BRIEF COMMUNICATION Randomized Trial of Adjuvant Human Interferon Gamma Versus Observation in High-Risk Cutaneous Melanoma: a Southwest Oncology Group Study Frank L. Meyskens, Jr., Kenneth J. Kopecky, Charles W. Taylor, R. Dirk Noyes, Ralph J. Tuthill, Evan M. Hersh, Lynn G. Feun, James H. Doroshow, Lawrence E. Flaherty, Vernon K. Sondak* The prognosis for patients with cu- taneous malignant melanoma worsens considerably if the primary tumor in- vades deeply (>1.5 mm, American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] stage II) and/or spreads to regional lymph nodes (AJCC stage III) (J-3). Such patients are therefore appropriate candidates for studies of postsurgical adjuvant therapy. Several observations suggest a role for immunologic mechanisms in controlling proliferation and spread of melanoma cells (4,5). Nonetheless, clinical trials of nonspecific immunologic stimulants such as BCG, Corynebacterium parvum, le- vamisole, and transfer factor have been disappointing (6-11), leading to con- sideration of more specific immuno- modulatory approaches. Interferon gamma (IFN y) induces a variety of immunomodulatory effects: increased natural killer cell-mediated cytotoxicity, macrophage activation, and enhancement of human leukocyte an- tigen class II antigen expression and shedding (12-15). Phase I studies showed that IFN y was well tolerated and favorably affected immune parameters in patients with completely resected melanoma (16-18). Although IFN y has 1710 BRIEF COMMUNICATION no documented activity against meta- static melanoma, such phase I results ar- gued for its evaluation in the adjuvant setting. Accordingly, the Southwest On- cology Group undertook a randomized, phase III trial (SWOG-8642) to test whether prognosis is improved with recombinant human IFN y (Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA) com- pared with observation following defini- tive surgery for cutaneous melanoma. Eligible patients were 18 years of age or older, had cutaneous melanoma of AJCC stage II (primary thickness of >1.5 mm, NO, MO) or III (any T, Nl-2, MO), and a performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale) of 0 or 1. Patients were required to have had complete excision of their tumors (with at least 1-cm margins) within 4 weeks after registration and to have no prior or concurrent nonsurgical therapy. Staging procedures were required to en- sure that patients were free of detectable residual disease. After giving written in- formed consent, patients were randomly assigned to receive either IFN y or no treatment (observation), stratified by stage. Optimal immunomodulatory ef- fects of IFN y in melanoma patients at high risk of recurrence following sur- gery have been reported at an intra- muscular or subcutaneous dose of 0.1 mg/m 2 per day (19). For practicality, IFN y was given subcutaneously at 0.2 mg per day for 1 year or until disease recurrence. The slides of the tumors of all patients were reviewed by one pa- thologist (R. J. Tuthill), and there was central review of all relevant eligibility criteria, including surgical technique, to determine final eligibility. The protocol was approved by the institutional review boards of the participating institutions. The present analysis was based on data available August 2, 1994, and updates an earlier preliminary report (20). Since the stated aim of the study was to deter- mine whether treatment with IFN y im- proves outcome compared with that seen with observation, one-tailed P values (P\) are reported except for un- planned post hoc analyses using two- tailed P values (P 2 ) that were performed to investigate whether treatment with IFN y might actually be harmful. From October 1987 through Novem- ber 1989, 284 patients were randomly assigned (137 IFN y and 147 observa- tion) by standard cooperative group pro- cedures performed centrally at the Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center. Eighty-two (29%) were in- eligible, primarily because of failure to obtain required prestudy tests or to meet required histologic or surgical criteria. Results for all 284 patients were similar to those for the 202 eligible patients; the latter are emphasized here. Characteristics of and treatment out- comes for the eligible patients are shown in Table 1. Disease-free survival and overall survival were not sig- nificantly better with IFN y (Fig. 1: for disease-free survival, P\ - .81; for over- all survival, P\ - .91; stage-stratified logrank test). Disease-free survival and overall survival were in fact somewhat poorer with IFN y, but not significantly so in post hoc analyses (disease-free survival, P 2 - .38; overall survival, P 2 = .18). Proportional hazards regression analysis found no significant interac- tions between treatment and stage, gender, age, primary site, body surface area, or weight. The study was original- ly designed for 230 eligible patients. With 202 eligible patients, however, the alternative hypothesis that IFN y reduces the risk of relapse or death by 25% (i.e., relative risk = 0.75) was con- vincingly rejected (Pi = .007), constitut- ing strong evidence against any clinically meaningful beneficial effect. Of the 137 patients randomly as- signed to receive IFN y, 133 were asses- sable for toxic effects. There were no *Affiliations of authors: F. L. Meyskens, Jr., University of California, Irvine; K. J. Kopecky, Southwest Oncology Group Statistical Center, Seattle, WA; C. W. Taylor, E. M. Hersh, Univer- sity of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson; R. D. Noyes, University of Utah Medical Center, Salt Lake City; R. J. Tuthill, Cleveland Clinic Founda- tion, OH; L. G. Feun, University of Miami School of Medicine, FL; J. H. Doroshow, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA; L. E. Flaherty, Wayne State University Medical Center, Detroit, MI; V. K. Sondak, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor. Correspondence to: Vernon K. Sondak, M.D., 2920 Taubman Center, 1500 East Medical Center Dr., Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0331. Reprint requests to: Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG-8642), Operations Office, Omicron Dr., San Antonio, TX 78245-3217. See Notes section following References. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 87, No. 22, November 15, 1995