Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background: Established prognostic factors are of limited value to predict long-term survival and benefit from metastasectomy in advanced melanoma. This study aimed to identify prognostic factors in patients with distant metastasis. Methods: We analysed overall survival of 855 institutional melanoma patients with distant metastasis by bivariate Kaplan–Meier survival probabilities and multivariate Cox hazard regression analysis. Results: Serum lactate dehydrogenases (LDH), S100B, the interval between initial diagnosis and occurrence of distant metastasis, the site of distant metastases, and the number of involved distant sites were significant independent prognostic factors in both bivariate and multivariate analyses. Visceral metastases other than lung (hazard ratio (HR) 1.8), elevated S100B (HR 1.7) and elevated LDH (HR 1.6) had the highest negative impact on survival. Complete metastasectomy was likewise an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis. This treatment was associated with favourable survival for patients with normal LDH and S100B values (5-year survival, 37.2%). Conclusion: The serum markers LDH and S100B were both found to be prognostic factors in melanoma patients with distant metastasis. Furthermore, complete metastasectomy had an independent favourable prognostic impact in particular for the patient subgroup with normal LDH and S100B values.

Background: This retrospective study aimed to identify prognostic factors in patients with brain metastases from cutaneous melanoma. Methods: In all, 265 patients under regular screening according to valid national surveillance guidelines were included in the study. Kaplan–Meier analyses were performed to estimate and to compare overall survival. Cox modeling was used to identify independent determinants of the overall survival, which were used in explorative classification and regression tree analysis to define meaningful prognostic groups. Results: In total, 55.5% of our patients presented with two or less brain metastases, 82.6% had concurrent extracranial metastasis and 64% were asymptomatic and diagnosed during surveillance scans. In all, 36.7% were candidates for local treatment (neurosurgery or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS)). The median overall survival of the entire collective was 5.0 months (95% confidence interval: 4.3–5.7). Favourable independent prognostic factors were: normal pre-treatment level of serum lactate dehydrogenase ( P <0.001), administered therapy (neurosurgery or SRS vs other, P =0.002), number of brain metastases (single vs multiple, P =0.032) and presence of bone metastasis (false vs true, P =0.044). Three prognostic groups with significantly different overall survival were identified. Candidates for local treatment (group I) had the longer median survival (9 months). Remaining patients could be further classified in two groups on the basis of serum lactate dehydrogenase. Conclusion: Applied treatment and serum lactate dehydrogenase levels were independent predictors of survival of patients with brain metastases from cutaneous melanoma. Patients receiving local therapy have overall survival comparable with general stage IV melanoma patients.

The objective of the present study was to validate the use of intralesional injection of interleukin-2 (IL-2) in patients with skin and soft-tissue melanoma metastases. A total of 24 patients with AJCC stage III or IV melanoma and single or multiple skin and soft-tissue metastases were included. Interleukin-2 injections were administered intralesionally into the total number of cutaneous and soft-tissue metastases accessible from the skin, 2–3 times weekly, over 1–57 weeks. Single doses varied from 0.6 to 6 × 10 6  IU, depending on lesion size. The clinical response was monitored by sonography and confirmed by histopathology; response evaluation was confined to the intralesionally treated tumours. Complete response (CR) of the treated metastases was achieved in 15 patients (62.5%), the longest remission lasting 38 months to date. In five patients, partial response (PR) was achieved (21%) and in another three patients, progressive disease was observed (one patient not assessable). A total of 245 metastases were treated with CR in 209 (85%), and PR in 21 (6%). The therapy was generally well tolerated; the observed adverse events were mainly of grade 1–2 severity. Immunohistochemical studies showed the tumour cells undergoing apoptosis and revealed a mixed character of the inflammatory infiltrate. The unusual high CR rate in metastatic melanoma of 62.5% and the limited toxicity suggest that treatment of skin and soft-tissue melanoma metastases with intralesional injection of IL-2 may be a safe and effective alternative to conventional therapies. The optimal dosage and duration of this therapy still remain to be defined in larger prospective multicentre trials.

IMspire150 aimed to evaluate first-line combination treatment with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors and immune checkpoint therapy in BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced or metastatic melanoma. IMspire150 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study done at 112 institutes in 20 countries. Patients with unresectable stage IIIc–IV, BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1 to 28-day cycles of atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) or atezolizumab placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group). In cycle 1, all patients received vemurafenib and cobimetinib only; atezolizumab placebo was added from cycle 2 onward. Randomisation was stratified by lactate dehydrogenase concentration and geographical region. Blinding for atezolizumab was achieved by means of an identical intravenous placebo, and blinding for vemurafenib was achieved by means of a placebo tablet. The primary outcome was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. This trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672) is ongoing but no longer recruiting patients. Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 777 patients were screened and 514 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (n=256) or control group (n=258). At a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4–23·8), progression-free survival as assessed by the study investigator was significantly prolonged with atezolizumab versus control (15·1 vs 10·6 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0·78; 95% CI 0·63–0·97; p=0·025). Common treatment-related adverse events (>30%) in the atezolizumab and control groups were blood creatinine phosphokinase increased (51·3% vs 44·8%), diarrhoea (42·2% vs 46·6%), rash (40·9%, both groups), arthralgia (39·1% vs 28·1%), pyrexia (38·7% vs 26·0%), alanine aminotransferase increased (33·9% vs 22·8%), and lipase increased (32·2% vs 27·4%); 13% of patients in the atezolizumab group and 16% in the control group stopped all treatment because of adverse events. The addition of atezolizumab to targeted therapy with vemurafenib and cobimetinib was safe and tolerable and significantly increased progression-free survival in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. F Hoffmann–La Roche and Genentech.

Primary analysis of the phase 3 IMspire150 study showed improved investigator-assessed progression-free survival with first-line atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) versus placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group) in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma. With a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4–23·8) at the primary analysis, overall survival data were immature. Here, we report the results from the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis. The multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 IMspire150 study was done at 108 academic and community hospitals in 20 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated unresectable stage IIIc or stage IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously on day 1 and 15) or placebo plus vemurafenib (960 mg or 720 mg twice daily orally) and cobimetinib (60 mg once daily orally; 21 days on and 7 days off) in 28-day cycles. Atezolizumab and placebo were added to treatment regimens from cycle two onwards. Randomisation was done centrally (Durham, NC, USA) based on a permuted block randomisation scheme (block size of 4) using an interactive web-based response system and was stratified by geographical region and baseline lactate dehydrogenase concentration. Overall survival was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug according to actual treatment received. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, which was previously reported. Here, we report the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis, which was planned after about 270 overall survival events had occurred. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer enrolling patients, and it is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672. Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 514 patients (median age 54 years [IQR 43–63]; 299 [58%] men and 215 [42%] women) were enrolled in the trial and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (256 [50%] patients) or the control group (258 [50%] patients). At the data cutoff (Sept 8, 2021), 273 patients had died (126 in the atezolizumab group and 147 in the control group). Median follow-up was 29·1 months (IQR 10·1–45·4) for the atezolizumab group versus 22·8 months (10·6–44·1) for the control group. Median overall survival was 39·0 months (95% CI 29·9–not estimable) in the atezolizumab group versus 25·8 months (22·0–34·6) in the control group (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·66–1·06]; p=0·14). The most common adverse events of any grade in the atezolizumab group were blood creatine phosphokinase increased (123 [53%] of 231 patients), diarrhoea (116 [50%]), and pyrexia (115 [50%]). The most common adverse events of any grade in the control group were diarrhoea (157 [56%] of 280 patients), blood creatine phosphokinase increased (135 [48%]), and rash (119 [43%]). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were increased lipase (54 [23%] of 231 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 62 [22%] of 280 patients in the control group), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (51 [22%] vs 50 [18%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase (32 [14%] vs 26 [9%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 112 (48%) patients in the atezolizumab group and 117 (42%) patients in the control group. Grade 5 adverse events were reported in eight (3%) patients in the atezolizumab group versus six (2%) patients in the control group. Two grade 5 adverse events (hepatitis fulminant and hepatic failure) in the atezolizumab group were considered to be associated with the triplet combination, and one event in the control group (pulmonary haemorrhage) was considered to be associated with cobimetinib. Additional follow-up of the IMspire150 trial showed that overall survival was not significantly improved with atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib compared with placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. Results of the final analysis are awaited to establish whether a significant improvement in overall survival can be achieved with long-term treatment with this triplet combination versus vemurafenib plus cobimetinib. F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Nivolumab and ipilimumab, alone or in combination, are widely used immunotherapeutic treatment options for patients with advanced—ie, unresectable or metastatic—melanoma. This criterion, however, excludes patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. We therefore aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab monotherapy versus a placebo in this patient population. We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial in 20 German academic medical centres. Eligible patients were aged 18–80 years with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after surgery or radiotherapy. Key exclusion criteria included uveal or mucosal melanoma, previous therapy with checkpoint inhibitors, and any previous immunosuppressive therapy within the 30 days before study drug administration. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a central, interactive, online system, to the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group (1 mg/kg of intravenous nivolumab every 3 weeks plus 3 mg/kg of intravenous ipilimumab every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by 3 mg/kg of nivolumab every 2 weeks), nivolumab monotherapy group (3 mg/kg of intravenous nivolumab every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab-matching placebo during weeks 1–12), or double-matching placebo group. The primary endpoint was the recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. The results presented in this report reflect the prespecified interim analysis of recurrence-free survival after 90 events had been reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02523313, and is ongoing. Between Sept 2, 2015, and Nov 20, 2018, 167 patients were randomly assigned to receive nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=56), nivolumab (n=59), or placebo (n=52). As of July 2, 2019, at a median follow-up of 28·4 months (IQR 17·7–36·8), median recurrence-free survival was not reached in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, whereas median recurrence-free survival was 12·4 months (95% CI 5·3–33·3) in the nivolumab group and 6·4 months (3·3–9·6) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio for recurrence for the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo group was 0·23 (97·5% CI 0·12–0·45; p<0·0001), and for the nivolumab group versus placebo group was 0·56 (0·33–0·94; p=0·011). In the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, recurrence-free survival at 1 year was 75% (95% CI 61·0–84·9) and at 2 years was 70% (55·1–81·0); in the nivolumab group, 1-year recurrence-free survival was 52% (38·1–63·9) and at 2 years was 42% (28·6–54·5); and in the placebo group, this rate was 32% (19·8–45·3) at 1 year and 14% (5·9–25·7) at 2 years. Treatment-related grade 3–4 adverse events were reported in 71% (95% CI 57–82) of patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and in 27% (16–40) of those in the nivolumab group. Treatment-related adverse events of any grade led to treatment discontinuation in 34 (62%) of 55 patients in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group and seven (13%) of 56 in the nivolumab group. Three deaths from adverse events were reported but were considered unrelated to the study treatment. Adjuvant therapy with nivolumab alone or in combination with ipilimumab increased recurrence-free survival significantly compared with placebo in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. The rates of grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events in both active treatment groups were higher than the rates reported in previous pivotal trials done in advanced melanoma with measurable disease. Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Ipilimumab, a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) blocking antibody, has been approved for the treatment of metastatic melanoma and induces adverse events (AE) in up to 64% of patients. Treatment algorithms for the management of common ipilimumab-induced AEs have lead to a reduction of morbidity, e.g. due to bowel perforations. However, the spectrum of less common AEs is expanding as ipilimumab is increasingly applied. Stringent recognition and management of AEs will reduce drug-induced morbidity and costs, and thus, positively impact the cost-benefit ratio of the drug. To facilitate timely identification and adequate management data on rare AEs were analyzed at 19 skin cancer centers. Patient files (n = 752) were screened for rare ipilimumab-associated AEs. A total of 120 AEs, some of which were life-threatening or even fatal, were reported and summarized by organ system describing the most instructive cases in detail. Previously unreported AEs like drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), granulomatous inflammation of the central nervous system, and aseptic meningitis, were documented. Obstacles included patientś delay in reporting symptoms and the differentiation of steroid-induced from ipilimumab-induced AEs under steroid treatment. Importantly, response rate was high in this patient population with tumor regression in 30.9% and a tumor control rate of 61.8% in stage IV melanoma patients despite the fact that some patients received only two of four recommended ipilimumab infusions. This suggests that ipilimumab-induced antitumor responses can have an early onset and that severe autoimmune reactions may reflect overtreatment. The wide spectrum of ipilimumab-induced AEs demands doctor and patient awareness to reduce morbidity and treatment costs and true ipilimumab success is dictated by both objective tumor responses and controlling severe side effects.

Engineered cytokine products represent promising agents for the treatment of immunogenic tumors, such as malignant melanoma, in addition to immune checkpoint inhibitors. Here we describe the results of a controlled, randomized phase II clinical trial, aimed at assessing the therapeutic potential of L19IL2, a fully human fusion protein consisting of the L19 antibody specific to the alternatively spliced extra-domain B of fibronectin, fused to human interleukin-2 in advanced metastatic melanoma. In one arm, patients received dacarbazine (DTIC; 1000 mg/m2 of body surface on day 1 of 21-day cycles) as single agent, while in two other arms L19IL2 (22.5 million international units of IL2 equivalents) was added, based on two different schedules of administration. In total, 69 patients with stage IV melanoma were enrolled (24 in the dacarbazine arm, 23 and 22 in the other combination arms, respectively) and 67 received treatment. Analyses of efficacy results show a statistically significant benefit in terms of overall response rate and median progression-free survival for patients receiving L19IL2 in combination with DTIC, compared to DTIC as single agent. In light of these results, further clinical investigations with L19IL2 (alone or in combination with other agents) are warranted.

The IMMUNED trial previously showed significant improvements in recurrence-free survival for adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab as well as for adjuvant nivolumab alone in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after resection or radiotherapy. Here, we report the final analysis, including overall survival data. IMMUNED was an investigator-sponsored, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-arm, phase 2 trial conducted in 20 academic medical centres in Germany. Eligible patients were aged 18–80 years with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease after surgery or radiotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to either nivolumab plus ipilimumab (nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks), nivolumab monotherapy (nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks), or matching placebo, for up to 1 year. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints were time-to-recurrence, overall survival, progression-free survival or recurrence-free survival 2 (in patients in the placebo group who crossed over to nivolumab monotherapy after experiencing disease recurrence), and safety endpoints. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02523313), and is complete. Between Sept 2, 2015, and Nov 20, 2018, 175 patients were enrolled in the study, and 167 were randomly assigned to receive either nivolumab plus ipilimumab (n=56), nivolumab plus ipilimumab-matching placebo (n=59), or double placebo control (n=52). At a median follow-up of 49·2 months (IQR 34·9–58·1), 4-year recurrence-free survival was 64·2% (95% CI 49·2–75·9) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 31·4% (19·7–43·8) in the nivolumab alone group, and 15·0% (6·7–26·6) in the placebo group. The hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence for the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo was 0·25 (97·5% CI 0·13–0·48; p<0·0001), and for the nivolumab group versus placebo was 0·60 (0·36–1·00; p=0·024). Median overall survival was not reached in any treatment group. The HR for overall survival was significantly in favour of the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group versus placebo (HR 0·41; 95% CI 0·17–0·99; p=0·040), but not for the nivolumab group versus placebo (HR 0·75; 0·36–1·56; p=0·44). 4-year overall survival was 83·8% (95% CI 68·8–91·9) in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 72·6% (57·4–83·2) in the nivolumab alone group, and 63·1% (46·9–75·6) in the placebo group. The median progression-free survival or recurrence-free survival 2 of patients in the placebo group who crossed over to nivolumab monotherapy after experiencing disease recurrence was not reached (95% CI 21·2 months to not reached). Rates of grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events remained largely unchanged compared with our previous report, occurring in 71% (95% CI 57–82) of the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, and 29% (95% CI 17–42) of patients receiving nivolumab alone. There were no treatment-related deaths. Both active regimens continued to show significantly improved recurrence-free survival compared with placebo in patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease who were at high risk of recurrence. Overall survival was significantly improved for patients receiving nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared with placebo. Use of subsequent anti-PD-1-based therapy was high in patients in the placebo group after recurrence and most likely impacted the overall survival comparison of nivolumab alone versus placebo. The recurrence-free and overall survival benefit of nivolumab plus ipilimumab over placebo reinforces the change of practice already initiated for the treatment of patients with stage IV melanoma with no evidence of disease. Bristol-Myers Squibb.

BackgroundBased on its viral-associated or UV-associated carcinogenesis, Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is a highly immunogenic skin cancer. Thus, clinically evident MCC occurs either in immuno-compromised patients or based on tumor-intrinsic immune escape mechanisms. This notion may explain that although advanced MCC can be effectively restrained by treatment with PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), a considerable percentage of patients does not benefit from ICI therapy. Biomarkers predicting ICI treatment response are currently not available.MethodsThe present multicenter retrospective study investigated clinical and molecular characteristics in 114 patients with unresectable MCC at baseline before treatment with ICI for their association with therapy response (best overall response, BOR). In a subset of 21 patients, pretreatment tumor tissue was analyzed for activation, differentiation and spatial distribution of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL).ResultsOf the 114 patients, n=74 (65%) achieved disease control (BOR=complete response/partial response/stable disease) on ICI. A Bayesian cumulative ordinal regression model revealed absence of immunosuppression and a limited number of tumor-involved organ systems was highly associated with a favorable therapy response. Unimpaired overall performance status, high age, normal serum lactate dehydrogenase and normal serum C reactive protein were moderately associated with disease control. While neither tumor Merkel cell polyomavirus nor tumor PD-L1 status showed a correlation with therapy response, treatment with anti-PD-1 antibodies was associated with a higher probability of disease control than treatment with anti-PD-L1 antibodies. Multiplexed immunohistochemistry demonstrated the predominance of CD8+ effector and central memory T cells (TCM) in close proximity to tumor cells in patients with a favorable therapy response.ConclusionsOur findings indicate the absence of immunosuppression, a limited number of tumor-affected organs, and a predominance of CD8+ TCM among TIL, as baseline parameters associated with a favorable response to PD-1/PD-L1 ICI therapy of advanced MCC. These factors should be considered when making treatment decisions in MCC patients.