Faculty Bibliography

Combination checkpoint blockade with anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 antibodies has shown promising efficacy in melanoma. However, the underlying mechanism in humans remains unclear. Here, we perform paired single-cell RNA and T cell receptor (TCR) sequencing across time in 36 patients with stage IV melanoma treated with anti-PD-1, anti-CTLA-4, or combination therapy. We develop the algorithm Cyclone to track temporal clonal dynamics and underlying cell states. Checkpoint blockade induces waves of clonal T cell responses that peak at distinct time points. Combination therapy results in greater magnitude of clonal responses at 6 and 9 weeks compared to single-agent therapies, including melanoma-specific CD8⁺ T cells and exhausted CD8⁺ T cell (T_EX) clones. Focused analyses of T_EX identify that anti-CTLA-4 induces robust expansion and proliferation of progenitor T_EX, which synergizes with anti-PD-1 to reinvigorate T_EX during combination therapy. These next generation immune profiling approaches can guide the selection of drugs, schedule, and dosing for novel combination strategies.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:In phase III CheckMate 238, adjuvant nivolumab significantly improved recurrence-free survival compared with ipilimumab in patients with resected stage IIIB-C/IV melanoma without a significant difference in overall survival (OS). Here, we investigate progression-free survival (PFS) and OS after postrecurrence systemic therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:>12 months [late] from initial therapy). RESULTS:73%). In response to subsequent therapy, patients on nivolumab with late versus early recurrence were more likely to benefit from anti-PD-1 monotherapy. Nivolumab-treated patients with either an early or late recurrence benefitted from an ipilimumab-based therapy or targeted therapy, each with similar OS. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Postrecurrence survival was longer for patients who recurred >12 months. Patients on nivolumab who recurred early benefitted from SST but had better survival with ipilimumab-based regimens or targeted therapy compared with anti-PD-1 monotherapy.

The origins of cancer vaccines date back to the 1800s. Since then, there have been significant efforts to generate vaccines against solid and hematologic malignancies using a variety of platforms. To date, these efforts have generally been met with minimal success. However, in the era of improved methods and technological advancements, supported by compelling preclinical and clinical data, a wave of renewed interest in the field offers the promise of discovering field-changing paradigms in the management of established and resected disease using cancer vaccines. These include novel approaches to personalized neoantigen vaccine development, as well as innovative immune-modulatory vaccines (IMVs) that facilitate activation of antiregulatory T cells to limit immunosuppression caused by regulatory immune cells. This article will introduce some of the limitations that have affected cancer vaccine development over the past several decades, followed by an introduction to the latest advancements in neoantigen vaccine and IMV therapy, and then conclude with a discussion of some of the newest technologies and progress that are occurring across the cancer vaccine space. Cancer vaccines are among the most promising frontiers for breakthrough innovations and strategies poised to make a measurable impact in the ongoing fight against cancer.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Nivolumab is approved as adjuvant therapy for resected stage III/IV melanoma based on the phase 3 CheckMate 238 trial. This analysis compared outcomes from CheckMate 238 with those from the real-world Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived de-identified database in patients with resected stage III melanoma (per AJCC-8) treated with adjuvant nivolumab. MATERIALS/METHODS:Outcomes included baseline characteristics, overall survival (OS) in the CheckMate 238 cohort (randomization until death or last known alive), and real-world overall survival (rwOS) in the Flatiron Health cohort (nivolumab initiation until death or data cutoff). rwOS was compared with OS using unadjusted and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was combined with the adjusted model to reduce baseline discrepancies. RESULTS:The CheckMate 238 and real-world cohorts included 369 and 452 patients, respectively (median age, 56.0 and 63.0 years; median follow-up, 61.4 vs. 25.5 months). rwOS was not different from OS in the unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR] 1.27; 95% CI 0.92-1.74), adjusted (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.67-1.54), and adjusted IPTW (HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.70-1.63) analyses. In the adjusted analysis, 2-year OS and rwOS rates were 84%. Median OS and rwOS were not reached. After IPTW, OS and rwOS were not different (HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.70-1.64). CONCLUSIONS:In this comparative analysis, OS in the CheckMate 238 trial was similar to rwOS in the Flatiron Health database after adjustments in patients with resected stage III melanoma (per AJCC-8) treated with adjuvant nivolumab, validating the trial results.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?/UNASSIGNED:in October 2023. The study goal was to learn whether nivolumab works as an adjuvant therapy (that is, helps to keep cancer from coming back when it is given after surgery) for stage 2 melanoma (skin cancer) that has not spread to other parts of the body. Nivolumab is an immunotherapy that activates a person's immune system so it can destroy cancer cells. In melanoma, staging describes the severity of the cancer. Melanoma staging ranges from 0 (very thin and confined to the upper layer of the skin) to 4 (spread to distant parts of the body), with earlier stages removed by surgery. The people in this study had stage 2 melanoma that had not spread to the lymph nodes or other organs in the body. HOW WAS THE STUDY DESIGNED?/UNASSIGNED:People 12 years and older with stage 2 melanoma that had not spread and had been removed by surgery were included in CheckMate 76K. People were randomly assigned to receive either nivolumab (526 patients) or placebo (264 patients). A placebo resembles the test medicine but does not contain any active medicines. The researchers assessed whether people who received nivolumab lived longer without their cancer returning and/or spreading to other parts of their bodies (compared with placebo) and if nivolumab was well tolerated. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?/UNASSIGNED:Researchers found that people who received nivolumab were 58% less likely to have their cancer return and 53% less likely of having their cancer spread to distant parts of their body, compared with placebo. These reductions in risk with nivolumab were seen in different subgroups of people with a range of characteristics, and regardless of how deep the melanoma had gone into the skin. People taking nivolumab had more side effects than those taking placebo, but most were mild to moderate and manageable. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?/UNASSIGNED:Results from CheckMate 76K support the benefit of using nivolumab as a treatment option for people with stage 2 melanoma post-surgery.

The gut microbiome (GMB) has been associated with outcomes of immune checkpoint blockade therapy in melanoma, but there is limited consensus on the specific taxa involved, particularly across different geographic regions. We analyzed pre-treatment stool samples from 674 melanoma patients participating in a phase-III trial of adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab, across three continents and five regions. Longitudinal analysis revealed that GMB was largely unchanged following treatment, offering promise for lasting GMB-based interventions. In region-specific and cross-region meta-analyses, we identified pre-treatment taxonomic markers associated with recurrence, including Eubacterium, Ruminococcus, Firmicutes, and Clostridium. Recurrence prediction by these markers was best achieved across regions by matching participants on GMB compositional similarity between the intra-regional discovery and external validation sets. AUCs for prediction ranged from 0.83-0.94 (depending on the initial discovery region) for patients closely matched on GMB composition (e.g., JSD ≤0.11). This evidence indicates that taxonomic markers for prediction of recurrence are generalizable across regions, for individuals of similar GMB composition.

Traditional chemotherapy has been ineffective in the treatment of metastatic melanoma. Until the use of checkpoint inhibitors, patients had very limited survival. Since the original US Food and Drug Administration approval of ipilimumab over a decade ago, the armamentarium of immunotherapeutic agents has expanded to include programmed cell death protein 1 and lymphocyte activation gene 3 antibodies, requiring a nuanced approach to the selection of frontline treatments, managing patients through recurrence and progression, and determining length of therapy. Herein, we review the existing evidence supporting current standard immunotherapy regimens and discuss the clinical decision-making involved in treating patients with metastatic melanoma with checkpoint inhibitors.

BACKGROUND:Checkpoint inhibitors are standard adjuvant treatment for stage IIB-IV resected melanoma, but many patients recur. Our study aimed to evaluate whether mRNA-4157 (V940), a novel mRNA-based individualised neoantigen therapy, combined with pembrolizumab, improved recurrence-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival versus pembrolizumab monotherapy in resected high-risk melanoma. METHODS:We did an open-label, randomised, phase 2b, adjuvant study of mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab versus pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients, enrolled from sites in the USA and Australia, with completely resected high-risk cutaneous melanoma. Patients with completely resected melanoma (stage IIIB-IV) were assigned 2:1 to receive open-label mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab or pembrolizumab monotherapy. mRNA-4157 was administered intramuscularly (maximum nine doses) and pembrolizumab intravenously (maximum 18 doses) in 3-week cycles. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This ongoing trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03897881. FINDINGS/RESULTS:From July 18, 2019, to Sept 30, 2021, 157 patients were assigned to mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab combination therapy (n=107) or pembrolizumab monotherapy (n=50); median follow-up was 23 months and 24 months, respectively. Recurrence-free survival was longer with combination versus monotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] for recurrence or death, 0·561 [95% CI 0·309-1·017]; two-sided p=0·053), with lower recurrence or death event rate (24 [22%] of 107 vs 20 [40%] of 50); 18-month recurrence-free survival was 79% (95% CI 69·0-85·6) versus 62% (46·9-74·3). Most treatment-related adverse events were grade 1-2. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 25% of patients in the combination group and 18% of patients in the monotherapy group, with no mRNA-4157-related grade 4-5 events. Immune-mediated adverse event frequency was similar for the combination (37 [36%]) and monotherapy (18 [36%]) groups. INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:Adjuvant mRNA-4157 plus pembrolizumab prolonged recurrence-free survival versus pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with resected high-risk melanoma and showed a manageable safety profile. These results provide evidence that an mRNA-based individualised neoantigen therapy might be beneficial in the adjuvant setting. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:Moderna in collaboration with Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Rahway, NJ, USA.