide ISA-51) once per cycle, followed by interleukin-2. The primary end point was clinical response. Secondary end points included toxic effects and progression-free survival., Results: The treatment groups were well balanced with respect to baseline characteristics and received a similar amount of interleukin-2 per cycle. The toxic effects were consistent with those expected with interleukin-2 therapy. The vaccine-interleukin-2 group, as compared with the interleukin-2-only group, had a significant improvement in centrally verified overall clinical response (16% vs. 6%, P=0.03), as well as longer progression-free survival (2.2 months; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7 to 3.9 vs. 1.6 months; 95% CI, 1.5 to 1.8; P=0.008). The median overall survival was also longer in the vaccine-interleukin-2 group than in the interleukin-2-only group (17.8 months; 95% CI, 11.9 to 25.8 vs. 11.1 months; 95% CI, 8.7 to 16.3; P=0.06)., Conclusions: In patients with advanced melanoma, the response rate was higher and progression-free survival longer with vaccine and interleukin-2 than with interleukin-2 alone. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00019682.).

Purpose: The aim of this study was to characterize the primary gp100(209-2M)-specific T-cell response in vaccine-draining, metastases-free lymph nodes and peripheral blood of peptide-vaccinated stage I to III melanoma patients., Experimental Design: After two or three gp100(209-2M) vaccinations, sentinel lymph nodes that drained both the primary tumor and adjacent vaccine sites were excised concomitant with wide excision of the tumor. Comparative 7-color flow cytometry phenotype analysis was done on gp100 tetramer-positive CD8(+) T cells from sentinel lymph nodes, closely proximate time-related peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) collected 2 to 4 weeks after sentinel lymph node excision, and on PBMC collected 6 months later after 7 or 11 more immunizations. Lymph node and peripheral blood T cells were tested for proliferative response, functional avidity, and tumor cell-induced CD107 mobilization., Results: The frequencies of gp100-specific CD8(+) T cells from time-related PBMC and sentinel lymph nodes were comparable and were similar to those reported for virus-specific memory T cells. Their respective in vitro proliferation responses were also equivalent but statistically higher than proliferation responses of peripheral blood T cells collected after completion of the entire vaccine regimen. By contrast, functional avidity and CD107 responses were significantly higher in circulating T cells. Sentinel lymph node-derived, gp100-specific CD8(+) T cells predominantly expressed central and effector memory phenotype signatures, whereas there were higher frequencies of effector T cells in the peripheral blood., Conclusion: Priming immunization with gp100(209-2M) without coadministration of CD4(+) helper T cell-restricted antigens induced the effective expansion of peptide-specific central and effector memory CD8(+) T cells with high proliferation potential in vaccine-draining lymph nodes of stage I to III melanoma patients. Lymph node memory T cells gave rise to circulating gp100-specific effector T cells exhibiting increased functional maturation.

Background: The combination of temozolomide (TMZ) and thalidomide was reported to produce a high response rate, including shrinkage of brain metastases, in patients with metastatic melanoma. The authors tested the efficacy of a regimen including TMZ, thalidomide, and whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) in patients with brain (CNS) metastases from melanoma., Methods: Patients with melanoma, CNS metastases documented by magnetic resonance imaging, and no prior systemic chemotherapy received WBRT, 30 Gray in 10 fractions, Days 1 to 5 and 8 to 12; TMZ, 75 mg/m(2)/day, Weeks 1 to 6; and thalidomide, 100 mg/day, Weeks 1 to 4, then escalated by 100 mg/day at Weeks 5, 7, and 9 as tolerated to a maximum of 400 mg/day. CNS and systemic tumor response was assessed at Week 10. Patients without CNS or clinically significant systemic disease progression received additional cycles of TMZ at 10-week intervals., Results: Thirty-nine patients received treatment, and 3 exhibited CNS response (1 complete response, 2 partial responses) (response rate, 7.6%; 95% confidence interval, 0.7%-16.1%), all unconfirmed by repeat imaging. Seven patients had stable CNS disease at 10 weeks. No patient exhibited a systemic response. Only 4 patients received 2 cycles of therapy, and just 1 received 3. Median time to progression was 7 weeks, and median overall survival was 4 months. Grade 3-4 side effects included deep venous thrombosis (3), pulmonary embolism (1), and CNS events (12). Eighteen (45%) patients required admission for side effects (7) and/or symptomatic disease progression (11)., Conclusions: The efficacy of TMZ, thalidomide, and WBRT in the treatment of CNS metastatic melanoma is low. Other treatment approaches should be considered for this patient population., ((c) 2008 American Cancer Society.)

We conducted a phase II randomized trial of recombinant granculocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) administered before topotecan chemotherapy to determine whether it could prevent myelosuppression and to determine the antitumor activity of this topoisomerase I inhibitor in 53 patients with metastatic malignant melanoma and renal cell cancer. All patients received GM-CSF after topotecan at a dose of 250 microg/m(2) daily for at least 8 days. Patients randomly assigned to receive GM-CSF priming were treated with GM-CSF at 250 microg/m(2) twice daily for 5 days before treatment. Twenty-five patients were randomly assigned to receive GM-CSF priming and 28 to receive topotecan without priming. The primary analysis was restricted to the protective effects seen during the first cycle of therapy. Grade 4 neutropenia occurred in 8 of 23 patients (35%) and grade 3 neutropenia in 5 of 23 patients (22%) randomized to GM-CSF priming, whereas 18 of 26 (69%) and 5 of 26 (19%) patients experienced grade 4 or 3 neutropenia, respectively, without GM-CSF priming (P =.0074). The mean duration of neutropenia was reduced by GM-CSF priming: grade 3 neutropenia from 5.2 +/- 0.7 to 2.8 +/- 0.7 days (P =.0232) and grade 4 neutropenia from 2.7 +/- 0.6 to 1.1 +/- 0.4 days (P = 0.0332). The protective effects of GM-CSF extended to the second cycle of treatment. The incidence of febrile neutropenia was also reduced. Chemotherapy-induced anemia and thrombocytopenia were similar in both groups. One partial response was seen in a patient with melanoma, and one patient with renal cell cancer had complete regression of pulmonary metastases and was rendered disease-free by nephrectomy. (Blood. 2001;97:1942-1946)

The purpose of this trial was to determine the toxicity and antineoplastic activity of cisplatin, carboplatin, tamoxifen, and interferon-alpha (IFN-alpha) in patients with advanced melanoma. Eleven patients with metastatic melanoma were enrolled. The patients received carboplatin 400 mg/m2 i.v. on day 0; cisplatin 25 mg/m2 i.v. on days 7, 14, and 21; tamoxifen 20 mg p.o. b.i.d. on days 0-27; and interferon-alpha 5 million units/m2 subcutaneously 3 times per week. Cycles were repeated every 28 days. Patients were assessed for tumor response at the end of 2 cycles. Toxicity was severe, with 14 of 24 cycles given requiring some form of dose reduction. Carboplatin dose reductions were related to bone-marrow toxicity, whereas IFN-alpha caused fatigue, arthralgias, myalgias, and fever. The overall response rate was 18% (2 partial responses [PRs]). The combination of cisplatin, carboplatin, tamoxifen, and IFN-alpha is active in advanced melanoma; however, the toxicity is unacceptable.

Background: The rising incidence of malignant melanoma and the lack of curative therapies for metastatic disease represent a therapeutic challenge. New agents effective in treating this disease are needed., Purpose: Because of the additive antitumor effects of interleukin 1 alpha (IL-1 alpha) and indomethacin in vivo, we conducted a phase II trial of this combination in patients with melanoma. We used the recommended dose determined from our phase I trial to ascertain the antitumor activity of the combination., Methods: From August 1, 1990, through July 28, 1992, 49 patients entered the study. They were stratified into two groups based on the presence of visceral (n = 14) and nonvisceral (n = 35) metastases. The patients received 7 days of both IL-1 alpha (O.1 micrograms/kg per day by intravenous bolus) infusion) and indomethacin (50 mg orally every 8 hours). At least two cycles of therapy, repeated at 21-day intervals, were planned. Additional treatment was given to those patients who had stable or responding lesions. A chi-squared test for homogeneity of proportions was used to compare groups on several measures. All P values resulted from two-sided tests., Results: Fever, chills, and hypotension were among the most common side effects. None of the 14 patients with visceral metastases responded to the treatment. Of the 35 patients with non-visceral metastases, three showed a partial response for 6 months each and one showed a complete response for more than 34 months; the response rate was 11% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 5%-26%). All responding patients required phenylephrine for treatment of IL-1 alpha-induced hypotension, whereas six (19%) of 31 of the nonresponding patients with nonvisceral metastases required phenylephrine (P = .0008). The response rate in women was higher; three of 10 women (30%; 95% CI = 11%-60%) responded, whereas one of 25 men (4%; 95% CI = 0%-20%) responded (P = .029). All three women were positive for human leukocyte antigen (HLA) B7 expression (P = .011)., Conclusions: The combination of IL-1 alpha and indomethacin has minimal antitumor activity in melanoma patients. All responses were confined to patients with nonvisceral metastases. IL-1 alpha-induced hypotension, gender, and HLA B7 expression were positively associated with response., Implications: Administration of higher doses of IL-1 alpha alone has been shown to produce hypotension in a large proportion of patients but can be given safely with phenylephrine support. Because of the association of hypotension with antitumor activity, treatment with higher IL-1 alpha doses alone may be a strategy for attaining better response rates.

We have recently described molecular changes in T cells from tumor-bearing patients that are associated with depressed immune function. The present work investigates changes in T-cell signal transduction proteins including the T-cell receptor-zeta (TCR-zeta) chain and receptor-associated tyrosine kinases in patients with metastatic malignant melanoma. A marked decrease in the expression of the TCR-zeta chain was observed in the peripheral blood T cells of 19 (43%) of 44 patients. Decreases in several tyrosine kinases were found in 12 (57%) of 21 patients tested. T cells from patients with diminished TCR-zeta chain expression also showed statistically significant differences in cytokine production pattern, with lower interleukin 2 and IFN-zeta production compared with normal subjects and melanoma patients with normal TCR-zeta chain status. The overall survival of melanoma patients with low TCR-zeta chain expression was significantly shorter than that of patients with normal TCR-zeta chain expression (P = 0.0013). TCR-zeta-deficient patients showed a trend toward having faster growing tumors. There was no correlation between the pretreatment TCR-zeta chain status and albumin or performance status. These findings suggest that alterations in T-cell function occur commonly in melanoma patients and may be independent predictors of clinical outcome.

Interstitial pressure (IP) is a physiological variable that may have its greatest influence on the transport of high-molecular-weight therapeutic agents. IP in tumor nodules was measured in patients with metastatic melanoma or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma to determine the influence of this physiological variable on treatment outcome. The wick-in-needle technique was used to measure IP at time points before and after treatment with a variety of immunotherapy and chemotherapy regimens. Selected patients had IP measurements during chemotherapy or immunotherapy infusions. Ultrasound or computed tomography was used to evaluate the size of the studied lesions and their relationship to normal structures. The mean baseline IP in melanoma nodules (n = 22) and lymphoma nodules (n = 7) was 29.8 and 4.7 mm Hg, respectively (P = 0.013 for the difference between tumor types). In a subset of melanoma nodules for which IP had been measured before and after treatment, the IP increased significantly over time for nonresponding melanoma lesions from a baseline of 24.4 to 53.9 mm Hg after treatment (P = 0.005) and decreased in melanoma lesions that responded to treatment where the mean baseline and post-treatment IPs were 12.2 and 0 mm Hg, respectively (P = 0.001 for the difference in IP profiles between responding and nonresponding lesions). Six of seven lymphoma nodules responded completely to chemotherapy or radiation. The single nodule that did not respond had a baseline IP of 1 mm Hg that increased to 30 mm Hg after treatment. Tumor IP differs significantly between melanoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. The changes in IP over time differ significantly between responding and nonresponding melanoma lesions. IP that increases during treatment appears to be associated with tumor progression in these tumor types.