Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) has revolutionized the treatment of melanoma care. Stereotactic radiosurgery combined with ICI has shown promise to improve clinical outcomes in prior studies in patients who have metastatic melanoma with brain metastases. However, others have suggested that concurrent ICI with stereotactic radiosurgery can increase the risk of complications. METHODS:We present a retrospective, single-institution analysis of 98 patients with a median follow up of 17.1 months managed with immune checkpoint inhibition and stereotactic radiosurgery concurrently and non-concurrently. A total of 55 patients were included in the concurrent group and 43 patients in the non-concurrent treatment group. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the relation between concurrent or non-concurrent treatment and overall survival or local progression-free survival. The Wald test was used to assess significance. Significant differences between patients in both groups experiencing adverse events including adverse radiation effects, perilesional edema, and neurological deficits were tested for using the Chi-square or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS:Patients receiving concurrent versus non-concurrent ICI showed a significant increase in overall survival (median 37.1 months, 95% CI: 18.9 months - NA versus median 11.4 months, 95% CI: 6.4-33.2 months, p = 0.0056) but not local progression-free survival. There were no significant differences between groups with regards to adverse radiation effects (2% versus 3%), perilesional edema (20% versus 9%), neurological deficits (3% versus 20%). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:These results suggest that the timing of ICI does not increase risk of neurological complications when delivered within 4 weeks of SRS.

BACKGROUND:In the phase 2 EMPOWER-CSCC-1 study (NCT02760498), cemiplimab demonstrated antitumor activity against metastatic (mCSCC) and locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (laCSCC). OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To report final analysis of weight-based cemiplimab in mCSCC and laCSCC (Groups 1 and 2), fixed-dose cemiplimab in mCSCC (Group 3), and primary analysis of fixed-dose cemiplimab in mCSCC/laCSCC (Group 6). METHODS:Patients received cemiplimab (3 mg/kg intravenously [IV] every 2 weeks [Groups 1 and 2]) or cemiplimab (350 mg IV [Groups 3 and 6]) every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Duration of response (DOR) and progression-free survival (PFS) are presented per protocol, according to post-hoc sensitivity analyses that only include the period of protocol-mandated imaging assessments. RESULTS:At 42.5 months, ORR for Groups 1-3 (n=193) was 47.2%, estimated 12-month DOR was 88.3%, and median PFS was 26.0 months. At 8.7 months, ORR for Group 6 (n=165 patients) was 44.8%; median DOR and median PFS were not reached. Serious treatment-emergent adverse event rates (grade ≥3) were Groups 1-3: 31.1% and Group 6: 34.5%. LIMITATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Non-randomized study, non-survival primary endpoint. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:EMPOWER-CSCC-1 provides the largest prospective data on long-term efficacy and safety for anti-programmed cell death-1 therapy in advanced CSCC.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) can achieve durable responses in patients with advanced melanoma, and results from clinical trials suggest cure may be possible for a subset of patients. Despite clinical trial data, little is known about the risk, character, and clinical outcome of late recurrences after ICI. This study aimed to explore the disease outcomes and survival in a cohort of patients with long-term responses to ICI. We retrospectively identified patients treated with ICI for advanced melanoma with long-term disease control, defined as not requiring a subsequent line of systemic therapy within 3 years of ICI commencement. We analysed disease characteristics, treatment, toxicity, recurrence patterns, management, and outcomes. A total of 567 patients were identified with a median follow-up of 7.1 years: 504 (89 %) without disease progression within 3 years (cohort 1) and 63 (11.1 %) with disease progression within 3 years managed without a change in systemic therapy (cohort 2). Subsequent progression after 3 years occurred for 39 (7.7 %) patients in cohort 1, compared to 14 (22 %) in cohort 2. Predictors for late progression after 3 years were a non-complete radiological response (CR) best response and prior progression within 3 years. Thirty-two patients (5.6 %) died during follow-up, 8 (1.4 %) from melanoma, 6 (1.2 %) from cohort 1 and 2 (3.2 %) from cohort 2. In this population of patients with advanced melanoma with long-term disease control from ICI, the risk of subsequent disease progression and death was low. This suggests that a significant proportion of long-term ICI responders are likely cured and may inform the frequency and duration of follow-up.

This review outlines the most up-to-date metastatic melanoma treatment recommendations and relevant risks for patients with solid organ transplants, patients with renal dysfunction, and patients with preexisting autoimmune conditions. These specific treatment populations were excluded from the original clinical trials, which studied immune checkpoint inhibitors and BRAF/MEK inhibitors in the advanced melanoma setting. We have synthesized the current body of literature, mainly case series and retrospective analyses, to reflect the evidence for the treatment of these special patient populations at present.

IMPORTANCE/OBJECTIVE:Acral (AM) and mucosal melanomas (MM) are rare subtypes with a poor prognosis. In those with advanced disease, anti-PD-1 (PD1) therapy has reduced activity compared to that seen in non-acral cutaneous melanoma. OBJECTIVE:To determine the efficacy of adjuvant PD1 in resected AM or MM. DESIGN/METHODS:An international, retrospective cohort study SETTING: Data up to November 2021 collected from 20 centres across 10 countries. PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:AM or MM who received adjuvant PD1 were included and compared to matched patients from the Melanoma Institute Australia (MIA) database using a propensity score matching analysis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES/METHODS:Recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and overall survival (OS) were investigated. RESULTS:Forty five of 139 (32%) AM and 9 of 55 (16%) MM patients completed adjuvant therapy. The main reason for early treatment cessation in both groups was disease recurrence: 51 (37%) and 30 (55%) in the AM and MM groups, respectively. In the AM group adjuvant PD1 was associated with a longer RFS [HR-0.69 (0.52-0.92, p = 0.0127)], DMFS [HR0.58 (0.38-0.89, p = 0.0134)] and OS [HR of 0.59 (0.38-0.92, p-value 0.0196)] when compared to the historical cohort. In the MM group there was no statistical difference in RFS [HR1.36 (0.69-2.68,p-value 0.3799], DMFS or OS. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE/CONCLUSIONS:After adjuvant PD1, both AM and MM have a high risk of recurrence. Our data suggests a benefit to using adjuvant PD1 therapy in resected AM but not in resected MM. Additional studies to investigate the efficacy of adjuvant PD1 for MM are needed.

IMPORTANCE:Anti-programmable cell death-1 (anti-PD-1) improves relapse-free survival when used as adjuvant therapy for high-risk resected melanoma. However, it can lead to immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which become chronic in approximately 40% of patients with high-risk melanoma treated with adjuvant anti-PD-1. OBJECTIVE:To determine the incidence, characteristics, and long-term outcomes of chronic irAEs from adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:This retrospective multicenter cohort study analyzed patients treated with adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy for advanced and metastatic melanoma between 2015 and 2022 from 6 institutions in the US and Australia with at least 18 months of evaluable follow-up after treatment cessation (range, 18.2 to 70.4 months). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:Incidence, spectrum, and ultimate resolution vs persistence of chronic irAEs (defined as those persisting at least 3 months after therapy cessation). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze categorical and continuous variables. Kaplan-Meier curves assessed survival, and Wilson score intervals were used to calculate CIs for proportions. RESULTS:Among 318 patients, 190 (59.7%) were male (median [IQR] age, 61 [52.3-72.0] years), 270 (84.9%) had a cutaneous primary, and 237 (74.5%) were stage IIIB or IIIC at presentation. Additionally, 226 patients (63.7%) developed acute irAEs arising during treatment, including 44 (13.8%) with grade 3 to 5 irAEs. Chronic irAEs, persisting at least 3 months after therapy cessation, developed in 147 patients (46.2%; 95% CI, 0.41-0.52), of which 74 (50.3%) were grade 2 or more, 6 (4.1%) were grade 3 to 5, and 100 (68.0%) were symptomatic. With long-term follow-up (median [IQR], 1057 [915-1321] days), 54 patients (36.7%) experienced resolution of chronic irAEs (median [IQR] time to resolution of 19.7 [14.4-31.5] months from anti-PD-1 start and 11.2 [8.1-20.7] months from anti-PD-1 cessation). Among patients with persistent irAEs present at last follow-up (93 [29.2%] of original cohort; 95% CI, 0.25-0.34); 55 (59.1%) were grade 2 or more; 41 (44.1%) were symptomatic; 24 (25.8%) were using therapeutic systemic steroids (16 [67%] of whom were on replacement steroids for hypophysitis (8 [50.0%]) and adrenal insufficiency (8 [50.0%]), and 42 (45.2%) were using other management. Among the 54 patients, the most common persistent chronic irAEs were hypothyroid (38 [70.4%]), arthritis (18 [33.3%]), dermatitis (9 [16.7%]), and adrenal insufficiency (8 [14.8%]). Furthermore, 54 [17.0%] patients experienced persistent endocrinopathies, 48 (15.1%) experienced nonendocrinopathies, and 9 (2.8%) experienced both. Of 37 patients with chronic irAEs who received additional immunotherapy, 25 (67.6%) experienced no effect on chronic irAEs whereas 12 (32.4%) experienced a flare in their chronic toxicity. Twenty patients (54.1%) experienced a distinct irAE. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:In this cohort study of 318 patients who received adjuvant anti-PD-1, chronic irAEs were common, affected diverse organ systems, and often persisted with long-term follow-up requiring steroids and additional management. These findings highlight the likelihood of persistent toxic effects when considering adjuvant therapies and need for long-term monitoring and management.

BACKGROUND:CAPRA (NCT02565992) evaluated Coxsackievirus A21 (V937) + pembrolizumab for metastatic/unresectable stage IIIB-IV melanoma. METHODS:Patients received intratumoral V937 on days 1, 3, 5, and 8 (then every 3 weeks [Q3W]) and intravenous pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg Q3W from day 8. Primary endpoint was safety. RESULTS:T cells in the tumor microenvironment was significantly lower in responders compared with nonresponders (P = 0.0179). CONCLUSIONS:These findings suggest responses to this combination may be seen even in patients without a typical "immune-active" microenvironment. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER/BACKGROUND:NCT02565992.

Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) plus ipilimumab has demonstrated greater antitumor activity versus ipilimumab alone, without additional toxicity, in patients with advanced melanoma. Here, we report the 5-year outcomes from a randomized phase II study. These data provide the longest efficacy and safety follow-up for patients with melanoma treated with a combination of an oncolytic virus and a checkpoint inhibitor.Eligible patients with unresectable stage IIIB‒IV melanoma were randomized 1:1 to receive T-VEC plus ipilimumab or ipilimumab alone. T-VEC was administered intralesionally at 10⁶ plaque-forming units (PFU)/mL in week 1, followed by 10⁸ PFU/mL in week 4 and every 2 weeks thereafter. Ipilimumab (3 mg/kg every 3 weeks; ≤4 doses) was administered intravenously starting at week 1 in the ipilimumab arm and week 6 in the combination arm. The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per immune-related response criteria; key secondary end points included durable response rate (DRR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.Overall, 198 patients were randomized to receive the combination (n=98) or ipilimumab (n=100). The combination improved the ORR versus ipilimumab (35.7% vs 16.0%; OR 2.9; 95% CI 1.5 to 5.7; p=0.003). DRR was 33.7% and 13.0% (unadjusted OR 3.4; 95% CI 1.7 to 7.0; descriptive p=0.001), respectively. Among the objective responders, the median DOR was 69.2 months (95% CI 38.5 to not estimable) with the combination and was not reached with ipilimumab. Median PFS was 13.5 months with the combination and 6.4 months with ipilimumab (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.09; descriptive p=0.14). Estimated 5-year OS was 54.7% (95% CI 43.9 to 64.2) in the combination arm and 48.4% (95% CI 37.9 to 58.1) in the ipilimumab arm. Forty-seven (48.0%) and 65 (65.0%) patients in the combination and ipilimumab arms, respectively, received subsequent therapies. No new safety signals were reported.At the 5-year follow-up, the improved response rates observed with T-VEC plus ipilimumab were durable. This is the first randomized controlled study of the combination of an oncolytic virus and a checkpoint inhibitor that meets its primary end point.Trial registration number: NCT01740297.

The Great Debate session at the 2022 Melanoma Bridge congress (December 1-3) featured counterpoint views from leading experts on five contemporary topics of debate in the management of melanoma. The debates considered the choice of anti-lymphocyte-activation gene (LAG)-3 therapy or ipilimumab in combination with anti-programmed death (PD)-1 therapy, whether anti-PD-1 monotherapy is still acceptable as a comparator arm in clinical trials, whether adjuvant treatment of melanoma is still a useful treatment option, the role of adjuvant therapy in stage II melanoma, what role surgery will continue to have in the treatment of melanoma. As is customary in the Melanoma Bridge Great Debates, the speakers are invited by the meeting Chairs to express one side of the assigned debate and the opinions given may not fully reflect personal views. Audiences voted in favour of either side of the argument both before and after each debate.