Faculty Bibliography

There is currently no targeted therapy to treat NF1-mutant melanomas. Herein, we compared the genomic and transcriptomic signatures of NF1-mutant and NF1-WT melanoma to reveal potential treatment targets for this subset of patients. Genomic alterations were verified using qPCR, and differentially expressed genes were independently validated using TCGA data, and immunohistochemistry (IHC). Digital spatial profiling (DSP) with multiplex IHC and immunofluorescence (IF) were used to validate the signatures. The efficacy of combinational regimens driven by these signatures was tested through in vitro assays using low-passage cell lines. Pathogenic NF1 mutations were identified in 27% cases. NF1-mutant melanoma expressed higher proliferative markers MK167 and CDC20 compared to NF1-WT (P=0.008), which was independently validated both in the TCGA dataset (P=0.01, P=0.03) and with IHC (P=0.013, P=0.036), respectively. DSP analysis showed upregulation of LY6E within the tumor cells [FDR<0.01, lg2FC>1], confirmed with multiplex IF showing co-localization of LY6E in melanoma cells. The combination of MEK and CDC20 co-inhibition induced both cytotoxic and cytostatic effects, decreasing CDC20 expression in multiple NF1-MUT cell lines. In conclusion, NF1-mutant melanoma is associated with a distinct genomic and transcriptomic profile. Our data support investigating CDC20 inhibition with MAPK pathway inhibitors as a targeted regimen in this melanoma subtype.

BACKGROUND:OX40 is a costimulatory receptor upregulated on antigen-activated T cells and constitutively expressed on regulatory T cells (Tregs). INCAGN01949, a fully human immunoglobulin G1κ anti-OX40 agonist monoclonal antibody, was designed to promote tumor-specific immunity by effector T-cell activation and Fcγ receptor-mediated Treg depletion. This first-in-human study was conducted to determine the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of INCAGN01949. METHODS:Phase I/II, open-label, non-randomized, dose-escalation and dose-expansion study conducted in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors. Patients received INCAGN01949 monotherapy (7-1400 mg) in 14-day cycles while deriving benefit. Safety measures, clinical activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamic effects were assessed and summarized with descriptive statistics. RESULTS:Eighty-seven patients were enrolled; most common tumor types were colorectal (17.2%), ovarian (8.0%), and non-small cell lung (6.9%) cancers. Patients received a median three (range 1-9) prior therapies, including immunotherapy in 24 patients (27.6%). Maximum tolerated dose was not reached; one patient (1.1%) receiving 350 mg dose reported dose-limiting toxicity of grade 3 colitis. Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 45 patients (51.7%), with fatigue (16 (18.4%)), rash (6 (6.9%)), and diarrhea (6 (6.9%)) being most frequent. One patient (1.1%) with metastatic gallbladder cancer achieved a partial response (duration of 6.3 months), and 23 patients (26.4%) achieved stable disease (lasting &gt;6 months in one patient). OX40 receptor occupancy was maintained over 90% among all patients receiving doses of ≥200 mg, while no treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies were detected across all dose levels. Pharmacodynamic results demonstrated that treatment with INCAGN01949 did not enhance proliferation or activation of T cells in peripheral blood or reduce circulating Tregs, and analyses of tumor biopsies did not demonstrate any consistent increase in effector T-cell infiltration or function, or decrease in infiltrating Tregs. CONCLUSION:No safety concerns were observed with INCAGN01949 monotherapy in patients with metastatic or advanced solid tumors. However, tumor responses and pharmacodynamic effects on T cells in peripheral blood and post-therapy tumor biopsies were limited. Studies evaluating INCAGN01949 in combination with other therapies are needed to further evaluate the potential of OX40 agonism as a therapeutic approach in patients with advanced solid tumors. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02923349.

PURPOSE:Adjuvant immunotherapy produces durable benefit for patients with resected melanoma, but many develop recurrence and/or immune-related adverse events (irAE). We investigated whether baseline serum autoantibody (autoAb) signatures predicted recurrence and severe toxicity in patients treated with adjuvant nivolumab, ipilimumab, or ipilimumab plus nivolumab. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN:This study included 950 patients: 565 from CheckMate 238 (408 ipilimumab versus 157 nivolumab) and 385 from CheckMate 915 (190 nivolumab versus 195 ipilimumab plus nivolumab). Serum autoAbs were profiled using the HuProt Human Proteome Microarray v4.0 (CDI Laboratories, Mayaguez, PR). Analysis of baseline differentially expressed autoAbs was followed by recurrence and severe toxicity signature building for each regimen, testing of the signatures, and additional independent validation for nivolumab using patients from CheckMate 915. RESULTS:In the nivolumab independent validation cohort, high recurrence score predicted significantly worse recurrence-free survival [RFS; adjusted HR (aHR), 3.60; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.98-6.55], and outperformed a model composed of clinical variables including PD-L1 expression (P < 0.001). Severe toxicity score was a significant predictor of severe irAEs (aHR, 13.53; 95% CI, 2.59-86.65). In the ipilimumab test cohort, high recurrence score was associated with significantly worse RFS (aHR, 3.21; 95% CI, 1.38-7.45) and severe toxicity score significantly predicted severe irAEs (aHR, 11.04; 95% CI, 3.84-37.25). In the ipilimumab plus nivolumab test cohort, high autoAb recurrence score was associated with significantly worse RFS (aHR, 6.45; 95% CI, 1.48-28.02), and high severe toxicity score was significantly associated with severe irAEs (aHR, 23.44; 95% CI, 4.10-212.50). CONCLUSIONS:Baseline serum autoAb signatures predicted recurrence and severe toxicity in patients treated with adjuvant immunotherapy. Prospective testing of the signatures that include datasets with longer follow-up and rare but more severe toxicities will help determine their generalizability and potential clinical utility. See related commentary by Hassel and Luke, p. 3914.

BACKGROUND:Recent data suggest that patients with stage III melanoma are at high risk for developing central nervous system (CNS) metastases. Because a subset of patients with stage II melanoma experiences worse survival outcomes than some patients with stage III disease, the authors investigated the risk of CNS metastasis in stage II melanoma to inform surveillance guidelines for this population. METHODS:test, the cumulative incidence, and Cox multivariable regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between baseline characteristics and the development of CNS metastases. RESULTS:Patients with stage III melanoma had a higher rate of developing brain metastases than those with stage II melanoma (100 of 468 patients [21.4%] vs. 82 of 586 patients [14.0%], respectively; p = .002). However, patients who had stage IIC melanoma had a significantly higher rate of isolated first recurrences in the CNS compared with those who had stage III disease (12.1% vs. 3.6%; p = .002). The risk of ever developing brain metastases was similarly elevated for patients who had stage IIC disease (hazard ratio [HR], 3.16; 95% CI, 1.77-5.66), stage IIIB disease (HR, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.63-4.91), and stage IIIC disease (HR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.81-4.74), and the risk was highest in patients who had stage IIID disease (HR, 8.59; 95% CI: 4.11-17.97). CONCLUSIONS:Patients with stage IIC melanoma are at elevated risk for first recurrence in the CNS. Surveillance strategies that incorporate serial neuroimaging should be considered for these individuals until more accurate predictive markers can be identified.

Brain metastases are the most common brain malignancy. This review discusses the studies presented at the third annual meeting of the Melanoma Research Foundation in the context of other recent reports on the biology and treatment of melanoma brain metastases (MBM). Although symptomatic MBM patients were historically excluded from immunotherapy trials, efforts from clinicians and patient advocates have resulted in more inclusive and even dedicated clinical trials for MBM patients. The results of checkpoint inhibitor trials were discussed in conversation with current standards of care for MBM patients, including steroids, radiotherapy and targeted therapy. Advances in the basic scientific understanding of melanoma brain metastases, including the role of astrocytes and metabolic adaptations to the brain microenvironment are exposing new vulnerabilities which could be exploited for therapeutic purposes. Technical advances including single cell omics and multiplex imaging are expanding our understanding of the MBM ecosystem and its response to therapy. This unprecedented level of spatial and temporal resolution is expected to dramatically advance the field in coming years and render novel treatment approaches that might improve the MBM patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Glutamate signaling activates MAPK and PI3K/AKT pathways in tumor cells. Treatment with riluzole, a glutamate release inhibitor, has been previously shown to be safe in melanoma patients and produced biologic effects, but did not lead to radiographic responses, possibly due to poor pharmacokinetic properties. Therefore, we conducted a phase Ib trial to determine the safety and tolerability of the combination of the riluzole prodrug troriluzole (BHV-4157, trigriluzole) and the PD-1 antibody nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS:Patients with advanced or refractory solid tumors and measurable disease per RECIST 1.1 were treated with increasing doses of troriluzole using a semi-Bayesian modified toxicity probability interval dose escalation procedure. Troriluzole monotherapy was orally self-administered for a 14-day lead-in period followed by continuation of troriluzole in combination with nivolumab 240 mg IV every 2 weeks. Endpoints included safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and efficacy. RESULTS:We enrolled 14 patients with advanced solid tumors (melanoma = 3, NSCLC = 3, renal cell carcinoma = 2, bladder/urothelial = 2, ovarian cancer = 1, adenoid cystic carcinoma = 1, pleural mesothelial = 1, head and neck cancer = 1). Eleven patients had cancer progression on prior therapy with PD-1 or PD-L1 agent. Patients received troriluzole total daily doses from 140 to 560 mg (divided). The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) occurring in ≥ 5 patients (> 35%) were transaminitis and increased lipase. DLT (dose-limiting toxicity) occurred in 3 patients: (1) grade 3 anorexia, (2) grade 3 fatigue and, (3) grade 3 atrial fibrillation. Six patients were treated at the MTD (maximum tolerated dose). No subjects discontinued treatment due to AEs. One response occurred (7%), which was a partial response in a subject who had PD-1 refractory disease. The 6-month PFS rate was 21%. PK data showed that the prodrug troriluzole was efficiently cleaved into riluzole by 2-h post-dosing in all dose cohorts tested. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The combination of troriluzole and nivolumab was safe and well-tolerated. The MTD of troriluzole was determined to be 420 mg total daily dose. The observed antitumor activity, primarily disease stabilization, is of interest in patients with PD-1 resistant tumors. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03229278.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors, particularly anti-PD-1-based immune checkpoint inhibitors, have dramatically improved outcomes for patients with advanced melanoma and are currently deemed a standard of care. Ipilimumab/nivolumab is the first combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors to improve progression-free survival and overall survival in the first-line setting, with durable responses and the longest median overall survival, 72.1 months, of any drug therapy approved for advanced melanoma. However, its use is limited by the high rate of severe (grade 3-4) treatment-related adverse events. More recently, the novel immune checkpoint inhibitor combination of nivolumab/relatlimab (anti-PD-1/anti-LAG3) showed improved progression-free survival compared with nivolumab alone in the first-line setting and was well tolerated; thus, it is likely this combination will be added to the armamentarium as a first-line treatment for advanced melanoma. These changes in the treatment landscape have several treatment implications for decision-making. The choice of first-line systemic drug therapy, and the decision between immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy or combination therapy, requires a comprehensive assessment of disease-related factors and patient characteristics. Despite this striking progress, many patients' disease still progresses. Several new agents and therapeutic approaches are under investigation in clinical trials. Intralesional treatments hold promise for accessible metastases, although their broad application in the clinic will be limited. Prognostic and predictive biomarkers, as well as strategies to reduce treatment-related toxicities and overcome resistance, are required and are now the focus of clinical and translational research.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:New therapies for melanoma have been associated with increasing survival expectations, as opposed to the dismal outcomes of only a decade ago. Using a prospective registry, we aimed to define current survival goals for melanoma patients with brain metastases (BM), based on state-of-the-art multimodality care. METHODS:We reviewed 171 melanoma patients with BM receiving stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) who were followed with point-of-care data collection between 2012 and 2020. Clinical, molecular and imaging data were collected, including systemic treatment and radiosurgical parameters. RESULTS:SRS were predictors of long-term survival ([Formula: see text] 5 years) from initial SRS (p = 0.023 and p = 0.018, respectively). Five patients (16%) of the long-term survivors required no active treatment for [Formula: see text] 5 years. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Long-term survival in patients with melanoma BM is achievable in the current era of SRS combined with immunotherapies. For those alive [Formula: see text] 5 years after first SRS, 16% had been also off systemic or local brain therapy for over 5 years. Given late recurrences of melanoma, caution is warranted, however prolonged survival off active treatment in a subset of our patients raises the potential for cure.