Search

Introduction: An altered immune tolerance disturbed by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may contribute to new-onset polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) and giant cell arteritis (GCA). This systematic literature review (SLR) examines the characteristics of PMR and GCA-like syndromes following anticancer treatment with ICIs, summarizing their demographic, clinical and treatment-related features to provide insights whether they differ from the idiopathic forms., Methods: The SLR was conducted in Medline and EMBASE databases from inception to July 2024, and in the EULAR/ACR abstract database (2021-2023). ICI-induced PMR and GCA syndromes were compared to the primary forms of the diseases using data from studies that included both groups as comparators. For manuscripts lacking direct comparisons, we summarized the main findings and discussed the differences using systematic reviews or large observational studies on the primary forms., Results: From 1237 screened abstracts, 46 met the inclusion criteria, involving 358 patients (314 with ICI-PMR and 44 with ICI-GCA). ICI-PMR had an estimated pooled prevalence of 0.1% [95% CI: 0.07%, 0.14%] among ICI recipients and 15.9% [95% CI: 12.6%, 19.9%] among patients experiencing rheumatic immune-related adverse events. Patients with ICI-PMR had a male-to-female ratio of 1.7:1 and a mean age of 71 ± 4 years. Most cases were associated with PD1/PDL1 blockers (87%). Clinical features included inflammatory pain in the girdles (100%), though pelvic girdle involvement was under-reported in some cases (3/28 studies). Peripheral arthritis was present in 35% of patients. Laboratory tests showed normal or slightly elevated inflammatory markers in 26% of cases. Glucocorticoids (GCs) led to symptom improvement in 84% of cases although 20% required immunosuppressive treatment and 14% experienced relapses. ICI-GCA had a prevalence of 0.06% among ICI recipients, with equal gender distribution and a mean age of 71 ± 5 years. Most patients received anti-PD1/PDL1 blockers (57%). Clinical manifestations included cephalic symptoms (75%), permanent visual loss (23%) and symptoms related to large-vessel involvement (54%). High-dose GCs were effective, with 96% achieving remission, though 17% experienced relapses., Conclusions: ICI-induced PMR and GCA may have distinct clinical profiles compared to idiopathic forms, with potentially milder symptoms and better treatment responses. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and better understand the long-term outcomes and pathophysiology of these conditions., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Previous studies showed an association between single nucleotide gene variants (SNVs) of PD-1 and cancer susceptibility. We analyzed PD1.5 C > T and PD1.7 T > C SNVs to investigate their association with the risk of developing metastatic melanoma (MM). Utilizing a cohort of 125 MM patients treated with anti-PD-1 agents and 84 healthy controls, we examined genotype/allele frequencies through a modified Poisson regression model, adjusted for age and sex. Our findings indicate that the PD1.5 T allele is associated with a reduced risk of MM, showing a significantly lower risk in both codominant (RR = 0.56, 95%CL: 0.37-0.87) and dominant (RR = 0.73 95%CL: 0.59-0.90) models. Conversely, the PD1.7 C allele is linked to an increased risk of MM, with the C/C genotype exhibiting a higher risk in the codominant (RR = 1.65, 95%CL: 1.32-2.05) and allelic (RR = 1.23, 95%CL: 1.06-1.43) models. These results are consistent with previous meta-analyses on other cancer types, mainly highlighting the PD1.5 SNV's potential role in promoting anti-tumor immunity through increased PD1-positive circulating effector T cell activity., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Comprehensive next-generation sequencing is widely used for precision oncology and precision prevention approaches. We aimed to determine the yield of actionable gene variants, the capacity to uncover hereditary predisposition and liquid biopsy appropriateness instead of, or in addition to, tumor tissue analysis, in a real-world cohort of cancer patients, who may benefit the most from comprehensive genomic profiling., Methods: Seventy-eight matched germline/tumor tissue/liquid biopsy DNA and RNA samples were profiled using the Hereditary Cancer Panel (germline) and the TruSight Oncology 500 panel (tumor tissue/cfDNA) from 23 patients consecutively enrolled at our center according to at least one of the following criteria: no available therapeutic options; long responding patients potentially fit for other therapies; rare tumor; suspected hereditary cancer; primary cancer with high metastatic potential; tumor of unknown primary origin. Variants were annotated for OncoKB and AMP/ASCO/CAP classification., Results: The overall yield of actionable somatic and germline variants was 57% (13/23 patients), and 43.5%, excluding variants previously identified by somatic or germline routine testing. The accuracy of tumor/cfDNA germline-focused analysis was demonstrated by overlapping results of germline testing. Five germline variants in BRCA1, VHL, CHEK1, ATM genes would have been missed without extended genomic profiling. A previously undetected BRAF p.V600E mutation was emblematic of the clinical utility of this approach in a patient with a liver undifferentiated embryonal sarcoma responsive to BRAF/MEK inhibition., Conclusions: Our study confirms the clinical relevance of performing extended parallel tumor DNA and cfDNA testing to broaden therapeutic options, to longitudinally monitor cfDNA during patient treatment, and to uncover possible hereditary predisposition following tumor sequencing in patient care., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

In recent years, advances in melanoma treatment have renewed patient hope. This comprehensive review emphasizes the evolving treatment landscape, particularly highlighting first-line strategies and the interplay between immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted therapies. Ipilimumab plus nivolumab has achieved the best median overall survival, exceeding 70 months. However, the introduction of new ICIs, like relatlimab, has added complexity to first-line therapy decisions. Our aim is to guide clinicians in making personalized treatment decisions. Various features, including brain metastases, PD-L1 expression, BRAF mutation, performance status, and prior adjuvant therapy, significantly impact the direction of advanced melanoma treatment. We also provide the latest insights into the treatment of rare melanoma subtypes, such as uveal melanoma, where tebentafusp has shown promising improvements in overall survival for metastatic uveal melanoma patients. This review provides invaluable insights for clinicians, enabling informed treatment choices and deepening our understanding of the multifaceted challenges associated with advanced melanoma management., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest FS has reported Honoraria for presentations or lectures from Sanofi Genzyme, Roche, BMS, Novartis, Merk, Sun Pharma, MSD, Pierre Fabre and for advisory board for Novartis, Philogen, SunPharma, MSD. The other authors have no conflict of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest CG has received grants from Italian Ministry of Health and BMS and Honoraria for presentations or lectures from AstraZeneca, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, Thermo Fisher; ML has received personal fees (advisory role and/or speaker honoraria) from Roche, Takeda, Sandoz, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novartis Exact Sciences and Ipsen; LDM has reported consulting fees from Roche, Novartis, MSD, Pfizer, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Genomic Health, Eli Lilly, Seattle Genetics, Eisai, Pierre Fabre, and Daiichi Sankyo, speaker Honoraria from Roche, Novartis, Eli Lilly and MSD, travel grants from Roche, Pfizer and Celgene; FS has reported Honoraria for presentations or lectures from Sanofi Genzyme, Roche, BMS, Novartis, Merk, Sun Pharma, MSD, Pierre Fabre and for advisory board for Novartis, Philogen, SunPharma, MSD.

Background: While cutaneous melanomas are well-documented, primary melanoma of the lung (PMML), particularly with endobronchial origin, remains rare and poorly characterized. This case report addresses gaps in understanding by presenting a comprehensive case of a 71-year-old male with primary endobronchial melanoma and conducting a systematic review of PMML cases., Case Presentation: The patient, a former smoker, presented with dyspnea, cough, and hemoptysis. Imaging revealed left lung atelectasis and a suspicious nodule. Bronchoscopy identified an endobronchial mass, subsequently treated with argon plasma coagulation and resection. Biopsy confirmed melanoma. Extensive examinations ruled out a primary skin lesion. Despite initial treatment, recurrence led to pneumonectomy. Histopathology confirmed melanoma. The patient received treatment with pembrolizumab and ipilimumab, but with poor clinical benefit., Conclusions: Primary endobronchial melanoma is a rare entity, comprising 0.01% of lung tumors. This case underscores diagnostic challenges and emphasizes histological criteria to distinguish primary from metastatic lesions. The pathogenesis remains unclear, with theories proposing foetal melanocyte migration or squamous metaplasia. Prognosis varies, necessitating radical surgical extirpation. A systematic review revealed diverse outcomes, supporting the need for further research. In conclusion, endobronchial melanoma involves an endoscopic and surgical management, but evolving therapies, such as immunotherapy, may reshape treatment paradigms. This case contributes to our understanding of PMML, guiding future research and clinical management. As therapeutic options evolve, continued research is crucial to refine our understanding and improve outcomes for this rare malignancy., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary intraocular malignancy with a limited five-year survival for metastatic patients. Limited therapeutic treatments are currently available for metastatic disease, even if the genomics of this tumor has been deeply studied using next-generation sequencing (NGS) and functional experiments. The profound knowledge of the molecular features that characterize this tumor has not led to the development of efficacious therapies, and the survival of metastatic patients has not changed for decades. Several bioinformatics methods have been applied to mine NGS tumor data in order to unveil tumor biology and detect possible molecular targets for new therapies. Each application can be single domain based while others are more focused on data integration from multiple genomics domains (as gene expression and methylation data). Examples of single domain approaches include differentially expressed gene (DEG) analysis on gene expression data with statistical methods such as SAM (significance analysis of microarray) or gene prioritization with complex algorithms such as deep learning. Data fusion or integration methods merge multiple domains of information to define new clusters of patients or to detect relevant genes, according to multiple NGS data. In this work, we compare different strategies to detect relevant genes for metastatic disease prediction in the TCGA uveal melanoma (UVM) dataset. Detected targets are validated with multi-gene score analysis on a larger UM microarray dataset.

The metastatic risk of uveal melanoma (UM) is defined by a limited number of molecular lesions, somatic mutations (SF3B1 and BAP1), and copy number alterations (CNA): monosomy of chromosome 3 (M3), chr8q gain (8q), chr6p gain (6p), yet the sequence of events is not clear. We analyzed data from three datasets (TCGA-UVM, GSE27831, GSE51880) with information regarding M3, 8q, 6p, SF3B1, and BAP1 status. We confirm that BAP1 mutations are always associated with M3 in high-risk patients. All other features (6p, 8q, M3, SF3B1 mutation) were present independently from each other. Chr8q gain was frequently associated with chr3 disomy. Hierarchical clustering of gene expression data of samples with different binary combinations of aggressivity factors shows that patients with 8q|M3, BAP1|M3 form one cluster enriched in samples that developed metastases. Patients with 6p combined with either 8q or SF3B1 are mainly represented in the other, low-risk cluster. Several gene expression events that show a non-significant association with outcome when considering single features become significant when analyzing combinations of risk features indicating additive action. The independence of risk factors is consistent with a random risk model of UM metastasis without an obligatory sequence.

Background: Despite having revolutionized the treatment paradigm for advanced melanoma, not all patients benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy. To date, there are no predictive biomarkers for response or the occurrence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) to programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors. Our aim was to investigate the predictive and prognostic role of single nucleotide variants (SNVs) of genes involved in the PD-1 axis., Methods: We analysed, in metastatic melanoma patients treated with nivolumab or pembrolizumab, five PD-1 SNVs, namely PD1.3 G>A (rs11568821), PD1.5 C>T (rs2227981), PD1.6 G>A (rs10204525), PD1.7 T>C(rs7421861), PD1.10 C>G (rs5582977) and three programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) SNVs: +8293 C>A (rs2890658), PD-L1 C>T (rs2297136) and PD-L1 G>C (rs4143815). Association of SNV genotypic frequencies with best overall response to PD-1 inhibitors and development of irAEs were estimated through a modified Poisson regression. A Cox regression modelling approach was applied to evaluate the SNV association with OS., Results: A total of 125 patients with advanced melanoma were included in the analysis. A reduction in irAEs risk was observed in patients carrying the PD-L1 +8293 C/A genotype compared with those carrying the C/C genotype (risk ratio = 0.45; 95% CL 0.22-0.93; P  = 0.031). A trend for a reduction in irAEs was also observed with the PD1.5 T allele (risk ratio = 0.70, 95% confidence limits 0.48-1.01 versus C allele). None of the SNVs was associated with response to therapy. Finally, a survival benefit was observed in patients harbouring the PD1.7 C/C genotype (hazard ratio = 0.37; 95% confidence limits 0.14-0.96; P  = 0.028) in the homozygous model., Conclusions: Our study showed that PD-1.5 and PD-L1 +8293 SNVs may play a role as a predictive biomarker of development of irAEs to PD-1 inhibitors. PD1.7 SNV may also be associated with a reduction of the risk of death, although further translational research is needed to confirm these results., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Purpose: No evidence exists as to whether type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) impairs clinical outcome from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in patients with solid tumors., Experimental Design: In a large cohort of ICI recipients treated at 21 institutions from June 2014 to June 2020, we studied whether patients on glucose-lowering medications (GLM) for T2DM had shorter overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). We used targeted transcriptomics in a subset of patients to explore differences in the tumor microenvironment (TME) of patients with or without diabetes., Results: A total of 1,395 patients were included. Primary tumors included non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; 54.7%), melanoma (24.7%), renal cell (15.0%), and other carcinomas (5.6%). After multivariable analysis, patients on GLM (n = 226, 16.2%) displayed an increased risk of death [HR, 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI),1.07-1.56] and disease progression/death (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.43) independent of number of GLM received. We matched 92 metformin-exposed patients with 363 controls and 78 patients on other oral GLM or insulin with 299 control patients. Exposure to metformin, but not other GLM, was associated with an increased risk of death (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.16-2.03) and disease progression/death (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.04-1.72). Patients with T2DM with higher pretreatment glycemia had higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (P = 0.04), while exploratory tumoral transcriptomic profiling in a subset of patients (n = 22) revealed differential regulation of innate and adaptive immune pathways in patients with T2DM., Conclusions: In this study, patients on GLM experienced worse outcomes from immunotherapy, independent of baseline features. Prospective studies are warranted to clarify the relative impact of metformin over a preexisting diagnosis of T2DM in influencing poorer outcomes in this population., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Real-life spectrum and survival implications of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in patients treated with extended interval dosing (ED) immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are unknown., Methods: Characteristics of 812 consecutive solid cancer patients who received at least 1 cycle of ED monotherapy (pembrolizumab 400 mg Q6W or nivolumab 480 mg Q4W) after switching from canonical interval dosing (CD; pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W or nivolumab 240 mg Q2W) or treated upfront with ED were retrieved. The primary objective was to compare irAEs patterns within the same population (before and after switch to ED). irAEs spectrum in patients treated upfront with ED and association between irAEs and overall survival were also described., Results: A total of 550 (68%) patients started ICIs with CD and switched to ED. During CD, 225 (41%) patients developed any grade and 17 (3%) G3 or G4 irAEs; after switching to ED, any grade and G3 or G4 irAEs were experienced by 155 (36%) and 20 (5%) patients. Switching to ED was associated with a lower probability of any grade irAEs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.64 to 0.99; P = .047), whereas no difference for G3 or G4 events was noted (aOR = 1.55, 95% CI = 0.81 to 2.94; P = .18). Among patients who started upfront with ED (n = 232, 32%), 107 (41%) developed any grade and 14 (5%) G3 or G4 irAEs during ED. Patients with irAEs during ED had improved overall survival (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.34 to 0.82; P = .004 after switching; aHR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.93; P = .025 upfront)., Conclusions: Switching ICI treatment from CD and ED did not increase the incidence of irAEs and represents a safe option also outside clinical trials., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Background: Treatment options for advanced melanoma have increased with the US Food and Drug Administration approval of the anti-LAG3 plus anti-PD-1 relatlimab/nivolumab combination. To date, ipilimumab/nivolumab is the benchmark of overall survival, despite a high toxicity profile. Furthermore, in BRAF-mutant patients, BRAF/MEK inhibitors and the atezolizumab/vemurafenib/cobimetinib triplet are also available treatments, making the first-line therapy selection more complex. To address this issue, we conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of the available first-line treatment options in advanced melanoma., Methods: Randomised clinical trials of previously untreated, advanced melanoma were included if at least one intervention arm contained a BRAF/MEK or an immune-checkpoint inhibitor (ICI). The aim was to indirectly compare the ICIs combinations ipilimumab/nivolumab and relatlimab/nivolumab, and these combinations with all the other first-line treatment options for advanced melanoma (irrespective of BRAF status) in terms of activity and safety. The coprimary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (≥ G3 TRAEs) rate, defined according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events., Results: A total of 9070 metastatic melanoma patients treated in 18 randomised clinical trials were included in the network meta-analysis. No difference in PFS and ORR was observed between ipilimumab/nivolumab and relatlimab/nivolumab (HR = 0.99 [95% CI 0.75-1.31] and RR = 0.99 [95% CI 0.78-1.27], respectively). The PD-(L)1/BRAF/MEK inhibitors triplet combinations were superior to ipilimumab/nivolumab in terms of both PFS (HR = 0.56 [95% CI 0.37-0.84]) and ORR (RR = 3.07 [95% CI 1.61-5.85]). Ipilimumab/nivolumab showed the highest risk of developing ≥ G3 TRAEs. Relatlimab/nivolumab trended to a lower risk of ≥ G3 TRAEs (RR = 0.71 [95% CI 0.30-1.67]) versus ipilimumab/nivolumab., Conclusion: Relatlimab/nivolumab showed similar PFS and ORR compared to ipilimumab/nivolumab, with a trend for a better safety profile., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Prof. Genova reported receipt of Grants from Italian Ministry of Health and BMS, and Honoraria from AstraZeneca, BMS, Eli Lilly, MSD, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, ThermoFisher. Prof. Del Mastro reported receipt of speaker Honoraria from Roche, Novartis, Eli Lilly and MSD; Travel Grants from Roche, Pfizer and Celgene; participation on Advisory Board for Roche, Novartis, MSD, Pfizer, Ipsen, AstraZeneca, Genomic Health, Eli Lilly, Seattle Genetics, Eisai, Pierre Fabre, and Daiichi Sankyo. Prof. Lambertini reported receipt of personal fees (advisory role and/or speaker honoraria) from Roche, Takeda, Sandoz, Eli Lilly, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Novartis Exact Sciences and Ipsen. Prof. Spagnolo reported receipt of Honoraria for presentations or lectures from Sanofi Genzyme, Roche, BMS, Novartis, Merk, Sun Pharma, MSD, Pierre Fabre; participation on Advisory Board for Novartis, Philogen SunPharma, and MSD. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Although several studies have explored the molecular landscape of metastatic melanoma, the genetic determinants of therapy resistance are still largely unknown. Here, we aimed to determine the contribution of whole-exome sequencing and circulating free DNA (cfDNA) analysis in predicting response to therapy in a consecutive real-world cohort of 36 patients, undergoing fresh tissue biopsy and followed during treatment. Although the underpowered sample size limited statistical analysis, samples from non-responders had higher copy number variations and mutations in melanoma driver genes compared to responders in the BRAF V600+ subset. In the BRAF V600- subset, Tumor Mutational Burden (TMB) was twice that in responders vs. non-responders. Genomic layout revealed commonly known and novel potential intrinsic/acquired resistance driver gene variants. Among these, RAC1 , FBXW7 , GNAQ mutations, and BRAF / PTEN amplification/deletion were present in 42% and 67% of patients, respectively. Both Loss of Heterozygosity (LOH) load and tumor ploidy were inversely associated with TMB. In immunotherapy-treated patients, samples from responders showed higher TMB and lower LOH and were more frequently diploid compared to non-responders. Secondary germline testing and cfDNA analysis proved their efficacy in finding germline predisposing variants carriers (8.3%) and following dynamic changes during treatment as a surrogate of tissue biopsy, respectively.

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the management of multiple tumors, due to improved efficacy, quality of life, and safety. While most immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are mild and easily managed, in rare cases such events may be life-threatening, especially those affecting the neuromuscular and cardiac system. The management of neuromuscular/cardiac irAEs is not clear due to the lack of consistent data. Therefore, we carried out a pooled analysis of collected cases from selected Italian centers and individual data from published case reports and case series, in order to improve our understanding of these irAEs., Patients and Methods: We collected retrospective data from patients treated in six Italian centers with ICIs (programmed cell death protein 1 or programmed death-ligand 1 and/or cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 inhibitor) for any solid tumor who experienced neuromuscular and/or cardiovascular toxicity. Then, we carried out a search of case reports and series of neuromuscular/cardiac irAEs from ICIs with any solid tumor., Results: This analysis includes cases from Italian institutions (n = 18) and the case reports identified in our systematic literature search (n = 120), for a total of 138 patients. Among these patients, 50 (36.2%) had complete resolution of their neuromuscular/cardiac irAEs, in 21 (15.2%) cases there was a clinical improvement with mild sequelae, and 53 (38.4%) patients died as a result of the irAEs. Factors significantly associated with worse outcomes were early irAE onset, within the first two cycles of ICI (Fisher P < 0.0001), clinical manifestation of both myositis and myocarditis when compared with patients who developed only myositis or myocarditis (chi-square P = 0.0045), and the development of arrhythmia (Fisher P = 0.0070)., Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest collection of individual cases of immune-related myocarditis/myositis. Early irAE onset, concurrent development of myositis and myocarditis, as well as occurrence of arrhythmias are associated with worse outcomes and should encourage an aggressive immunomodulatory treatment., Competing Interests: Disclosure FS received honoraria for presentations or lectures from Sanofi Genzyme, Roche, BMS, Novartis, Merck, Sunpharma, MSD, Pierre Fabre, advisory boards for Novartis, Philogen, Sunpharma, MSD. GB received contracts from AstraZeneca, GSK, honoraria from Roche and Pierre Fabre, advisory boards for Pierre Fabre and Roche. FDR received honoraria from MSD, Sunpharma, Pierre Fabre, Novartis, BMS. RM received honoraria for presentations or lectures from BMS, Novartis, Ipsen, Pierre Fabre, MSD, Roche, Sanofi, AAA, advisory boards for Novartis, BMS, Ipsen, Pierre Fabre, MSD. ML received honoraria from Roche, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Libbs, Knight, Takeda, advisory boards for Roche, Lilly, Novartis, AstraZeneca, MSD, Exact Sciences, Seagen, Gilead, Pfizer, and received honoraria from AstraZeneca, BMS, Boehringer-Ingelheim, MSD, Roche. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Metastatic uveal melanoma (MUM) is a highly aggressive, therapy-resistant disease. Driver mutations in Gα-proteins GNAQ and GNA11 activate MAP-kinase and YAP/TAZ pathways of oncogenic signalling. MAP-kinase and MEK-inhibitors do not significantly block MUM progression, likely due to persisting YAP/TAZ signalling. Statins inhibit YAP/TAZ activation by blocking the mevalonate pathway, geranyl-geranylation, and subcellular localisation of the Rho-GTPase. We investigated drugs that affect the YAP/TAZ pathway, valproic acid, verteporfin and statins, in combination with MEK-inhibitor trametinib., Methods: We established IC50 values of the individual drugs and monitored the effects of their combinations in terms of proliferation. We selected trametinib and cerivastatin for evaluation of cell cycle and apoptosis. Synergism was detected using isobologram and Chou-Talalay analyses. The most synergistic combination was tested in vivo., Results: Synergistic concentrations of trametinib and cerivastatin induced a massive arrest of proliferation and cell cycle and enhanced apoptosis, particularly in the monosomic, BAP1 -mutated UPMM3 cell line. The combined treatment reduced ERK and AKT phosphorylation, increased the inactive, cytoplasmatic form of YAP and significantly impaired the growth of UM cells with monosomy of chromosome 3 in NSG mice., Conclusion: Statins can potentiate the efficacy of MEK inhibitors in the therapy of UM.

ATM germline pathogenic variants were recently found enriched in high-risk melanoma patients. However, ATM loss of heterozygosity (LOH) has never been investigated in melanoma and, therefore, a causal association with melanoma development has not been established yet. The purpose of this study was to functionally characterize 13 germline ATM variants found in high-risk melanoma patients-and classified by in silico tools as pathogenic, uncertain significance, or benign-using multiple assays evaluating ATM/pATM expression and/or LOH in melanoma tissues and cell lines. We assessed ATM status by Immunohistochemistry (IHC), Western Blot, Whole-Exome Sequencing/Copy Number Variation analysis, and RNA sequencing, supported by Sanger sequencing and microsatellite analyses. For most variants, IHC results matched those obtained with in silico classification and LOH analysis. Two pathogenic variants (p.Ser1135&#95;Lys1192del and p.Ser1993ArgfsTer23) showed LOH and complete loss of ATM activation in melanoma. Two variants of unknown significance (p.Asn358Ile and p.Asn796His) showed reduced expression and LOH, suggestive of a deleterious effect. This study, showing a classic two-hit scenario in a well-known tumor suppressor gene, supports the inclusion of melanoma in the ATM-related cancer spectrum.

Background: BRAF and MEK inhibitors target therapies (TT) and AntiPD1 immunotherapies (IT) are available first-line treatments for BRAF v600 mutant metastatic melanoma patients. ECOG PS (E), baseline LDH (L), and baseline number of metastatic sites (N) are well-known clinical prognostic markers that identify different prognostic categories of patients. Direct comparison between first-line TT and IT in different prognostic categories could help in first line treatment decision., Methods: This is a retrospective analysis conducted in 14 Italian centers on about 454 metastatic melanoma patients, divided in 3 groups: group A-patients with E = 0, L within normal range, and N less than 3; group B-patients not included in group A or C; group C-patients with E > 0, L over the normal range, and N more than 3. For each prognostic group, we compared TT and IT in terms of progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and disease control rate (DCR)., Results: In group A, results in 140 TT and 36 IT-treated patients were, respectively, median PFS 35.5 vs 11.6 months (HR (95% CI) 1.949 (1.180-3.217) p value 0.009); median OS not reached vs 55 months (HR (95% CI) 1.195 (0.602-2.373) p value 0.610); DCR 99% vs 75% p value <0.001). In group B, results in 196 TT and 38 IT-treated patients were, respectively, median PFS 11.5 vs 5 months (HR 1.535 (1.036-2.275) p value 0.033); median OS 19 vs 20 months (HR 0.886 (0.546-1.437) p value 0.623); DCR 85% vs 47% p value <0.001). In group C, results in 41 TT and 3 IT-treated patients were, respectively, median PFS 6.4 vs 1.8 months (HR 4.860 (1.399-16) p value 0.013); median OS 9 vs 5 months (HR 3.443 (0.991-11.9) p value 0.052); DCR 66% vs 33% p value 0.612)., Conclusions: In good prognosis, group A-TT showed statistically significant better PFS than IT, also in a long-term period, suggesting that TT can be a good first line option for this patient category. It is only in group B that we observed a crossing of the survival curves after the 3rd year of observation in favor of IT. Few patients were enrolled in group C, so few conclusions can be made on it., Competing Interests: RMa, PF, AN, SM, MF, FDR, MDT, ETT, FC, AM, NP, FM, MB, MT, MS, AP, MO, IS declare that they received financial support for congress participation, advisory board, scientific advice from BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pierre fabre, La Roche, Sanofi, Ipsen. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Marconcini, Fava, Nuzzo, Manacorda, Ferrari, De Rosa, De Tursi, Tanda, Consoli, Minisini, Pimpinelli, Morgese, Bersanelli, Tucci, Saponara, Parisi, Ocelli, Bazzurri, Massaro, Morganti, Ciardetti and Stanganelli.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionised clinical practice in oncology in the last years, leading to a survival benefit in several tumour types. To investigate whether these benefits are associated with improved quality of life, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between ICIs and standard chemotherapy (CT) in patients with advanced solid tumours., Methods: Clinical trials comparing the efficacy of ICIs (either programmed death receptor-1 and programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitors or cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 inhibitors, as single agent or in combination) versus CT were included. Trials evaluating treatment with ICIs plus CT versus CT alone were also included, whereas studies in which the control arm included other anticancer agents (such as targeted therapy and other ICIs) or placebo alone were excluded. The aim of our meta-analysis was to compare PROs in subjects treated with ICIs or ICIs plus CT (intervention) with those reported by patients receiving CT (control). The co-primary endpoints were time from baseline to first deterioration in PROs, defined as the time from baseline to the first clinically significant deterioration in PROs, and the changes in PROs from baseline to follow-up between ICI and CT treatment groups (PROSPERO registration number CRD42021247440)., Results: A total of 8341 patients from 17 randomised trials of ICI versus CT were included in the analysis. Treatment with ICI delayed clinical deterioration over standard CT in Global Health Status/QoL EORTC QLQ-C30 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.89), and in both EQ-5D utility index (HR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.52-0.82) and EQ-5D visual analogue scale (VAS; HR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.80). The difference in mean change between the ICI-treated group and the CT-treated group was 5.82 (95% CI, 4.11-7.53) in favour of ICI. Similarly, in the EQ-5D, the mean change differences favoured treatment with ICIs in both Utility Index and VAS, with differences of 0.05 (95% CI, 0.03-0.07) and 5.41 (95% CI, 3.39-7.43), respectively., Conclusions: ICIs are associated with higher levels of quality of life and longer time to clinical deterioration on several PROs scales compared with CT in different types of solid tumours., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement F.S. received honoraria for presentations or lectures from Sanofi, Roche, BMS, Novartis, Merk, SunPharma, MSD, Pierre Fabre, and served on advisory boards of Novartis, Philogen, SunPharma and MSD; M.L. received honoraria for advisory role for Roche, Lilly, Novartis and AstraZeneca and speaker honoraria from Roche, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sandoz, Takeda outside the submitted work. All other authors disclosed no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a rare, highly aggressive, neuroendocrine cutaneous tumor. The incidence of MCC is growing worldwide, and the disease-related mortality is about three-fold higher than melanoma. Since a few years ago, very little has been known about this disease, and chemotherapy has been the standard of care. Nowadays, new discoveries about the pathophysiology of this neoplasm and the introduction of immunotherapy allowed to completely rewrite the history of these patients. In this review, we provide a summary of the most important changes in the management of Merkel cell carcinoma, with a focus on immunotherapy and a landscape of future treatment strategies., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Tanda, d’Amato, Rossi, Croce, Boutros, Cecchi, Spagnolo and Queirolo.)

Immunotherapy has changed the landscape of treatments for advanced disease in multiple neoplasms. More and more patients are long survivors from a metastatic disease. Most recently, the extension of indications and evidence of efficacy in early disease settings, such as the adjuvant and neoadjuvant setting in breast cancer, lung cancer, glioma, and gastric cancer, places more attention on what happens to patients who survive cancer. In particular, we evaluated what happens in young patients, a population in whom some immune-related effects are still poorly described. Immunotherapy is already a reality in early disease settings and the scientific community is lagging in describing what to expect in adolescent and young adult (AYA) patients. For instance, the impact of these therapies on female and male fertility is not clear, similarly to the interaction that may occur between these drugs and pregnancy. This review aims to highlight these little-known topics that are difficult to evaluate in ad hoc studies., Competing Interests: CG received honoraria from Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Merck-Sharp-Dohme, Roche, and Boehringer-Ingelheim. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Tanda, Croce, Spagnolo, Zullo, Spinaci, Genova and Rossi.)

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) accounts for approximately 20% of all keratinocytic tumors. In most cases, the diagnosis and treatments are made on small, low-risk lesions. However, in about 5% of cases, CSCC may present as either locally advanced or metastatic (i.e. with locoregional lymph nodes metastases or distant localizations). Prior to the introduction of immunotherapy in clinical practice, the standard treatment of advanced CSCC was not clearly defined, and up to 60% of patients received no systemic therapy. Thanks to a strong pre-clinical rationale, clinical trials led to the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) and EMA (European Medicines Agency) registration of cemiplimab, a PD-1 inhibitor that achieved encouraging results in terms of objective response, overall survival, and quality of life. Subsequently, the anti-PD-1 pembrolizumab received the approval for the treatment of advanced CSCC by the FDA only. In this review, we will focus on the definition of advanced CSCC and on the current and future therapeutic options, with a particular regard for immunotherapy., Competing Interests: FS received honoraria for presentations or lectures from Sanofi, Roche, BMS, Novartis, Merk, SunPharma, MSD, Pierre Fabre, and surved on advisory boards of Novartis, Philogen, SunPharma and MSD; PQ reports consulting or advisory role for Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck & Co., Novartis, Pierre Favre, Roche/Genentech, and Sanofi. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Boutros, Cecchi, Tanda, Croce, Gili, Arecco, Spagnolo and Queirolo.)

Background: The favourable safety profile and the increasing confidence with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) might have boosted their prescription in frail patients with short life expectancies, who usually are not treated with standard chemotherapy., Methods: The present analysis aims to describe clinicians' attitudes towards ICIs administration during late stages of life within a multicenter cohort of advanced cancer patients treated with single agent PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors in Italy., Results: Overall, 1149 patients with advanced cancer who received single agent PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors were screened. The final study population consisted of 567 deceased patients. 166 patients (29.3%) had received ICIs within 30 days of death; among them there was a significantly higher proportion of patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (28.3% vs 11.5%, p < 0.0001) and with a higher burden of disease (69.3% vs 59.4%, p = 0.0266). In total, 35 patients (6.2%) started ICIs within 30 days of death; among them there was a higher proportion of patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (45.7% vs 14.5%, p < 0.0001) and with a higher burden of disease (82.9% vs 60.9%, p = 0.0266). Primary tumors were significantly different across subgroups (p = 0.0172), with a higher prevalence of NSCLC patients (80% vs 60.9%) among those who started ICIs within 30 days of death. Lastly, 123 patients (21.7%) started ICIs within 3 months of death. Similarly, within this subgroup there was a higher proportion of patients with ECOG-PS ≥ 2 (29.3% vs 12.8%, p < 0.0001), with a higher burden of disease (74.0% vs 59.0%, p = 0.0025) and with NSCLC (74.0% vs 58.8%, p = 0.0236)., Conclusion: Our results confirmed a trend toward an increasing ICIs prescription in frail patients, during the late stages of life. Caution should be exercised when evaluating an ICI treatment for patients with a poor PS and a high burden of disease.

Uveal melanoma (UM), though a rare form of melanoma, is the most common intraocular tumor in adults. Conventional therapies of primary tumors lead to an excellent local control, but 50% of patients develop metastases, in most cases with lethal outcome. Somatic driver mutations that act on the MAP-kinase pathway have been identified, yet targeted therapies show little efficacy in the clinics. No drugs are currently available for the G protein alpha subunits GNAQ and GNA11 , which are the most frequent driver mutations in UM. Drugs targeting the YAP-TAZ pathway that is also activated in UM, the tumor-suppressor gene BRCA1 Associated Protein 1 ( BAP1 ) and the Splicing Factor 3b Subunit 1 gene ( SF3B1 ) whose mutations are associated with metastatic risk, have not been developed yet. Immunotherapy is highly effective in cutaneous melanoma but yields only poor results in the treatment of UM: anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 blocking antibodies did not meet the expectations except for isolated cases. Here, we discuss how the improved knowledge of the tumor microenvironment and of the cross-talk between tumor and immune cells could help to reshape anti-tumor immune responses to overcome the intrinsic resistance to immune checkpoint blockers of UM. We critically review the dogma of low mutational load, the induction of immune-suppressive cells, and the expression of alternative immune checkpoint molecules. We argue that immunotherapy might still be an option for the treatment of UM.

Background: Treatment beyond progression with immunotherapy may be appropriate in selected patients based on the potential for late responses. The aim of this systematic review was to explore the impact of treatment beyond progression in patients receiving an anti-PD-1/PD-L1 based regimen for an advanced solid tumor., Methods: A systematic literature search was performed to identify prospective clinical trials reporting data on overall response rate by immune-related criteria and/or the number of patients treated beyond conventional criteria-defined PD and/or the number of patients achieving a clinical benefit after an initial PD with regimens including an anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agent which received the FDA approval for the treatment of an advanced solid tumor., Results: 254 (4.6%) responses after an initial RECIST-defined progressive disease were observed among 5588 patients, based on 35 trials included in our analysis reporting this information. The overall rate of patients receiving treatment beyond progressive disease was 30.2%, based on data on 5334 patients enrolled in 36 trials, and the rate of patients who achieved an unconventional response among those treated beyond progressive disease was 19.7% (based on 25 trials for a total of 853 patients)., Conclusion: The results of our systematic review support the clinical relevance of unconventional responses to anti-PD-1/PD-L1-based regimens; however, most publications provided only partial information regarding immune-related clinical activity, or did not provide any information at all, highlighting the need of a more comprehensive report of such data in trials investigating immunotherapy for the treatment of patients with advanced tumors.

Background: Concomitant medications are known to impact on clinical outcomes of patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). We aimed weighing the role of different concomitant baseline medications to create a drug-based prognostic score., Methods: We evaluated concomitant baseline medications at immunotherapy initiation for their impact on objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in a single-institution cohort of patients with advanced cancer treated with ICIs (training cohort, N = 217), and a drug-based prognostic score with the drugs resulting significantly impacting the OS was computed. Secondly, we externally validated the score in a large multicenter external cohort (n = 1012)., Results: In the training cohort (n = 217), the median age was 69 years (range: 32-89), and the primary tumours were non-small-cell lung cancer (70%), melanoma (14.7%), renal cell carcinoma (9.2%) and others (6%). Among baseline medications, corticosteroids (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.60-3.30), systemic antibiotics (HR = 2.07; 95% CI: 1.31-3.25) and proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) (HR = 1.57; 95% CI: 1.13-2.18) were significantly associated with OS. The prognostic score was calculated using these three drug classes, defining good, intermediate and poor prognosis patients. Within the training cohort, OS (p < 0.0001), PFS (p < 0.0001) and ORR (p = 0.0297) were significantly distinguished by the score stratification. The prognostic value of the score was also demonstrated in terms of OS (p < 0.0001), PFS (p < 0.0001) and ORR (p = 0.0006) within the external cohort., Conclusion: Cumulative exposure to corticosteroids, antibiotics and PPIs (three likely microbiota-modulating drugs) leads to progressively worse outcomes after ICI therapy. We propose a simple score that can help stratifying patients in routine practice and clinical trials of ICIs., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement M.B. reports receiving research funding by Roche, Seqirus, Pfizer and Novartis and personal fees as a speaker/consultant from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Pfizer and BMS. M.T. reports receiving speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Eli-Lilly, BMS, Novartis, Roche, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, Otsuka, Takeda and Pierre Fabre. A.C. reports receiving speaker fees and grant consultancies from Roche, MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Novartis and Astellas. R.G. reports receiving speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca and Roche. M.G.V. reports receiving speaker fees, grant consultancies and travel support from BMS, Ipsen, Novartis, Pfizer, Astellas, Jansen and Pierre-Fabre. A.R. reports receiving grant consultancies from AstraZeneca and MSD. F.S. reports receiving speaker fees and grant consultancies from Roche, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Pierre-Fabre, Sanofi, Merck and Sunpharma. D.J.P. reports receiving lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare and Bayer Healthcare; travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche and AstraZeneca and research funding (to institution) from MSD and BMS. P.A.A. reports receiving speaker fees and grant consultancies from BMS, Roche-Genentech, MSD, Dohme, Array, Novartis, Merck-Serono, Pierre-Fabre, Incyte, New Link Genetics, Genmab, Medimmune, AstraZeneca, Syndax, SunPharma, Sanofi, Idera, Ultimovacs, Sandoz, Immunocore, 4SC, Alkermes, Italfarmaco, Nektar and Boehringer-Ingelheim and research funds from BMS, Roche-Genentech and Array. All other authors declared no competing interests., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Identification of somatic mutations in key oncogenes in melanoma is important to lead the effective and efficient use of personalized anticancer treatment. Conventional methods focus on few genes per run and, therefore, are unable to screen for multiple genes simultaneously. The use of Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) technologies enables sequencing of multiple cancer-driving genes in a single assay, with reduced costs and DNA quantity needed and increased mutation detection sensitivity., Methods: We designed a customized IMI somatic gene panel for targeted sequencing of actionable melanoma mutations; this panel was tested on three different NGS platforms using 11 metastatic melanoma tissue samples in blinded manner between two EMQN quality certificated laboratory., Results: The detection limit of our assay was set-up to a Variant Allele Frequency (VAF) of 10% with a coverage of at least 200x. All somatic variants detected by all NGS platforms with a VAF ≥ 10%, were also validated by an independent method. The IMI panel achieved a very good concordance among the three NGS platforms., Conclusion: This study demonstrated that, using the main sequencing platforms currently available in the diagnostic setting, the IMI panel can be adopted among different centers providing comparable results.

Background: Concomitant medications, such as steroids, proton pump inhibitors (PPI) and antibiotics, might affect clinical outcomes with immune checkpoint inhibitors., Methods: We conducted a multicenter observational retrospective study aimed at evaluating the impact of concomitant medications on clinical outcomes, by weighing their associations with baseline clinical characteristics (including performance status, burden of disease and body mass index) and the underlying causes for their prescription. This analysis included consecutive stage IV patients with cancer, who underwent treatment with single agent antiprogrammed death-1/programmed death ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) with standard doses and schedules at the medical oncology departments of 20 Italian institutions. Each medication taken at the immunotherapy initiation was screened and collected into key categories as follows: corticosteroids, antibiotics, gastric acid suppressants (including proton pump inhibitors - PPIs), statins and other lipid-lowering agents, aspirin, anticoagulants, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), ACE inhibitors/Angiotensin II receptor blockers, calcium antagonists, β-blockers, metformin and other oral antidiabetics, opioids., Results: From June 2014 to March 2020, 1012 patients were included in the analysis. Primary tumors were: non-small cell lung cancer (52.2%), melanoma (26%), renal cell carcinoma (18.3%) and others (3.6%). Baseline statins (HR 1.60 (95% CI 1.14 to 2.25), p=0.0064), aspirin (HR 1.47 (95% CI 1.04 to 2.08, p=0.0267) and β-blockers (HR 1.76 (95% CI 1.16 to 2.69), p=0.0080) were confirmed to be independently related to an increased objective response rate. Patients receiving cancer-related steroids (HR 1.72 (95% CI 1.43 to 2.07), p<0.0001), prophylactic systemic antibiotics (HR 1.85 (95% CI 1.23 to 2.78), p=0.0030), prophylactic gastric acid suppressants (HR 1.29 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.53), p=0.0021), PPIs (HR 1.26 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.48), p=0.0050), anticoagulants (HR 1.43 (95% CI: 1.16 to 1.77), p=0.0007) and opioids (HR 1.71 (95% CI 1.28 to 2.28), p=0.0002) were confirmed to have a significantly higher risk of disease progression. Patients receiving cancer-related steroids (HR 2.16 (95% CI 1.76 to 2.65), p<0.0001), prophylactic systemic antibiotics (HR 1.93 (95% CI 1.25 to 2.98), p=0.0030), prophylactic gastric acid suppressants (HR 1.29 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.57), p=0.0091), PPI (HR 1.26 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.52), p=0.0172), anticoagulants (HR 1.45 (95% CI 1.14 to 1.84), p=0.0024) and opioids (HR 1.53 (95% CI 1.11 to 2.11), p=0.0098) were confirmed to have a significantly higher risk of death., Conclusion: We confirmed the association between baseline steroids administered for cancer-related indication, systemic antibiotics, PPIs and worse clinical outcomes with PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors, which can be assumed to have immune-modulating detrimental effects., Competing Interests: Competing interests: AC received speaker fees and grant consultancies from Roche, MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Astellas. RG received speaker fees and grant consultancies from AstraZeneca and Roche. MGV received speaker fees, grant consultancies and travel support from BMS, Ipsen, Novartis, Pfizer, Astellas, Jansen and Pierre-Fabre. AR received grant consultancies from AstraZeneca and MSD. RM received grant consultancies from Pierre-Fabre, MSD, Incyte, BMS, and Roche. FS received speaker fees and grant consultancies from Roche, Novartis, BMS, MSD, Pierre-Fabre, Sanofi, Merck and Sunpharma. DP received lecture fees from ViiV Healthcare, Bayer Healthcare and travel expenses from BMS and Bayer Healthcare; consulting fees for Mina Therapeutics, EISAI, Roche, Astra Zeneca; received research funding (to institution) from MSD, BMS. PAA received speaker fees and grant consultancies from BMS, Roche-Genentech, MSD, Dohme, Array, Novartis, Merck-Serono, Pierre-Fabre, Incyte, New Link Genetics, Genmab, Medimmune, AstraZeneca, Syndax, SunPharma, Sanofi, Idera, Ultimovacs, Sandoz, Immunocore, 4SC, Alkermes, Italfarmaco, Nektar, Boehringer-Ingelheim; he also received research funds from BMS, Roche-Genentech, Array., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Melanoma is one of the most aggressive tumors of the skin, and its incidence is growing worldwide. Historically considered a drug resistant disease, since 2011 the therapeutic landscape of melanoma has radically changed. Indeed, the improved knowledge of the immune system and its interactions with the tumor, and the ever more thorough molecular characterization of the disease, has allowed the development of immunotherapy on the one hand, and molecular target therapies on the other. The increased availability of more performing technologies like Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS), and the availability of increasingly large genetic panels, allows the identification of several potential therapeutic targets. In light of this, numerous clinical and preclinical trials are ongoing, to identify new molecular targets. Here, we review the landscape of mutated non- BRAF skin melanoma, in light of recent data deriving from Whole-Exome Sequencing (WES) or Whole-Genome Sequencing (WGS) studies on melanoma cohorts for which information on the mutation rate of each gene was available, for a total of 10 NGS studies and 992 samples, focusing on available, or in experimentation, targeted therapies beyond those targeting mutated BRAF. Namely, we describe 33 established and candidate driver genes altered with frequency greater than 1.5%, and the current status of targeted therapy for each gene. Only 1.1% of the samples showed no coding mutations, whereas 30% showed at least one mutation in the RAS genes (mostly NRAS ) and 70% showed mutations outside of the RAS genes, suggesting potential new roads for targeted therapy. Ongoing clinical trials are available for 33.3% of the most frequently altered genes., (Copyright © 2020 Vanni, Tanda, Dalmasso, Pastorino, Andreotti, Bruno, Boutros, Spagnolo and Ghiorzo.)

Incidence of melanoma has been constantly growing during the last decades. Although most of the new diagnoses are represented by thin melanomas, the number of melanoma-related deaths in 2018 was 60,712 worldwide (Global Cancer Observatory, 2019). Until 2011, no systemic therapy showed to improve survival in patients with advanced or metastatic melanoma. At that time, standard of care was chemotherapy, with very limited results. The identification of BRAF V600 mutation, and the subsequent introduction of BRAF targeting drugs, radically changed the clinical practice and dramatically improved outcomes. In this review, we will retrace the development of molecular-target drugs and the current therapeutic scenario for patients with BRAF mutated melanoma, from the introduction of BRAF inhibitors as single agents to modern clinical practice. We will also discuss the resistance mechanisms identified so far, and the future therapeutic perspectives in BRAF mutated melanoma., (Copyright © 2020 Tanda, Vanni, Boutros, Andreotti, Bruno, Ghiorzo and Spagnolo.)

The incidence of melanoma, among the most lethal cancers, is widespread and increasing. Metastatic melanoma has a poor prognosis, representing about 90% of skin cancer mortality. The increased knowledge of tumor biology and the greater understanding of the immune system role in the anti-tumor response has allowed us to develop a more rational approach to systemic therapies. The discovery of activating BRAF mutations in half of all melanomas has led to the development of molecularly targeted therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors, which dramatically improved outcomes of patients with stage IV BRAF-mutant melanoma. More recently, the results of clinical phase III studies conducted in the adjuvant setting led to the combined administration of BRAF and MEK inhibitors also in patients with resected high-risk melanoma (stage III). Therefore, BRAF mutation testing has become a priority to determine the oncologist's choice and course of therapy. In this review, we will report the molecular biology-based strategies used for BRAF mutation detection with the main advantages and disadvantages of the most commonly used diagnostic strategies. The timing of such molecular assessment in patients with cutaneous melanoma will be discussed, and we will also examine considerations and approaches for accurate and effective BRAF testing., (Copyright © 2020 Vanni, Tanda, Spagnolo, Andreotti, Bruno and Ghiorzo.)

In recent years, the evolution of treatments has made it possible to significantly improve the outcomes of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In particular, while molecular targeted therapies are effective in specific patient sub-groups, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have greatly influenced the outcomes of a large proportion of NSCLC patients. While nivolumab activity was initially assessed irrespective of predictive biomarkers, subsequent pivotal studies involving other PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors in pre-treated advanced NSCLC (atezolizumab within the OAK study and pembrolizumab in the Keynote 010 study) reported the first correlations between clinical outcomes and PD-L1 expression. However, PD-L1 could not be sufficient on its own to select patients who may benefit from immunotherapy. Many studies have tried to discover more precise markers that are derived from tumor tissue or from peripheral blood. This review aims to analyze any characteristics of the immunogram that could be used as a predictive biomarker for response to ICIs. Furthermore, we describe the most important genetic alteration that might predict the activity of immunotherapy.

The contribution of recently established or candidate susceptibility genes to melanoma missing heritability has yet to be determined. Multigene panel testing could increase diagnostic yield and better define the role of candidate genes. We characterized 273 CDKN2A/ARF and CDK4- negative probands through a custom-designed targeted gene panel that included CDKN2A/ARF, CDK4, ACD, BAP1, MITF, POT1, TERF2IP, ATM, and PALB2. Co-segregation, loss of heterozygosity (LOH)/protein expression analysis, and splicing characterization were performed to improve variant classification. We identified 16 (5.9%) pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants in established high/medium penetrance cutaneous melanoma susceptibility genes ( BAP1, POT1, ACD, MITF, and TERF2IP ), including two novel variants in BAP1 and 4 in POT1 . We also found four deleterious and five likely deleterious variants in ATM (3.3%). Thus, including potentially deleterious variants in ATM increased the diagnostic yield to about 9%. Inclusion of rare variants of uncertain significance would increase the overall detection yield to 14%. At least 10% of melanoma missing heritability may be explained through panel testing in our population. To our knowledge, this is the highest frequency of putative ATM deleterious variants reported in melanoma families, suggesting a possible role in melanoma susceptibility, which needs further investigation., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Background: Advanced age is associated with comorbidities and immune system impairment, which may influence the efficacy and tolerability of immune checkpoint inhibitors. There is evidence that anti-PD1 antibodies in advanced melanoma are equally effective in patients >65 years. However, data on patients >75 years are lacking as co-morbidities and logistics often exclude them from clinical trials., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of older patients with advanced melanoma undergoing any-line treatment with an anti-PD1 (nivolumab/pembrolizumab) to investigate its clinical effectiveness and toxicity in a real-life setting. Clinical response was assessed using RECIST criteria and toxicity was evaluated according to CTCAE 4.0. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method and the Cox model was used to assess potential prognostic factors., Results: 174 patients were considered; 59.2% males, median age 79 years (range 75-93). The majority had a performance status of 0 and normal lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels (55.2% and 52.4%, respectively). 69.1% had multiple co-morbidities. 56.9% received nivolumab. 36.7% of cases showed an objective response and the disease control rate was 56.3%. Median OS was 17.2 months [95% CI: 8.87-not reached] and a better prognosis was observed for patients with normal LDH (p < .001) and lower performance status (p < .001). Treatment was well tolerated, only 11 patients experiencing severe (grade 3/4) toxicity. There were no treatment-related deaths. Adverse events were managed with corticosteroids and additional immunosuppressive agents were unnecessary., Conclusions: Anti-PD1 antibodies appear effective and well tolerated in older patients with advanced melanoma., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None to declare., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Multiple primary melanoma (MPM), in concert with a positive family history, is a predictor of cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A) germline mutations. A rule regarding the presence of either 2 or 3 or more cancer events (melanoma and pancreatic cancer) in low or high melanoma incidence populations, respectively, has been established to select patients for genetic referral., Objective: We sought to determine the CDKN2A/CDK4/microphthalmia-associated transcription factor mutation rate among Italian patients with MPM to appropriately direct genetic counseling regardless of family history., Methods: In all, 587 patients with MPM and an equal number with single primary melanomas and control subjects were consecutively enrolled at the participating centers and tested for CDKN2A, CDK4, and microphthalmia-associated transcription factor., Results: CDKN2A germline mutations were found in 19% of patients with MPM versus 4.4% of patients with single primary melanoma. In familial MPM cases the mutation rate varied from 36.6% to 58.8%, whereas in sporadic MPM cases it varied from 8.2% to 17.6% in patients with 2 and 3 or more melanomas, respectively. The microphthalmia-associated transcription factor E318K mutation accounted for 3% of MPM cases altogether., Limitations: The study was hospital based, not population based. Rare novel susceptibility genes were not tested., Conclusion: Italian patients who developed 2 melanomas, even in situ, should be referred for genetic counseling even in the absence of family history., (Copyright © 2015 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The treatment of advanced melanoma underwent a complete revolution over the last years. Targeted therapy and immunotherapy marked the beginning of a new management model for cancer. Targeted therapies are drugs directed exclusively against specific molecules in order to modulate their action. Immunotherapy, on the other hand, operates through drugs aimed to restoring the normal anti-tumor activity of the immune system. Indeed, in pathological conditions the immune system could be silenced or avoided through several mechanisms of "immunological escape". Since Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of ipilimumab in 2011, many other molecules have been investigated. Recently, anti-PD-1 (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) achieved promising results. The aim of this review is to trace the history of nivolumab, through major Phase I, II and III studies until FDA and European Medicines Agency approval.

Introduction: The aim of this study was to analyze and describe the incidence and mortality trends of ovarian cancer in North Sardinia, Italy, in the period 1992-2010., Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from the tumor registry of Sassari province which makes part of a wider registry web, coordinated today by the Italian Association for Tumor Registries., Results: The overall number of ovarian cancer cases registered in the period under investigation was 600. The mean age of the patients was 62 years. The standardized incidence and mortality rates were 11.2/100,000 and 5.1/100,000 respectively. A substantially stable trend in incidence and mortality of ovarian cancer was evidenced. Relative survival at five years from diagnosis was 44.2%., Conclusions: The incidence and mortality trends of ovarian cancer in North Sardinia remained relatively stable in the last decades, while prognosis remains relatively poor.