Neoadjuvant Dual Checkpoint Inhibitors vs Anti-PD1 Therapy in High-Risk Resectable Melanoma: A Pooled Analysis.

Importance: Despite the clear potential benefits of neoadjuvant therapy, the optimal neoadjuvant regimen for patients with high-risk resectable melanoma (HRRM) is not known. Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of dual checkpoint inhibitors with anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (anti-PD1) therapy in a neoadjuvant setting among patients with HRRM. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this pooled analysis of clinical trials, studies were selected provided they investigated immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment, were published between January 2018 and March 2023, and were phase 1, 2, or 3 clinical trials. Participant data included in the analysis were derived from trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of anti-PD1 monotherapy and the combination of anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein-4 with anti-PD1 in the neoadjuvant setting, specifically among patients with HRRM. Interventions: Patients were treated with either anti-PD1 monotherapy; dual checkpoint inhibition (DCPI) with a conventional dose of 3-mg/kg ipilimumab and 1-mg/kg nivolumab; or DCPI with an alternative-dose regimen of 1-mg/kg ipilimumab and 3-mg/kg nivolumab. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were radiologic complete response (rCR), radiologic overall objective response (rOOR), and radiologic progressive disease. Also, pathologic complete response (pCR), the proportion of patients undergoing surgical resection, and occurrence of grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events (irAEs) were considered. Results: Among 573 patients enrolled in 6 clinical trials, neoadjuvant therapy with DCPI was associated with higher odds of achieving pCR compared with anti-PD1 monotherapy (odds ratio [OR], 3.16; P < .001). DCPI was associated with higher odds of grade 3 or 4 irAEs compared with anti-PD1 monotherapy (OR, 3.75; P < .001). When comparing the alternative-dose ipilimumab and nivolumab (IPI-NIVO) regimen with conventional-dose IPI-NIVO, no statistically significant difference in rCR, rOOR, radiologic progressive disease, or pCR was noted. However, the conventional-dose IPI-NIVO regimen was associated with increased grade 3 or 4 irAEs (OR, 4.76; P < .001). Conventional-dose IPI-NIVO was associated with greater odds of achieving improved rOOR (OR, 1.95; P = .046) and pCR (OR, 2.99; P < .001) compared with anti-PD1 monotherapy. The alternative dose of IPI-NIVO also was associated with higher odds of achieving rCR (OR, 2.55; P = .03) and pCR (OR, 3.87; P < .001) compared with anti-PD1 monotherapy. The risk for grade 3 or 4 irAEs is higher with both the conventional-dose (OR, 9.59; P < .001) and alternative-dose IPI-NIVO regimens (OR, 2.02; P = .02) compared with anti-PD1 monotherapy. Conclusion and Relevance: In this pooled analysis of 6 clinical trials, although DCPI was associated with increased likelihood of achieving pathological and radiologic responses, the associated risk for grade 3 or 4 irAEs was significantly lower with anti-PD1 monotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting for HRRM. Additionally, compared with alternative-dose IPI-NIVO, the conventional dose of IPI-NIVO was associated with increased risk for grade 3 or 4 irAEs, with no significant distinctions in radiologic or pathologic efficacy.

Disparities in the Receipt of Systemic Treatment in Metastatic Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: In 2011, immunotherapy and targeted therapy revolutionized melanoma treatment. However, inequities in their use may limit the benefits seen by certain patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients in the National Cancer Database for patients with stage IV melanoma from 2 time periods: 2004-2010 and 2016-2020, distinguishing between those who received systemic therapy and those who did not. We investigated the rates and factors associated with treatment omission. We employed Kaplan-Meier analysis to explore the impact of treatment on overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 19,961 patients met the inclusion criteria: 7621 patients were diagnosed in 2004-2010 and 12,340 patients in 2016-2020, of whom 54.9% and 28.3% did not receive systemic treatment, respectively. The rate of "no treatment" has decreased to a plateau of ∼25% in 2020. Median overall survival was improved with treatment in both time periods (2004-2010: 8.8 vs. 5.6 mo [ P <0.05]; and 2016-2020: 25.9 vs. 4.3 mo [ P <0.05]). Nonmedical factors associated with the omission of treatment in both periods included low socioeconomic status, Medicaid or no health insurance, and treatment at low-volume centers. In the period from 2016 to 2020, patients treated at nonacademic programs were also less likely to receive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Systemic therapies significantly improve survival for patients with metastatic melanoma, but significant disparities exist with their receipt. Local efforts are needed to ensure all patients benefit from these revolutionary treatments.

Identifying critical quality metrics in Mohs Surgery: A national expert consensus process.

BACKGROUND: Amid a movement toward value-based healthcare, increasing emphasis has been placed on outcomes and cost of medical services. To define and demonstrate the quality of services provided by Mohs surgeons, it is important to identify and understand the key aspects of Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) that contribute to excellence in patient care. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to develop and identify a comprehensive list of metrics in an initial effort to define excellence in MMS. METHODS: Mohs surgeons participated in a modified Delphi process to reach a consensus on a list of metrics. Patients were administered surveys to gather patient perspectives. RESULTS: Twenty-four of the original 66 metrics met final inclusion criteria. Broad support for the initiative was obtained through physician feedback. LIMITATIONS: Limitations of this study include attrition bias across survey rounds and participation at the consensus meeting. Furthermore, the list of metrics is based on expert consensus instead of quality evidence-based outcomes. CONCLUSION: With the goal of identifying metrics that demonstrate excellence in performance of MMS, this initial effort has shown that Mohs surgeons and patients have unique perspectives and can be engaged in a data-driven approach to help define excellence in the field of MMS.

The effect of surgical timing in nonmetastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is no consensus guidelines on the best timing to perform Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in high-risk melanoma patients. We aimed to understand the impact of surgical timing on nodal upstaging in patients with cutaneous melanoma. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database from 2004 to 2018 for patients with T2-T4, N0, M0 melanomas, who underwent melanoma excision and nodal surgery. We included patients who underwent surgery within 2-19 weeks postdiagnosis. We aimed to determine the association of surgical delay (weeks) with nodal positivity. RESULTS: A total of 53 355 patients were included, of whom 20.9% had positive lymph nodes. Patients underwent surgery at a median of 5 (4-7) weeks after diagnosis. The rate of positive nodes increased with increased weeks to surgery (line of best-fit slope = 0.38). Multivariable regression analysis identified an association between time to surgery and nodal positivity (2.4% increased risk per week, p < 0.05). Our analysis showed significantly increased likelihood of nodal positivity beginning 9 weeks after diagnosis (odds ratio [OR] = 1.3, p < 0.05). Furthermore, patients with T2-3 tumors had a significant increase in nodal positivity with increased time to surgery (OR = 1.03 per week, p < 0.001). However, no significant trend in nodal positivity was identified for patients with T4 melanomas (OR = 1.01 per week, p = 0.596). CONCLUSION: Surgery within 9 weeks of melanoma diagnosis was not associated with increased likelihood of nodal positivity. These data can guide clinical conversations regarding the importance of surgical timing for melanoma.

Is sentinel lymph node biopsy needed for lentigo maligna melanoma?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is an area of debate in the management of lentigo maligna melanoma (LMM). The utility of SLNB and its prognostic value in LMM have not yet been studied with large databases. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the National Cancer Database (2012-2020) and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (2010-2019) database for patients with cutaneous nonmetastatic LMM with Breslow thickness >1.0 mm. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with SLNB performance and sentinel lymph node (SLN) positivity. Univariable and multivariable analyses assessed overall survival (OS) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) based on SLNB performance and SLN status. RESULTS: Compared to other melanoma subtypes, LMM had lower rates of SLNB (66.6% vs. 80.0%-84.0%) and SLN positivity (11.3% vs. 18.6%-34.2%). Compared to patients who did not undergo SLNB, SLN status was significantly associated with improved OS in patients with SLN positive (HR = 0.64 [0.55-0.76]) and SLN negative (HR = 0.68 [0.49-0.94]), and worse MSS only in patients with positive SLN (HR = 3.93, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The improved OS associated with SLNB likely implies surgical selection bias. Analysis of MSS confirms appropriate patient selection and suggests important prognostic value associated with SLN status. These results support continued SLNB for LMM patients according to standard guidelines.

Incidence and Survival Outcomes of Dermatofibrosarcoma Protuberans From 2000 to 2020: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent changes in the incidence and survival of dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) have not been described. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the incidence and survival of DFSP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients with DFSP from 2000 to 2020 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was performed. Cox and Fine-Gray regression models were used to assess overall and DFSP-specific survival. RESULTS: The incidence of DFSP has not changed from 2000 to 2020 with 4.6 cases/million person-years, with higher rates in dark-skinned and middle-age individuals. Factors associated with overall mortality in DFSP patients include advanced age ( p < .0001), male sex (hazard ratio [HR] 1.8, p < .0001), larger tumors (HR 1.002 per millimeter, p < .001), lower household income (HR 1.8, p = .0002), and lower extremity location (HR 1.7, p = .008). Mohs surgery is associated with improved overall survival (HR 0.4, p = .02). Large tumor size (6.0+ cm, HR 6.7, p = .01) and advanced age (age 80+ years, HR 21.3, p = .003) were associated with worse DFSP-specific mortality. CONCLUSION: Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans incidence has remained constant from 2000 to 2020. Increasing age and tumor size, decreased income, male sex, and lower extremity location are associated with worsened survival. Mohs surgery is associated with improved overall survival. Increased age and tumor size are associated with worsened DFSP-specific mortality.

Predictors of sentinel lymph node metastasis in very thin invasive melanomas.

BACKGROUND: Melanomas < 0.8 mm in Breslow depth have less than a 5% risk for nodal positivity. Nonetheless, nodal positivity is prognostic for this group. Early identification of nodal positivity may improve the outcomes for these patients. OBJECTIVES: To determine the degree to which ulceration and other high-risk features predict sentinel lymph node (SLN) positivity for very thin melanomas. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was reviewed from 2012 to 2018 for patients with melanoma with Breslow thickness < 0.8 mm. Data were analysed from 7 July 2022 through to 25 February 2023. Patients were excluded if data regarding their ulceration status or SLN biopsy (SLNB) performance were unknown. We analysed patient, tumour and health system factors for their effect on SLN positivity. Data were analysed using χ2 tests and logistic regressions. Overall survival (OS) was compared by Kaplan-Meier analyses. RESULTS: Positive nodal metastases were seen in 876 (5.0%) patients who underwent SLNB (17 692). Factors significantly associated with nodal positivity on multivariable analysis include lymphovascular invasion [odds ratio (OR) 4.5, P < 0.001], ulceration (OR 2.6, P < 0.001), mitoses (OR 2.1, P < 0.001) and nodular subtype (OR 2.1, P < 0.001). Five-year OS was 75% and 92% for patients with positive and negative SLN, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Nodal positivity has prognostic significance for very thin melanomas. In our cohort, the rate of nodal positivity was 5% overall in these patients who underwent SLNB. Specific tumour factors (e.g. lymphovascular invasion, ulceration, mitoses, nodular subtype) were associated with higher rates of SLN metastases and should be used to guide clinicians in choosing which patients will benefit from SLNB.

Association of sociodemographic characteristics with utilization of sentinel lymph node biopsy for American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition T1b cutaneous melanoma.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is an important staging and prognostic tool for cutaneous melanoma (CM). However, there exists a knowledge gap regarding whether sociodemographic characteristics are associated with receipt of SLNB for T1b CMs, for which there are no definitive recommendations for SLNB per current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. We performed a retrospective analysis of the 2012-2018 National Cancer Database, identifying patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual 8th edition stage T1b CM, and used multivariable logistic regression to analyze associations between sociodemographic characteristics and receipt of SLNB. Among 40,458 patients with T1b CM, 23,813 (58.9%) received SLNB. Median age was 62 years, and most patients were male (57%) and non-Hispanic White (95%). In multivariable analyses, patients of Hispanic (aOR 0.67, 95%CI 0.48-0.94) and other (aOR 0.78, 95%CI 0.63-0.97) race/ethnicity, and patients aged > 75 (aOR 0.33, 95%CI 0.29-0.38), were less likely to receive SLNB. Conversely, patients in the highest of seven socioeconomic status levels (aOR 1.37, 95%CI 1.13-1.65) and those treated at higher-volume facilities (aOR 1.29, 95%CI 1.14-1.46) were more likely to receive SLNB. Understanding the underlying drivers of these associations may yield important insights for the management of patients with melanoma.

Asian American and Pacific Islander patients with melanoma have increased odds of treatment delays: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) melanoma patients have higher mortality than non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients. Treatment delays may contribute, but whether AAPI patients have longer time from diagnosis to definitive surgery (TTDS) is unknown. OBJECTIVES: Investigate TTDS differences between AAPI and NHW melanoma patients. METHODS: Retrospective review of AAPI and NHW melanoma patients in the National Cancer Database (NCD) (2004-2020). The association of race with TTDS was evaluated by multivariable logistic regression, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Of 354,943 AAPI and NHW melanoma patients identified, 1155 (0.33%) were AAPI. AAPI patients had longer TTDS for stage I, II, and III melanoma (P < .05 for all). Adjusting for sociodemographic factors, AAPI patients had 1.5 times the odds of a TTDS between 61 and 90 days and twice the odds of a TTDS >90 days. Racial differences in TTDS persisted in Medicare and private insurance types. Uninsured AAPI patients had the longest TTDS (mean, 53.26 days), while those with private insurance had the shortest TTDS (mean, 34.92 days; P < .001 for both). LIMITATION: AAPI patients comprised 0.33% of the sample. CONCLUSIONS: AAPI melanoma patients have increased odds of treatment delays. Associated socioeconomic differences should inform efforts to reduce disparities in treatment and survival.