The inhibition of the mitogen-activated protein kinases signalling pathway through combined use of BRAF and MEK inhibitors (BRAFi+MEKi) represents an established therapeutic option in patients with ...BRAF-mutated, advanced melanoma. These efficient therapies are well tolerated with mostly moderate and reversible side effects and a discontinuation rate due to adverse events of 11.5%–15.7%. Median duration of therapy ranges between 8.8 and 11.7 months. Based on data from confirmatory trials, safety profiles of three BRAFi+MEKi combinations were reviewed, that is, dabrafenib plus trametinib, vemurafenib plus cobimetinib and encorafenib plus binimetinib. Many adverse events are class effects, such as cutaneous, gastrointestinal, ocular, cardiac and musculoskeletal events; some adverse events are substance associated. Fever (dabrafenib) and photosensitivity (vemurafenib) are the most common and clinically prominent examples. Other adverse events are less frequent and the association to one substance is less strong such as anaemia, facial paresis (encorafenib), neutropenia (dabrafenib), skin rash, QTc prolongation and increased liver function tests (vemurafenib). This narrative review provides recommendations for monitoring, adverse event evaluation and management focusing on the clinically relevant side effects of the three regimens.
Summary Background Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor antibody, can result in durable responses in patients with melanoma who have progressed after ipilimumab and BRAF ...inhibitors. We assessed the efficacy and safety of nivolumab compared with investigator's choice of chemotherapy (ICC) as a second-line or later-line treatment in patients with advanced melanoma. Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients at 90 sites in 14 countries. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, had unresectable or metastatic melanoma, and progressed after ipilimumab, or ipilimumab and a BRAF inhibitor if they were BRAFV 600 mutation-positive. Participating investigators randomly assigned (with an interactive voice response system) patients 2:1 to receive an intravenous infusion of nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or ICC (dacarbazine 1000 mg/m2 every 3 weeks or paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 combined with carboplatin area under the curve 6 every 3 weeks) until progression or unacceptable toxic effects. We stratified randomisation by BRAF mutation status, tumour expression of PD-L1, and previous best overall response to ipilimumab. We used permuted blocks (block size of six) within each stratum. Primary endpoints were the proportion of patients who had an objective response and overall survival. Treatment was given open-label, but those doing tumour assessments were masked to treatment assignment. We assessed objective responses per-protocol after 120 patients had been treated with nivolumab and had a minimum follow-up of 24 weeks, and safety in all patients who had had at least one dose of treatment. The trial is closed and this is the first interim analysis, reporting the objective response primary endpoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01721746. Findings Between Dec 21, 2012, and Jan 10, 2014, we screened 631 patients, randomly allocating 272 patients to nivolumab and 133 to ICC. Confirmed objective responses were reported in 38 (31·7%, 95% CI 23·5–40·8) of the first 120 patients in the nivolumab group versus five (10·6%, 3·5–23·1) of 47 patients in the ICC group. Grade 3–4 adverse events related to nivolumab included increased lipase (three 1% of 268 patients), increased alanine aminotransferase, anaemia, and fatigue (two 1% each); for ICC, these included neutropenia (14 14% of 102), thrombocytopenia (six 6%), and anaemia (five 5%). We noted grade 3–4 drug-related serious adverse events in 12 (5%) nivolumab-treated patients and nine (9%) patients in the ICC group. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Interpretation Nivolumab led to a greater proportion of patients achieving an objective response and fewer toxic effects than with alternative available chemotherapy regimens for patients with advanced melanoma that has progressed after ipilimumab or ipilimumab and a BRAF inhibitor. Nivolumab represents a new treatment option with clinically meaningful durable objective responses in a population of high unmet need. Funding Bristol-Myers Squibb.
In a previous trial (CheckMate 066),3 2-year overall survival with first-line nivolumab treatment was 58% for patients with BRAF wild-type melanoma. ...although cross-study comparisons should be ...interpreted with caution, overall survival for patients in the CheckMate 069 who received ipilimumab first and nivolumab subsequently was only slightly shorter than previously reported.
Uveal melanoma is the most common primary intraocular malignancy among adults. It is, nevertheless, a rare disease, with an incidence of approximately one case per 100,000 individuals per year in ...Europe. Approximately half of tumors will eventually metastasize, and the liver is the organ usually affected. No standard-of-care treatment exists for metastasized uveal melanoma. Chemotherapies or liver-directed treatments do not usually result in long-term tumor control. Immunotherapies are currently the most promising therapy option available.
We reviewed both relevant recent literature on PubMed concerning the treatment of uveal melanoma with immunotherapies, and currently investigated drugs on ClinicalTrials.gov. Our own experiences with immune checkpoint blockers are included in a case series of 20 patients.
Because few clinical trials have been conducted for metastasized uveal melanoma, no definitive treatment strategy exists for this rare disease. The outcomes of most immunotherapies are poor, especially compared with cutaneous melanoma. However, encouraging results have been found for some very recently investigated agents such as the bispecific tebentafusp, for which a remarkably increased one-year overall survival rate, and similarly increased disease control rate, were observed in early phase studies.
The treatment of metastatic uveal melanoma remains challenging, and almost all patients still die from the disease. Long-term responses might be achievable by means of new immunological strategies. Patients should therefore be referred to large medical centers where they can take part in controlled clinical studies.
Opinion statement
Modern therapy of advanced melanoma offers effective targeted therapeutic options in the form of BRAF plus MEK inhibition for patients with BRAF V600 mutations. For patients lacking ...these mutations, checkpoint inhibition remains the only first-line choice for treatment of metastatic disease. However, approximately half of patients do not respond to immunotherapy, requiring effective options for a second-line treatment. Advances in genetic profiling have found other possible target molecules, especially a wide array of rare non-V600 BRAF mutations which may respond to available targeted therapy.
More information on the characteristics of such mutants is needed to further assess the efficacy of targeted therapies in the metastatic and adjuvant setting of advanced melanoma. Thus, it may be helpful to classify known BRAF mutations by their kinase activation status and dependence on alternative signaling pathways. While BRAF V600 mutations appear to have an overall more prominent role of kinase activity for tumor growth, non-V600 BRAF mutations show great differences in kinase activation and, hence, response to BRAF plus MEK inhibition. When BRAF-mutated melanomas rely on additional signaling molecules such as RAS for tumor growth, greater benefit may be expected from MEK inhibition than BRAF inhibition. In other cases, mutations of c-kit or NRAS may serve as important pharmacological targets in advanced melanoma. However, since benefit from currently available targeted therapies for non-V600 mutants is usually inferior regarding response and long-term outcome, checkpoint inhibitors remain the standard recommended first-line therapy for these patients.
Herein, we review the current clinical data for characteristics and response to targeted therapy of melanomas lacking a V600 BRAF mutation.
Purpose Until recently, limited options existed for patients with advanced melanoma who experienced disease progression while receiving treatment with ipilimumab. Here, we report the coprimary ...overall survival (OS) end point of CheckMate 037, which has previously shown that nivolumab resulted in more patients achieving an objective response compared with chemotherapy regimens in ipilimumab-refractory patients with advanced melanoma. Patients and Methods Patients were stratified by programmed death-ligand 1 expression, BRAF status, and best prior cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 therapy response, then randomly assigned 2:1 to nivolumab 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks or investigator's choice chemotherapy (ICC; dacarbazine 1,000 mg/m
every 3 weeks or carboplatin area under the curve 6 plus paclitaxel 175 mg/m
every 3 weeks). Patients were treated until they experienced progression or unacceptable toxicity, with follow-up of approximately 2 years. Results Two hundred seventy-two patients were randomly assigned to nivolumab (99% treated) and 133 to ICC (77% treated). More nivolumab-treated patients had brain metastases (20% v 14%) and increased lactate dehydrogenase levels (52% v 38%) at baseline; 41% of patients treated with ICC versus 11% of patients treated with nivolumab received anti-programmed death 1 agents after randomly assigned therapy. Median OS was 16 months for nivolumab versus 14 months for ICC (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95.54% CI, 0.73 to 1.24); median progression-free survival was 3.1 months versus 3.7 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.0; 95.1% CI, 0.78 to 1.436). Overall response rate (27% v 10%) and median duration of response (32 months v 13 months) were notably higher for nivolumab versus ICC. Fewer grade 3 and 4 treatment-related adverse events were observed in patients on nivolumab (14% v 34%). Conclusion Nivolumab demonstrated higher, more durable responses but no difference in survival compared with ICC. OS should be interpreted with caution as it was likely impacted by an increased dropout rate before treatment, which led to crossover therapy in the ICC group, and by an increased proportion of patients in the nivolumab group with poor prognostic factors.
Uveal melanoma is a disease that is distinct from cutaneous melanoma, with a low tumor mutational burden and a 1-year overall survival of approximately 50% in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. ...Data showing a proven overall survival benefit with a systemic treatment are lacking. Tebentafusp is a bispecific protein consisting of an affinity-enhanced T-cell receptor fused to an anti-CD3 effector that can redirect T cells to target glycoprotein 100-positive cells.
In this open-label, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned previously untreated HLA-A*02:01-positive patients with metastatic uveal melanoma in a 2:1 ratio to receive tebentafusp (tebentafusp group) or the investigator's choice of therapy with single-agent pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine (control group), stratified according to the lactate dehydrogenase level. The primary end point was overall survival.
A total of 378 patients were randomly assigned to either the tebentafusp group (252 patients) or the control group (126 patients). Overall survival at 1 year was 73% in the tebentafusp group and 59% in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.51; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.37 to 0.71; P<0.001) in the intention-to-treat population. Progression-free survival was also significantly higher in the tebentafusp group than in the control group (31% vs. 19% at 6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.94; P = 0.01). The most common treatment-related adverse events in the tebentafusp group were cytokine-mediated events (due to T-cell activation) and skin-related events (due to glycoprotein 100-positive melanocytes), including rash (83%), pyrexia (76%), and pruritus (69%). These adverse events decreased in incidence and severity after the first three or four doses and infrequently led to discontinuation of the trial treatment (2%). No treatment-related deaths were reported.
Treatment with tebentafusp resulted in longer overall survival than the control therapy among previously untreated patients with metastatic uveal melanoma. (Funded by Immunocore; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03070392; EudraCT number, 2015-003153-18.).
Treating patients who have cancer with vaccines that stimulate a targeted immune response is conceptually appealing, but cancer vaccine trials have not been successful in late-stage patients with ...treatment-refractory tumours
. We are testing melanoma FixVac (BNT111)-an intravenously administered liposomal RNA (RNA-LPX) vaccine, which targets four non-mutated, tumour-associated antigens that are prevalent in melanoma-in an ongoing, first-in-human, dose-escalation phase I trial in patients with advanced melanoma (Lipo-MERIT trial, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02410733). We report here data from an exploratory interim analysis that show that melanoma FixVac, alone or in combination with blockade of the checkpoint inhibitor PD1, mediates durable objective responses in checkpoint-inhibitor (CPI)-experienced patients with unresectable melanoma. Clinical responses are accompanied by the induction of strong CD4
and CD8
T cell immunity against the vaccine antigens. The antigen-specific cytotoxic T-cell responses in some responders reach magnitudes typically reported for adoptive T-cell therapy, and are durable. Our findings indicate that RNA-LPX vaccination is a potent immunotherapy in patients with CPI-experienced melanoma, and suggest the general utility of non-mutant shared tumour antigens as targets for cancer vaccination.
Chemokines and cytokines represent an emerging field of immunotherapy research. They are responsible for the crosstalk and chemoattraction of immune cells and tumor cells. For instance, CXCL9/10/11 ...chemoattract effector CD8+ T cells to the tumor microenvironment, making an argument for their promising role as biomarkers for a favorable outcome. The cytokine Interleukin-15 (IL-15) can promote the chemokine expression of CXCR3 ligands but also XCL1, contributing to an important DC-T cell interaction. Recruited cytotoxic T cells can be clonally expanded by IL-2. Delivering or inducing these chemokines and cytokines can result in tumor shrinkage and might synergize with immune checkpoint inhibition. In addition, blocking specific chemokine and cytokine receptors such as CCR2, CCR4 or Il-6R can reduce the recruitment of tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs), myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) or regulatory T cells (Tregs). Efforts to target these chemokines and cytokines have the potential to personalize cancer immunotherapy further and address patients that are not yet responsive because of immune cell exclusion. Targeting cytokines such as IL-6 and IL-15 is currently being evaluated in clinical trials in combination with immune checkpoint-blocking antibodies for the treatment of metastatic melanoma. The improved overall survival of melanoma patients might outweigh potential risks such as autoimmunity. However, off-target toxicity needs to be elucidated.
PDF
