Faculty Bibliography

Outcomes for patients with melanoma have improved over the past decade with the clinical development and approval of immunotherapies targeting immune checkpoint receptors such as programmed death-1 (PD-1), programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) or cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4). Combinations of these checkpoint therapies with other agents are now being explored to improve outcomes and enhance benefit-risk profiles of treatment. Alternative inhibitory receptors have been identified that may be targeted for anti-tumor immune therapy, such as lymphocyte-activation gene-3 (LAG-3), as have several potential target oncogenes for molecularly targeted therapy, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Unfortunately, many patients still progress and acquire resistance to immunotherapy and molecularly targeted therapies. To bypass resistance, combination treatment with immunotherapies and single or multiple TKIs have been shown to improve prognosis compared to monotherapy. The number of new combinations treatment under development for melanoma provides options for the number of patients to achieve a therapeutic benefit. Many diagnostic and prognostic assays have begun to show clinical applicability providing additional tools to optimize and individualize treatments. However, the question on the optimal algorithm of first- and later-line therapies and the search for biomarkers to guide these decisions are still under investigation. This year, the Melanoma Bridge Congress (Dec 1^st-3rd, 2022, Naples, Italy) addressed the latest advances in melanoma research, focusing on themes of paramount importance for melanoma prevention, diagnosis and treatment. This included sessions dedicated to systems biology on immunotherapy, immunogenicity and gene expression profiling, biomarkers, and combination treatment strategies.

BACKGROUND:Management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is important as they cause treatment interruption or discontinuation, more often seen with combination immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Here, we retrospectively evaluated the safety and effectiveness of anti-interleukin-6 receptor (anti-IL-6R) as therapy for irAEs. METHODS:We performed a retrospective multicenter study evaluating patients diagnosed with de novo irAEs or flare of pre-existing autoimmune disease following ICI and were treated with anti-IL-6R. Our objectives were to assess the improvement of irAEs as well as the overall tumor response rate (ORR) before and after anti-IL-6R treatment. RESULTS:We identified a total of 92 patients who received therapeutic anti-IL-6R antibodies (tocilizumab or sarilumab). Median age was 61 years, 63% were men, 69% received anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) antibodies alone, and 26% patients were treated with the combination of anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 and anti-PD-1 antibodies. Cancer types were primarily melanoma (46%), genitourinary cancer (35%), and lung cancer (8%). Indications for using anti-IL-6R antibodies included inflammatory arthritis (73%), hepatitis/cholangitis (7%), myositis/myocarditis/myasthenia gravis (5%), polymyalgia rheumatica (4%), and one patient each with autoimmune scleroderma, nephritis, colitis, pneumonitis and central nervous system vasculitis. Notably, 88% of patients had received corticosteroids, and 36% received other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) as first-line therapies, but without adequate improvement. After initiation of anti-IL-6R (as first-line or post-corticosteroids and DMARDs), 73% of patients showed resolution or change to ≤grade 1 of irAEs after a median of 2.0 months from initiation of anti-IL-6R therapy. Six patients (7%) stopped anti-IL-6R due to adverse events. Of 70 evaluable patients by RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) V.1.1 criteria; the ORR was 66% prior versus 66% after anti-IL-6R (95% CI, 54% to 77%), with 8% higher complete response rate. Of 34 evaluable patients with melanoma, the ORR was 56% prior and increased to 68% after anti-IL-6R (p=0.04). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Targeting IL-6R could be an effective approach to treat several irAE types without hindering antitumor immunity. This study supports ongoing clinical trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of tocilizumab (anti-IL-6R antibody) in combination with ICIs (NCT04940299, NCT03999749).

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), including CTLA-4- and PD-1-blocking antibodies, can have profound effects on tumor immune cell infiltration that have not been consistent in biopsy series reported to date. Here, we analyze seven molecular datasets of samples from patients with advanced melanoma (N = 514) treated with ICI agents to investigate clinical, genomic, and transcriptomic features of anti-PD-1 response in cutaneous melanoma. We find that prior anti-CTLA-4 therapy is associated with differences in genomic, individual gene, and gene signatures in anti-PD-1 responders. Anti-CTLA-4-experienced melanoma tumors that respond to PD-1 blockade exhibit increased tumor mutational burden, inflammatory signatures, and altered cell cycle processes compared with anti-CTLA-4-naive tumors or anti-CTLA-4-experienced, anti-PD-1-nonresponsive melanoma tumors. We report a harmonized, aggregate resource and suggest that prior CTLA-4 blockade therapy is associated with marked differences in the tumor microenvironment that impact the predictive features of PD-1 blockade therapy response.

BACKGROUND:Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) data for adjuvant nivolumab versus placebo (proxy for routine surveillance) in patients with high-risk, resected melanoma are lacking. This post hoc, indirect treatment comparison (ITC) used pooled data from the phase 3 EORTC 18,071 (ipilimumab vs. placebo) and CheckMate 238 (nivolumab vs. ipilimumab) trials to assess RFS and OS with nivolumab versus placebo and the numbers needed to treat (NNT) over 4 years. METHODS:Patients with resected stage IIIB-C cutaneous melanoma (American Joint Committee on Cancer seventh edition) were included. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline characteristics. RFS NNTs were calculated for nivolumab versus ipilimumab and placebo. OS NNTs were calculated for nivolumab versus placebo. To adjust for different post-recurrence treatments, the difference in post-recurrence survival between the two ipilimumab arms was added to OS of the placebo arm. RESULTS:This ITC included 278, 643, and 365 patients treated with nivolumab, ipilimumab, and placebo, respectively. Following IPTW, nivolumab was associated with improved RFS versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.61) and ipilimumab (HR: 0.69; 95% CI 0.56-0.85). RFS NNT was 4.2 for nivolumab versus placebo and 8.9 for nivolumab versus ipilimumab. After post-recurrence survival adjustment, weighted 4-year OS rates were 75.8% for nivolumab and 64.1% for placebo; OS NNT for nivolumab versus placebo was 8.5. CONCLUSIONS:In patients with resected stage IIIB-C cutaneous melanoma in this ITC, nivolumab improved RFS versus placebo and ipilimumab, and OS versus placebo after post-recurrence survival adjustment.

Although Ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) is FDA-approved for stage III/IV melanoma adjuvant treatment, it is not used clinically in first-line therapy, given the superior relapse-free survival (RFS)/toxicity benefits of anti-PD-1 therapy. However, it is important to understand anti-CTLA-4"™s mechanistic contribution to combination anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 therapy and investigate anti-CTLA-4 therapy for BRAF-wild type melanoma cases reresected after previous adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy. Our group published that nitric oxide (NO) increased within the immune effector cells among patients with longer RFS after adjuvant ipilimumab, whereas NO increased within the immune suppressor cells among patients with shorter RFS. Herein, we measured the post-translational modifications of STAT1 (nitration-nSTAT1 and phosphorylation-pSTAT1) that are important for regulating its activity via flow cytometry and mass spectrometry approaches. PBMCs were analyzed from 35 patients undergoing adjuvant ipilimumab treatment. Shorter RFS was associated with higher pSTAT1 levels before (p = 0.007) and after (p = 0.036) ipilimumab. Ipilimumab-treated patients with high nSTAT1 levels before and after therapy in PBMCs experienced decreased RFS, but the change in nSTAT1 levels before and after ipilimumab therapy was associated with longer RFS (p = 0.01). The measurement of post-translational modifications in STAT1 may distinguish patients with prolonged RFS from ipilimumab and provide mechanistic insight into responses to ipilimumab combination regimens.

Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy may vary substantially in their clinical presentation, including natural history, outcomes to treatment, and patterns. The application of clinical guidelines for irAE management can be challenging for practitioners due to a lack of common or consistently applied terminology. Furthermore, given the growing body of clinical experience and published data on irAEs, there is a greater appreciation for the heterogeneous natural histories, responses to treatment, and patterns of these toxicities, which is not currently reflected in irAE guidelines. Furthermore, there are no prospective trial data to inform the management of the distinct presentations of irAEs. Recognizing a need for uniform terminology for the natural history, response to treatment, and patterns of irAEs, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a consensus panel composed of leading international experts from academic medicine, industry, and regulatory agencies. Using a modified Delphi consensus process, the expert panel developed clinical definitions for irAE terminology used in the literature, encompassing terms related to irAE natural history (ie, re-emergent, chronic active, chronic inactive, delayed/late onset), response to treatment (ie, steroid unresponsive, steroid dependent), and patterns (ie, multisystem irAEs). SITC developed these definitions to support the adoption of a standardized vocabulary for irAEs, which will have implications for the uniform application of irAE clinical practice guidelines and to enable future irAE clinical trials.

BACKGROUND:The phase I first-in-human study ENGAGE-1 evaluated the humanized IgG1 OX40 agonistic monoclonal antibody GSK3174998 alone (Part 1 (P1)) or in combination with pembrolizumab (Part 2 (P2)) in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS:GSK3174998 (0.003-10 mg/kg) ± pembrolizumab (200 mg) was administered intravenously every 3 weeks using a continuous reassessment method for dose escalation. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability; secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, pharmacodynamics, and clinical activity. RESULTS:138 patients were enrolled (45 (P1) and 96 (P2, including 3 crossovers)). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 51% (P1) and 64% (P2) of patients, fatigue being the most common (11% and 24%, respectively). No dose-toxicity relationship was observed, and maximum-tolerated dose was not reached. Dose-limiting toxicities (P2) included Grade 3 (G3) pleural effusion and G1 myocarditis with G3 increased troponin. GSK3174998 ≥0.3 mg/kg demonstrated pharmacokinetic linearity and >80% receptor occupancy on circulating T cells; 0.3 mg/kg was selected for further evaluation. Limited clinical activity was observed for GSK3174998 (P1: disease control rate (DCR) ≥24 weeks 9%) and was not greater than that expected for pembrolizumab alone (P2: overall response rate 8%, DCR ≥24 weeks 28%). Multiplexed immunofluorescence data from paired biopsies suggested that increased infiltration of natural killer (NK)/natural killer T (NKT) cells and decreased regulatory T cells (Tregs) in the tumor microenvironment may contribute to clinical responses: CD16+CD56-CD134+ NK /NKT cells and CD3+CD4+FOXP3+CD134+ Tregs exhibited the largest magnitude of change on treatment, whereas CD3+CD8+granzyme B+PD-1+CD134+ cytotoxic T cells were the least variable. Tumor gene expression profiling revealed an upregulation of inflammatory responses, T-cell proliferation, and NK cell function on treatment with some inflammatory cytokines upregulated in peripheral blood. However, target engagement, evidenced by pharmacologic activity in peripheral blood and tumor tissue, did not correlate with clinical efficacy. The low number of responses precluded identifying a robust biomarker signature predictive of response. CONCLUSIONS:GSK3174998±pembrolizumab was well tolerated over the dose range tested and demonstrated target engagement. Limited clinical activity does not support further development of GSK3174998±pembrolizumab in advanced cancers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02528357.

Background: The high mortality of cutaneous melanoma (CM) is partly due to unpredictable patterns of disease progression in patients with early-stage lesions. The reliable prediction of advanced disease risk from early-stage CM, is an urgent clinical need, especially given the recent expansion of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy to the adjuvant setting. In our study, we comprehensively investigated the role of germline variants as CM prognostic markers. Methods: We performed a genome-wide association analysis in two independent cohorts of N=551 (discovery), and N=550 (validation) early-stage immunotherapy-naïve melanoma patients. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression model was used to identify associations with overall survival in the discovery group, followed by a validation analysis. Transcriptomic profiling and survival analysis were used to elucidate the biological relevance of candidate genes associated with CM progression. Results: We found two independent associations of germline variants with melanoma prognosis. The alternate alleles of these two SNPs were both associated with an increased risk of death [rs60970102 in MELK: HR=3.14 (2.05"“4.81), p=1.48×10^-7; and rs77480547 in SH3BP4: HR=3.02 (2.02"“4.52), p=7.58×10^-8, both in the pooled cohort]. The addition of the combined risk alleles (CRA) of the identified variants into the prognostic model improved the predictive power, as opposed to a model of clinical covariates alone. Conclusions: Our study provides suggestive evidence of novel melanoma germline prognostic markers, implicating two candidate genes: an oncogene MELK and a tumor suppressor SH3BP4, both previously suggested to affect CM progression. Pending further validation, these findings suggest that the genetic factors may improve the prognostic stratification of high-risk early-stage CM patients, and propose putative biological insights for potential therapeutic investigation of these targets to prevent aggressive outcome from early-stage melanoma.

In CM238, 76% of patients (pts) with high-risk resected melanoma (MEL) treated with adjuvant NIVO were alive at 5 years, but there is limited RW data to validate these findings in a similar patient population. This study compared the OS of pts treated with adjuvant NIVO in CM238 vs. RW pts. Pts with stage III resected MEL (AJCC 8th edition) who received adjuvant NIVO were selected from CM238 and the nationwide Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived de-identified database (the RW cohort). Pts in the RW cohort were required to meet the eligibility criteria in CM238 where possible. OS/real-world OS (rwOS) were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier methods and compared using Cox proportional hazards models after adjusting for key prognostic baseline variables (age, sex, race, disease stage, time from surgical resection to index date, ECOG, and comorbidities) between the two cohorts. In the RW cohort, 492 pts with resected stage III MEL received adjuvant NIVO and 320 pts met the eligibility criteria of CM238. Compared with pts in the CM238 cohort, pts in the RW cohort were older (median: 64 vs. 56 years), heavier (91 vs. 82 kg), had a higher proportion of diabetes (9% vs. 6%) and ECOG PS 1 (17% vs. 10%), and had slightly more stage IIIA (4% vs. 1%), less stage IIIB (29% vs. 32%), and similar stage IIIC (63% vs. 63%) and stage IIID (4% vs. 5%). Before adjustment, pts in the RW cohort had a higher risk of mortality compared with pts in the CM238 cohort (HR: 1.46; 95% CI, 1.00 to 2.13; p < 0.05). After adjusting for differences in key patient characteristics, OS was similar between the two cohorts (HR: 1.12; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.84, p = 0.66). In conclusion, pts with stage III resected MEL treated with adjuvant NIVO in the RW setting had OS similar to those in CM238 after adjusting for key prognostic factors