Search

Since the introduction of BRAF(/MEK) inhibition and immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI), the prognosis of advanced melanoma has greatly improved. Melanoma is known for its remarkably long time to first distant recurrence (TFDR), which can be decades in some patients and is partly attributed to immune-surveillance. We investigated the relationship between TFDR and patient outcomes after systemic treatment for advanced melanoma. We selected patients undergoing first-line systemic therapy for advanced melanoma from the nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. The association between TFDR and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed by Cox proportional hazard regression models. The TFDR was modeled categorically, linearly, and flexibly using restricted cubic splines. Patients received anti-PD-1-based treatment (n = 1844) or BRAF(/MEK) inhibition (n = 1618). For ICI-treated patients with a TFDR 5 years (P = .014). Patients treated with BRAF(/MEK) inhibition with a longer TFDR also had a significantly longer median OS (8.6 months for TFDR 5 years, P = .004). The hazard of dying rapidly decreased with increasing TFDR until approximately 5 years (HR 0.87), after which the hazard of dying further decreased with increasing TFDR, but less strongly (HR 0.82 for a TFDR of 10 years and HR 0.79 for a TFDR of 15 years). Results were similar when stratifying for type of treatment. Advanced melanoma patients with longer TFDR have a prolonged PFS and OS, irrespective of being treated with first-line ICI or targeted therapy.

Invasive lobular breast cancer (ILC) is the second most common histological breast cancer subtype, but ILC-specific trials are lacking. Translational research revealed an immune-related ILC subset, and in mouse ILC models, synergy between immune checkpoint blockade and platinum was observed. In the phase II GELATO trial (NCT03147040), patients with metastatic ILC were treated with weekly carboplatin (area under the curve 1.5 mg ml–1 min–1) as immune induction for 12 weeks and atezolizumab (PD-L1 blockade; triweekly) from the third week until progression. Four of 23 evaluable patients had a partial response (17%), and 2 had stable disease, resulting in a clinical benefit rate of 26%. From these six patients, four had triple-negative ILC (TN-ILC). We observed higher CD8+ T cell infiltration, immune checkpoint expression and exhausted T cells after treatment. With this GELATO trial, we show that ILC-specific clinical trials are feasible and demonstrate promising antitumor activity of atezolizumab with carboplatin, particularly for TN-ILC, and provide insights for the design of highly needed ILC-specific trials.

Introduction: When analysing patient survival, one is often interested in cause of death. Little is known about the presence of population mortality in advanced melanoma pa-tients. The aim of this study was to assess population mortality after different response states in advanced melanoma patients in the Netherlands, and analyse the contribution of disease and population mortality for different age groups.Methods: We selected patients diagnosed between 2013 and 2019 with unresectable IIIC or stage IV melanoma, registered in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. A multi-state model with response states integrating population mortality was fitted. One-year landmark an-alyses were performed to assess outcomes after each response state.Results: Overall, 5119 patients were selected. Five-year probabilities of melanoma-related mortality in patients alive in complete response at one year after diagnosis increased with age, and was 17.2% (95% confidence interval: 13.0-21.4) for patients aged 80 years. Population mortality only played a large role for older patients (75 years and above) alive at 1 year after diagnosis with a partial or complete response.Conclusion: Even though survival outcomes of advanced melanoma patients have improved over the last decade, the vast majority of patients still die due to melanoma-related mortality. 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Cross-presentation of tumor antigens by dendritic cells (DC) is crucial to prime, stimulate and restimulate CD8+ T cells. This process is important in initiating and maintaining an antitumor response. Here, we show that the presence of conventional type 1 DCs (cDC1), a DC subtype that excels in cross-presentation, in the tumor correlated with response to neoadjuvant immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in melanoma. This led us to hypothesize that patients failing to respond to ICB could benefit from enhanced cross-presentation of tumor antigens. We therefore established a cross-presentation assay to screen over 5,500 compounds for enhancers of DC cross-presentation using induced T-cell proliferation as the readout. We identified 145 enhancers, including AZD5582, an antagonist of inhibitor of apoptosis proteins (IAP) cIAP1, cIAP2, and XIAP. AZD5582 treatment led to DC activation of the noncanonical NF-kB pathway, enhanced antigen import from endolysosomes into the cytosol, and increased expression of genes involved in cross-presentation. Furthermore, it upregulated expression of CD80, CD86, MHC class II, CD70 and secretion of TNF by DCs. This enhanced DC activation and maturation program was observed also in tumor-bearing mice upon AZD5582 treatment, culminating in an increased frequency of systemic tumor antigen–specific CD8+ T cells. Our results merit further exploration of AZD5582 to increase antigen cross-presentation for improving the clinical benefit of ICB in patients who are unlikely to respond to ICB.

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies have dramatically improved outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma, but approximately half these patients will not have a durable benefit. Phase 1-2 trials of adoptive cell therapy with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have shown promising responses, but data from phase 3 trials are lacking to determine the role of TILs in treating advanced melanoma. METHODS: In this phase 3, multicenter, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients with unresectable stage IIIC or IV melanoma in a 1:1 ratio to receive TIL or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 therapy (ipilimumab at 3 mg per kilogram of body weight). Infusion of at least 5×10(9) TILs was preceded by nonmyeloablative, lymphodepleting chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide plus fludarabine) and followed by high-dose interleukin-2. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 168 patients (86% with disease refractory to anti-programmed death 1 treatment) were assigned to receive TILs (84 patients) or ipilimumab (84 patients). In the intention-to-treat population, median progression-free survival was 7.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2 to 13.1) in the TIL group and 3.1 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 4.3) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.72; P

To assess efficacy and toxicity of combination immunotherapy with ipilimumab plus nivolumab in routine practice in a retrospective multicentre cohort of patients with advanced melanoma.This retrospective analysis included patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab between October 2015 and January 2020 at six centres in Australia, Europe and the United States of America. We describe efficacy outcomes (overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS] and objective response rate [ORR]) in treatment-naïve and pre-treated patients, with and without brain metastases, plus treatment-related adverse events (trAEs) in all patients treated.A total of 697 patients were identified; 472 were treatment-naïve of which 138 (29.2%) had brain metastases, and 225 were previously treated of which 102 (45.3%) had brain metastases. At baseline, 32.3% had stage M1c and 34.4% stage M1d disease. Lactate dehydrogenase was high in 280 patients (40.2%). With a median follow-up of 25.9 months, median OS in the 334 treatment-naïve patients without brain metastases was 53.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 40.8-NR) and 38.7 months (95% CI 18.6-NR) for the 138 treatment-naïve patients with brain metastases. For the entire cohort the ORR was 48%, for treatment-naïve patients without brain metastases ORR was 56.6% with a median PFS of was 13.7 months (95% CI 9.6-26.5). Median PFS was 7.9 months (95% CI 5.8-10.4) and OS 38 months (95% CI 31-NR) for the entire cohort. Grade 3-4 trAE were reported in 44% of patients, and 4 (0.7%) treatment-related deaths (1 pneumonitis, 2 myocarditis and 1 colitis) were recorded.The outcome and toxicity of combination immunotherapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab in a real-world patient population are similar to those reported in pivotal trials.

Contains fulltext : 293454.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) The efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with advanced melanoma that develop brain metastases (BM) remains unpredictable. In this study, we aimed to identify prognostic factors in patients with melanoma BM who are treated with ICIs. Data from advanced melanoma patients with BM treated with ICIs in any line between 2013 and 2020 were obtained from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Patients were included from the time of the treatment of BM with ICIs. Survival tree analysis was performed with clinicopathological parameters as potential classifiers and overall survival (OS) as the response variable. In total, 1278 patients were included. Most patients were treated with ipilimumab-nivolumab combination therapy (45%). The survival tree analysis resulted in 31 subgroups. The median OS ranged from 2.7 months to 35.7 months. The strongest clinical parameter associated with survival in advanced melanoma patients with BM was the serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level. Patients with elevated LDH levels and symptomatic BM had the worst prognosis. The clinicopathological classifiers identified in this study can contribute to optimizing clinical studies and can aid doctors in giving an indication of the patients' survival based on their baseline and disease characteristics.

Background: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy has shown promising results in the treatment of high-risk stage III melanoma; however, the effects on surgery are currently unknown. This study aims to compare the surgical outcomes, in terms of postoperative complications, postoperative morbidity, duration of surgery and textbook outcomes, of patients with high-risk stage III melanoma who received neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by lymph node dissection with patients who received an upfront lymph node dissection. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, patients with high-risk stage III melanoma treated with neoadjuvant anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA4 in the OpACIN (NCT02437279) and OpACIN-neo (NCT02977052) trial between October 2014 and August 2018 were included and compared to patients who received upfront surgery in the same time period. Results: A total of 120 patients were included in this study, of whom 44 received neoadjuvant systemic therapy and 76 underwent upfront surgery. There was no significant difference in the overall rate of postoperative complications between the neoadjuvant group and the upfront surgery group (31.8% versus 36.8%, p = 0.578) and neither in rate of postoperative morbidity (seroma 56.8% versus 57.9%, p = 0.908) (lymphedema 22.7% versus 13.2%, p = 0.175). There was a non-significant difference towards a slightly longer duration of surgery after neoadjuvant immunotherapy (105 versus 90 min, p = 0.077). There were no differences in textbook outcomes (50% versus 49%, p = 0.889). Conclusion: This study shows that the surgical outcomes for patients who underwent a lymph node dissection after neoadjuvant systemic immunotherapy or underwent upfront lymph node dissection for high-risk stage III melanoma are comparable.

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

Background: Recent reports suggest the limited efficacy of immune checkpoints inhibitors in advanced acral melanoma (AM). This study aims to investigate the clinical outcomes of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with stage III and IV AM and compare them to cutaneous melanoma (CM). Methods: We included patients with advanced AM and CM treated with first-line anti -programmed cell death (PD)-1 monotherapy or ipilimumab-nivolumab registered in the prospective nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Objective response rates, progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess the prognostic factors with PFS and OS. Results: In total, 2058 patients (88 AM and 1970 CM) with advanced melanoma were included. First-line objective response rates were 34% for AM versus 54% for CM in the advanced anti-PD-1 cohort and 33% for AM versus 53% for CM in the advanced ipilimumab-nivolumab cohort. The Median PFS was significantly shorter for anti-PD-1 treated AM patients (3.1 months; 95%CI: 2.8-5.6) than patients with CM (10.1 months; 95%CI: 8.5-12.2) (P < 0.001). In patients with advanced melanoma, AM was significantly associated with a higher risk of progression (HRadj 1.63; 95%CI: 1.26-2.11 ; P < 0.001) and death (HRadj 1.54; 95%CI: 1.15-2.06; P Z 0.004) than CM. Conclusions: This study shows lower effectiveness of anti-PD-1 monotherapy and ipilimumab-nivolumab in AM, with lower response rates, PFS and OS than CM. This group of patients should be prioritised in the development of alternative treatment strategies. 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

PURPOSE Currently, there are no robust biomarkers that predict immunotherapy outcomes in metastatic melanoma. We sought to build multivariable predictive models for response and survival to anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (anti–PD-1) monotherapy or in combination with anticytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 (ipilimumab [IPI]; anti–PD-1 ± IPI) by including routine clinical data available at the point of treatment initiation. METHODS One thousand six hundred forty-four patients with metastatic melanoma treated with anti–PD-1 ± IPI at 16 centers from Australia, the United States, and Europe were included. Demographics, disease characteristics, and baseline blood parameters were analyzed. The end points of this study were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The final predictive models for ORR, PFS, and OS were determined through penalized regression methodology (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator method) to select the most significant predictors for all three outcomes (discovery cohort, N = 633). Each model was validated internally and externally in two independent cohorts (validation-1 [N = 419] and validation-2 [N = 592]) and nomograms were created. RESULTS The final model for predicting ORR (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.71) in immunotherapy-treated patients included the following clinical parameters: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, presence/absence of liver and lung metastases, serum lactate dehydrogenase, blood neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, therapy (monotherapy/combination), and line of treatment. The final predictive models for PFS (AUC = 0.68) and OS (AUC = 0.77) included the same variables as those in the ORR model (except for presence/absence of lung metastases), and included presence/absence of brain metastases and blood hemoglobin. Nomogram calculators were developed from the clinical models to predict outcomes for patients with metastatic melanoma treated with anti–PD-1 ± IPI. CONCLUSION Newly developed combinations of routinely collected baseline clinical factors predict the response and survival outcomes of patients with metastatic melanoma treated with immunotherapy and may serve as valuable tools for clinical decision making.

Background: Antitumor activity of ipilimumab or BRAF +/- MEK inhibitors (BRAFi +/- MEKi) following pembrolizumab administration in melanoma is poorly characterized. Patients and methods: In the phase III KEYNOTE-006 study, patients with unresectable stage III/IV melanoma received pembrolizumab (10 mg/kg) once every 2 or 3 weeks (Q3W) or ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) Q3W. The current post hoc analysis evaluates outcomes with ipilimumab or BRAFi +/- MEKi as first subsequent systemic therapy after pembrolizumab administration and includes patients who completed or discontinued pembrolizumab after one or more dose. Pembrolizumab arms were pooled. Results: At data cut-off (4 December 2017), median follow-up was 46.9 months. Of 555 pembrolizumab-treated patients, first subsequent therapy was ipilimumab for 103 (18.6%) and BRAFi +/- MEKi for 59 (10.6%) [33 received BRAFi thorn MEKi, 26 BRAFi alone; 37 (62.7%) were BRAFi +/- MEKi naive]. In the subsequent ipilimumab group, ORR with previous pembrolizumab was 17.5% [1 complete response (CR); 17 partial response (PR)]; 79.6% had discontinued pembrolizumab due to progressive disease (PD); median overall survival (OS) was 21.5 months. ORR with subsequent ipilimumab was 15.5%; 11/16 responses (8 CRs; 3 PRs) were ongoing. ORR with subsequent ipilimumab was 9.7% for patients with PD as best response to pembrolizumab. Median OS from ipilimumab initiation was 9.8 months. In the subsequent BRAFi +/- MEKi group, ORR with previous pembrolizumab was 13.5% (8 PR); 76.3% had discontinued pembrolizumab due to PD; median OS was 17.9 months. ORR with subsequent BRAFi +/- MEKi was 30.5%, 7/18 responses (4 CR, 3 PR) were ongoing. Median OS from BRAFi +/- MEKi initiation was 12.9 months. ORR for BRAFi +/- MEKi-naive patients who received subsequent BRAFi +/- MEKi was 43.2%; 6/16 were ongoing (3 CR, 3 PR). Conclusions: Ipilimumab and BRAFi +/- MEKi have antitumor activity as first subsequent therapy after pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma.

Figure S5 shows that complement factor B (CFB), component 7 (C7) and alpha-1B-glycoportein (A1BG) expression are increased upon melanoma progression and recurrence.

Supplementary Data file, Figure S1-S9, Table S1

Table S2 shows the patient characteristics OpACIN-neo

Cross-presentation of tumor antigens by dendritic cells (DC) is crucial to prime, stimulate and restimulate CD8+ T cells. This process is important in initiating and maintaining an antitumor response. Here, we show that the presence of conventional type 1 DCs (cDC1), a DC subtype that excels in cross-presentation, in the tumor correlated with response to neoadjuvant immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in melanoma. This led us to hypothesize that patients failing to respond to ICB could benefit from enhanced cross-presentation of tumor antigens. We therefore established a cross-presentation assay to screen over 5,500 compounds for enhancers of DC cross-presentation using induced T-cell proliferation as the readout. We identified 145 enhancers, including AZD5582, an antagonist of inhibitor of apoptosis proteins (IAP) cIAP1, cIAP2, and XIAP. AZD5582 treatment led to DC activation of the noncanonical NF-kB pathway, enhanced antigen import from endolysosomes into the cytosol, and increased expression of genes involved in cross-presentation. Furthermore, it upregulated expression of CD80, CD86, MHC class II, CD70 and secretion of TNF by DCs. This enhanced DC activation and maturation program was observed also in tumor-bearing mice upon AZD5582 treatment, culminating in an increased frequency of systemic tumor antigen–specific CD8+ T cells. Our results merit further exploration of AZD5582 to increase antigen cross-presentation for improving the clinical benefit of ICB in patients who are unlikely to respond to ICB.

Suppl. tab. S1 | Multivariable Cox regression of baseline factors associated with overall survival in all first-line checkpoint inhibitor treated patients Suppl. tab. S2 | Multivariable Cox regression of baseline factors associated with overall survival in first-line checkpoint inhibitor treated patients experiencing severe immune related adverse events managed with immunosuppression

Legends for the supplementary figures

Purpose:Combining anti–PD-1 + anti–CTLA-4 immune-checkpoint blockade (ICB) shows improved patient benefit, but it is associated with severe immune-related adverse events and exceedingly high cost. Therefore, there is a dire need to predict which patients respond to monotherapy and which require combination ICB treatment.Experimental Design:In patient-derived melanoma xenografts (PDX), human tumor microenvironment (TME) cells were swiftly replaced by murine cells upon transplantation. Using our XenofilteR deconvolution algorithm we curated human tumor cell RNA reads, which were subsequently subtracted in silico from bulk (tumor cell + TME) patients' melanoma RNA. This produced a purely tumor cell–intrinsic signature (“InTumor”) and a signature comprising tumor cell–extrinsic RNA reads (“ExTumor”).Results:We show that whereas the InTumor signature predicts response to anti–PD-1, the ExTumor predicts anti–CTLA-4 benefit. In PDX, InTumorLO, but not InTumorHI, tumors are effectively eliminated by cytotoxic T cells. When used in conjunction, the InTumor and ExTumor signatures identify not only patients who have a substantially higher chance of responding to combination treatment than to either monotherapy, but also those who are likely to benefit little from anti–CTLA-4 on top of anti–PD-1.Conclusions:These signatures may be exploited to distinguish melanoma patients who need combination ICB blockade from those who likely benefit from either monotherapy.

Supplementary Figures

Supplementary Figure 3. KLH-specific immune responses before and after DC vaccination. (A) KLH-specific T cell proliferation was analyzed before the first vaccination and after each DC vaccination during the first vaccination cycle in peripheral blood of vaccinated metastatic melanoma patients. Per time point each dot represents 1 patient. Proliferative response to KLH is given as proliferation index (proliferation with KLH/proliferation without KLH). The two patients not showing a KLH-specific T cell response are shown in grey. (B) KLH-specific IgG, IgA, and IgM antibodies were quantitatively measured after each vaccination cycle in sera of vaccinated patients. Per isotype each dot represents one patient. Best KLH responses per patient are shown.

Purpose: Thus far, dendritic cell (DC)-based immunotherapy of cancer was primarily based on in vitro–generated monocyte-derived DCs, which require extensive in vitro manipulation. Here, we report on a clinical study exploiting primary CD1c+ myeloid DCs, naturally circulating in the blood.Experimental Design: Fourteen stage IV melanoma patients, without previous systemic treatment for metastatic disease, received autologous CD1c+ myeloid DCs, activated by only brief (16 hours) ex vivo culture and loaded with tumor-associated antigens of tyrosinase and gp100.Results: Our results show that therapeutic vaccination against melanoma with small amounts (3–10 × 106) of myeloid DCs is feasible and without substantial toxicity. Four of 14 patients showed long-term progression-free survival (12–35 months), which directly correlated with the development of multifunctional CD8+ T-cell responses in three of these patients. In particular, high CD107a expression, indicative for cytolytic activity, and IFNγ as well as TNFα and CCL4 production was observed. Apparently, these T-cell responses are essential to induce tumor regression and promote long-term survival by stalling tumor growth.Conclusions: We show that vaccination of metastatic melanoma patients with primary myeloid DCs is feasible and safe and results in induction of effective antitumor immune responses that coincide with improved progression-free survival. Clin Cancer Res; 22(9); 2155–66. ©2015 AACR.

Supplementary Figure 1. Schematic overview of the 44 h mDC vaccine preparation cycle and vaccination strategy.

Supplementary Tables

Purpose:Unleashing the immune system by PD-1 and/or CTLA-4 blockade can cause severe immune-related toxicity necessitating immunosuppressive treatment. Whether immunosuppression for toxicity impacts survival is largely unknown.Experimental Design:Using data from the prospective nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR), we analyzed the association between severe toxicity and overall survival (OS) in 1,250 patients with advanced melanoma who were treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in first line between 2012 and 2017. Furthermore, we analyzed whether toxicity management affected survival in these patients.Results:A total of 1,250 patients were included, of whom 589 received anti-PD1 monotherapy, 576 ipilimumab, and 85 combination therapy. A total of 312 patients (25%) developed severe (grade ≥3) toxicity. Patients experiencing severe ICI toxicity had a significantly prolonged survival with a median OS of 23 months compared with 15 months for patients without severe toxicity [hazard ratio (HRadj) = 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.63–0.93]. Among patients experiencing severe toxicity, survival was significantly decreased in patients who received anti-TNF ± steroids for steroid-refractory toxicity compared with patients who were managed with steroids only (HRadj = 1.61; 95% CI, 1.03–2.51), with a median OS of 17 and 27 months, respectively.Conclusions:Patients experiencing severe ICI toxicity have a prolonged OS. However, this survival advantage is abrogated when anti-TNF is administered for steroid-refractory toxicity. Further prospective studies are needed to assess the effect of different immunosuppressive regimens on checkpoint inhibitor efficacy.See related commentary by Weber and Postow, p. 2085

Neoadjuvant ipilimumab + nivolumab has demonstrated high pathologic response rates in stage III melanoma. Patients with low intra-tumoral interferon-γ (IFN-γ) signatures are less likely to benefit. We show that domatinostat (a class I histone deacetylase inhibitor) addition to anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4 increased the IFN-γ response and reduced tumor growth in our murine melanoma model, rationalizing evaluation in patients. To stratify patients into IFN-γ high and low cohorts, we developed a baseline IFN-γ signature expression algorithm, which was prospectively tested in the DONIMI trial. Patients with stage III melanoma and high intra-tumoral IFN-γ scores were randomized to neoadjuvant nivolumab or nivolumab + domatinostat, while patients with low IFN-γ scores received nivolumab + domatinostat or ipilimumab + nivolumab + domatinostat. Domatinostat addition to neoadjuvant nivolumab ± ipilimumab did not delay surgery but induced unexpected severe skin toxicity, hampering domatinostat dose escalation. At studied dose levels, domatinostat addition did not increase treatment efficacy. The baseline IFN-γ score adequately differentiated patients who were likely to benefit from nivolumab alone versus patients who require other therapies.

Simple Summary: Mucosal melanoma (MM) is rare and entails a poor prognosis. MM is biologically different from cutaneous melanoma (CM). For advanced CM, overall survival has improved since the introduction of immune and targeted therapy. In contrast, little is known about the effect of their introduction on the survival of MM. This study presents the incidence, clinical characteristics, treatment characteristics, and survival of MM over 30 years (1990-2019) in the Netherlands. We conclude that the incidence of MM remained stable, and survival has slightly improved when comparing the timeframe 2014-2019 with previous years. However, the prognosis of MM remains poor as compared to CM. Future studies addressing the effect of immune and targeted therapy in MM are needed to improve outcomes for patients with MM. Background: Mucosal melanoma (MM) is a rare tumour with a poor prognosis. Over the years, immune and targeted therapy have become available and have improved overall survival (OS) for patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma (CM). This study aimed to assess trends in the incidence and survival of MM in the Netherlands against the background of new effective treatments that became available for advanced melanoma. Methods: We obtained information on patients diagnosed with MM during 1990-2019 from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. The age-standardized incidence rate and estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) were calculated over the total study period. OS was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Independent predictors for OS were assessed by applying multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models. Results: In total, 1496 patients were diagnosed with MM during 1990-2019, mostly in the female genital tract (43%) and the head and neck region (34%). The majority presented with local or locally advanced disease (66%). The incidence remained stable over time (EAPC 3.0%, p = 0.4). The 5-year OS was 24% (95%CI: 21.6-26.0%) with a median OS of 1.7 years (95%CI: 1.6-1.8). Age >= 70 years at diagnosis, higher stage at diagnosis, and respiratory tract location were independent predictors for worse OS. Diagnosis in the period 2014-2019, MM located in the female genital tract, and treatment with immune or targeted therapy were independent predictors for better OS. Conclusion: Since the introduction of immune and targeted therapies, OS has improved for patients with MM. However, the prognosis of MM patients is still lower compared to CM, and the median OS of patients treated with immune and targeted therapies remains fairly short. Further studies are needed to improve outcomes for patients with MM.

Neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab induces high pathologic response rates (pRRs) in clinical stage III nodal melanoma, and pathologic response is strongly associated with prolonged relapse-free survival (RFS). The PRADO extension cohort of the OpACIN-neo trial ( NCT02977052 ) addressed the feasibility and effect on clinical outcome of using pathologic response after neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab as a criterion for further treatment personalization. In total, 99 patients with clinical stage IIIb-d nodal melanoma were included and treated with 6 weeks of neoadjuvant ipilimumab 1 mg kg-1 and nivolumab 3 mg kg-1. In patients achieving major pathologic response (MPR, ≤10% viable tumor) in their index lymph node (ILN, the largest lymph node metastasis at baseline), therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND) and adjuvant therapy were omitted. Patients with pathologic partial response (pPR; >10 to ≤50% viable tumor) underwent TLND only, whereas patients with pathologic non-response (pNR; >50% viable tumor) underwent TLND and adjuvant systemic therapy ± synchronous radiotherapy. Primary objectives were confirmation of pRR (ILN, at week 6) of the winner neoadjuvant combination scheme identified in OpACIN-neo; to investigate whether TLND can be safely omitted in patients achieving MPR; and to investigate whether RFS at 24 months can be improved for patients achieving pNR. ILN resection and ILN-response-tailored treatment were feasible. The pRR was 72%, including 61% MPR. Grade 3-4 toxicity within the first 12 weeks was observed in 22 (22%) patients. TLND was omitted in 59 of 60 patients with MPR, resulting in significantly lower surgical morbidity and better quality of life. The 24-month relapse-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival rates were 93% and 98% in patients with MPR, 64% and 64% in patients with pPR, and 71% and 76% in patients with pNR, respectively. These findings provide a strong rationale for randomized clinical trials testing response-directed treatment personalization after neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab.

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.

PURPOSE: The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies improved the overall survival of patients with advanced melanoma. It is not known how often these costly treatments with potential serious side effects are ineffectively applied in the last phase of life. This study aimed to investigate the start of a new systemic therapy within 45 and 90 days of death in Dutch patients with advanced melanoma. METHODS: We selected patients who were diagnosed with unresectable IIIC or stage IV melanoma, registered in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry, and died between 2013 and 2019. Primary outcome was the probability of starting a new systemic therapy 45 and 90 days before death. Secondary outcomes were type of systemic therapy started, grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs), and the total costs of systemic therapies. RESULTS: Between 2013 and 2019, 3,797 patients with unresectable IIIC or stage IV melanoma were entered in the registry and died. The percentage of patients receiving a new systemic therapy within 45 and 90 days before death was significantly different between Dutch melanoma centers (varying from 6% to 23% and 20% to 46%, respectively). Thirteen percent of patients (n = 146) developed grade 3/4 AEs in the last period before death. The majority of patients with an AE required hospital admission (n = 102, 69.6%). Mean total costs of systemic therapy per cohort year of the patients who received a new systemic therapy within 90 days before death were 2.3%-2.8% of the total costs spent on melanoma therapies. CONCLUSION: The minority of Dutch patients with metastatic melanoma started a new systemic therapy in the last phase of life. However, the percentages varied between Dutch melanoma centers. Financial impact of these therapies in the last phase of life is relatively small.

This Phase Ib study combined programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitor, atezolizumab, with other immunomodulatory agents in locally advanced and metastatic solid tumors. Arms B-D evaluated atezolizumab plus interferon-α, with/without vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor, bevacizumab, in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and other solid tumors. Arm B predominantly recruited patients with previously treated RCC or melanoma to receive atezolizumab plus interferon α-2b. Arm C investigated atezolizumab plus polyethylene glycol (PEG)-interferon α-2a in previously treated RCC. Arm D evaluated atezolizumab plus PEG-interferon α-2a and bevacizumab. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability; secondary objectives included clinical activity. Combination therapy was well tolerated, with safety profiles consistent with known risks of individual agents. The most frequent treatment-related toxicities were fatigue, chills, and pyrexia. The objective response rate (ORR) in arm B was 20.0% overall and 17.8% in patients with previously treated checkpoint inhibitor–naive RCC (n = 45). No responses were reported in arm C. The highest ORR in arm D was 46.7% in patients with treatment-naive RCC (n = 15). Data showed preliminary clinical activity and acceptable tolerability of atezolizumab plus interferon α-2b in patients with previously treated checkpoint inhibitor–naive RCC and of atezolizumab plus PEG-interferon α-2a and bevacizumab in patients with treatment-naive RCC.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer have an increased risk of complications from SARS-CoV-2 infection. Vaccination to prevent COVID-19 is recommended, but data on the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines for patients with solid tumours receiving systemic cancer treatment are scarce. Therefore, we aimed to assess the impact of immunotherapy, chemotherapy, and chemoimmunotherapy on the immunogenicity and safety of the mRNA-1273 (Moderna Biotech, Madrid, Spain) COVID-19 vaccine as part of the Vaccination Against COVID in Cancer (VOICE) trial.METHODS: This prospective, multicentre, non-inferiority trial was done across three centres in the Netherlands. Individuals aged 18 years or older with a life expectancy of more than 12 months were enrolled into four cohorts: individuals without cancer (cohort A [control cohort]), and patients with solid tumours, regardless of stage and histology, treated with immunotherapy (cohort B), chemotherapy (cohort C), or chemoimmunotherapy (cohort D). Participants received two mRNA-1273 vaccinations of 100 μg in 0·5 mL intramuscularly, 28 days apart. The primary endpoint, analysed per protocol (excluding patients with a positive baseline sample [>10 binding antibody units (BAU)/mL], indicating previous SARS-CoV-2 infection), was defined as the SARS-CoV-2 spike S1-specific IgG serum antibody response (ie, SARS-CoV-2-binding antibody concentration of >10 BAU/mL) 28 days after the second vaccination. For the primary endpoint analysis, a non-inferiority design with a margin of 10% was used. We also assessed adverse events in all patients who received at least one vaccination, and recorded solicited adverse events in participants who received at least one vaccination but excluding those who already had seroconversion (>10 BAU/mL) at baseline. This study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04715438.FINDINGS: Between Feb 17 and March 12, 2021, 791 participants were enrolled and followed up for a median of 122 days (IQR 118 to 128). A SARS-CoV-2-binding antibody response was found in 240 (100%; 95% CI 98 to 100) of 240 evaluable participants in cohort A, 130 (99%; 96 to >99) of 131 evaluable patients in cohort B, 223 (97%; 94 to 99) of 229 evaluable patients in cohort C, and 143 (100%; 97 to 100) of 143 evaluable patients in cohort D. The SARS-CoV-2-binding antibody response in each patient cohort was non-inferior compared with cohort A. No new safety signals were observed. Grade 3 or worse serious adverse events occurred in no participants in cohort A, three (2%) of 137 patients in cohort B, six (2%) of 244 patients in cohort C, and one (1%) of 163 patients in cohort D, with four events (two of fever, and one each of diarrhoea and febrile neutropenia) potentially related to the vaccination. There were no vaccine-related deaths.INTERPRETATION: Most patients with cancer develop, while receiving chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or both for a solid tumour, an adequate antibody response to vaccination with the mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine. The vaccine is also safe in these patients. The minority of patients with an inadequate response after two vaccinations might benefit from a third vaccination.FUNDING: ZonMw, The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

Item does not contain fulltext 01 januari 2023

Simple Summary BRAF/MEK therapy and anti-PD-1 therapy have shown better recurrence-free survival of stage III melanoma in patients with BRAF V600 mutations in clinical trials. However, little is known about how these therapies compare to each other in everyday practice. The aim of our study was to describe the toxicity and survival of patients treated with BRAF/MEK therapy and anti-PD-1 therapy in daily practice. We demonstrated that grade >= 3 toxicity occurred in 11.5% of patients and was the most common cause of early treatment discontinuation (71.1%). We also show that at 12 months, patients treated with BRAF/MEK therapy have less progression than those treated with anti-PD-1 therapy. However, this is no longer the case at 18 months. Adjuvant BRAF/MEK- and anti-PD-1 inhibition have significantly improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) compared to placebo in resected stage III BRAF-mutant melanoma. However, data beyond the clinical trial setting are limited. This study describes the toxicity and survival of patients treated with adjuvant BRAF/MEK inhibitors and compares outcomes to adjuvant anti-PD-1. For this study, stage III BRAF V600 mutant cutaneous melanoma patients treated with adjuvant BRAF/MEK-inhibition or anti-PD-1 were identified from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. BRAF/MEK- and anti-PD-1-treated patients were matched based on propensity scores, and RFS at 12 and 18 months were estimated. Between 1 July 2018 and 31 December 2021, 717 patients were identified. Of these, 114 patients with complete records were treated with BRAF/MEK therapy and 532 with anti-PD-1. Comorbidities (p = 0.04) and geographical region (p < 0.01) were associated with treatment choice. In 45.6% of BRAF/MEK-treated patients, treatment was prematurely discontinued. Grade >= 3 toxicity occurred in 11.5% of patients and was the most common cause of early discontinuation (71.1%). At 12 and 18 months, RFS in BRAF/MEK-treated patients was 85% and 70%, compared to 68% and 68% in matched anti-PD-1-treated patients (p = 0.03). In conclusion, comorbidities and geographical region determine the choice of adjuvant treatment in patients with resected stage III BRAF-mutant melanoma. With the currently limited follow-up, BRAF/MEK-treated patients have better RFS at 12 months than matched anti-PD-1-treated patients, but this difference is no longer observed at 18 months. Therefore, longer follow-up data are necessary to estimate long-term effectiveness.

Treatment with targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors has significantly improved survival of patients with advanced melanoma. Unfortunately, a large proportion of patients are either primary non-responders or will eventually develop secondary resistance. In 2017, Nosrati and colleagues published a prediction scale in the British Journal of Cancer, which included five clinical parameters that were associated with lower response to anti-PD-1 treatment; female sex (1 point), age 1]. This study used a derivation cohort of 228 patients treated in California, and a validation cohort of 87 patients treated in Switzerland. The primary outcome measure was best tumour response to treatment evaluated using computed tomography at 12 and 16 weeks after the first administration of anti-PD-1 monotherapy, and every 12 weeks thereafter. The aim of this correspondence is to validate the prediction scale, published by Nosrati and colleagues.