Understanding quality of life issues in patients with advanced melanoma: Phase 1 and 2 in the development of the EORTC advanced melanoma module.

AIMS: We aimed to develop a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life (QoL) module tailored for patients with advanced (resectable or unresectable stage III/IV) melanoma receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy. METHODS: Following the EORTC QoL Group module development guidelines, we conducted phases 1 and 2 of the development process. In phase 1, we generated a list of health-related (HR)QoL issues through a systematic literature review and semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients with advanced melanoma. In phase 2, these issues were converted into questionnaire items to create the preliminary module. RESULTS: Phase 1: we retrieved 8006 articles for the literature review, of which 35 were deemed relevant, resulting in 84 HRQoL issues being extracted to create the initial issue list. Semi-structured interviews with 18 HCPs and 28 patients with advanced melanoma resulted in 28 issues being added to the initial issue list. Following EORTC module development criteria, 26 issues were removed, and two issues were added after review by patient advocates. Phase 2: To ensure uniformity and avoid duplication, 16 issues were consolidated into eight items. Additionally, an independent expert contributed one new item, resulting in a preliminary module comprising 80 HRQoL items. CONCLUSION: We identified a range of HRQoL issues (dry skin, xerostomia, and arthralgia) relevant to patients with stage III/IV melanoma. Future module development phases will refine the questionnaire. Once completed, this module will enable standardized assessment of HRQoL in patients with (locally) advanced melanoma.

Survival update of neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab in macroscopic stage III melanoma in the OpACIN and OpACIN-neo trials.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab has yielded high response rates in patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma. These response rates translated to high short-term survival rates. However, data on long-term survival and disease recurrence are lacking. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In OpACIN, 20 patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma were randomized to ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg q3w four cycles of adjuvant or split two cycles of neoadjuvant and two adjuvant. In OpACIN-neo, 86 patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma were randomized to arm A (2× ipilimumab 3 mg/kg plus nivolumab 1 mg/kg q3w; n = 30), arm B (2× ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus nivolumab 3 mg/kg q3w; n = 30), or arm C (2× ipilimumab 3 mg/kg q3w plus 2× nivolumab 3 mg/kg q2w; n = 26) followed by surgery. RESULTS: The median recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached in either trial. After a median follow-up of 69 months for OpACIN, 1/7 patients with a pathologic response to neoadjuvant therapy had disease recurrence. The estimated 5-year RFS and OS rates for the neoadjuvant arm were 70% and 90% versus 60% and 70% for the adjuvant arm. After a median follow-up of 47 months for OpACIN-neo, the estimated 3-year RFS and OS rates were 82% and 92%, respectively. The estimated 3-year RFS rate for OpACIN-neo was 95% for patients with a pathologic response versus 37% for patients without a pathologic response (P < 0.001). In multiple regression analyses, pathologic response was the strongest predictor of disease recurrence. Of the 12 patients with distant disease recurrence after neoadjuvant therapy, 5 responded to subsequent anti-PD-1 and 8 to targeted therapy, although 7 patients showed progression after the initial response. CONCLUSIONS: Updated data confirm the high survival rates after neoadjuvant combination checkpoint inhibition in macroscopic stage III melanoma, especially for patients with a pathologic response. Pathologic response is the strongest surrogate marker for long-term outcome.

Dermoscopy as response evaluation tool for cutaneous malignant melanoma metastases treated with Talimogene Laherparepvec: a prospective feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, the response of cutaneous melanoma metastases (CMM) to treatment with Talimogene Laherparepvec (T-VEC) is evaluated by clinical examination, macroscopic lesion photography and 3-monthly PET-CT scans. When a complete response (CR) is suspected, biopsies are taken for histopathological confirmation. OBJECTIVES: We set out to investigate the feasibility of dermoscopy in monitoring the response to T-VEC in a pilot study. METHODS: Six patients with CMM treated with T-VEC monotherapy were enrolled in the pilot study. Patients were treated with T-VEC according to protocol, and the response was monitored with clinical examination, macroscopic lesion photography and 3-monthly PET-CT scans. For this study, 1-3 cutaneous metastases per patient were selected. Macroscopic and dermoscopic pictures of these metastases were taken at baseline, prior to each treatment with T-VEC and prior to histological biopsy. The pictures were evaluated by two investigators, using a colour-based pattern classification. RESULTS: In total, 11 CMM were dermoscopically assessed, 93% was located on the extremities. Four metastases had a blue pattern, two metastases had a pink pattern, three metastases had a brown pattern, and two metastases had mixed patterns. Metastases with a pink pattern harboured glomerular and arborizing vessels that diminished and vanished during treatment T-VEC, indicating CR. The remaining metastases did not show changes on a dermoscopic level that were not also seen on macroscopic level. Five patients achieved CR to T-VEC, one patient is still on treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that for CMM with a pink pattern, dermoscopy can provide additional information regarding the response to T-VEC. For cutaneous metastases with a blue, brown or a mixed patterns, dermoscopy did not provide additional information on top of the information obtained through physical examination and lesion photography. More studies would be needed to determine the exact role of dermoscopy in the evaluation of CMM.

Isolated limb perfusion for locally advanced melanoma in the immunotherapy era.

BACKGROUND: Prior to the advent of effective systemic therapy for melanoma, isolated limb perfusion (ILP) was the most effective local treatment for advanced in-transit melanoma (ITM). However, many patients who are now treated by ILP will have received prior immunotherapy. We sought to compare response rates to ILP in patients who had previously received immunotherapy compared to immunotherapy naive patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who underwent ILP for ITM between January 2015 and July 2020 for melanoma were identified retrospectively from two tertiary institutions. Surgical morbidity and oncologic outcomes were compared between immunotherapy naive and immunotherapy pre-treated patients. RESULTS: 97 perfusions were performed for melanoma. Of those, 18 patients had undergone prior immunotherapy. There were no differences in clinicopathological characteristics or perioperative outcomes between cohorts. Surgical morbidity and local toxicity were similar between both cohorts. Patients who underwent immunotherapy prior to ILP had significantly decreased complete response (CR) rates compared with immunotherapy-naïve (6% vs 47%, p = 0.0018) and a significantly decreased overall survival (OS) and distant progression free survival (DPFS) (p = 0.0031 and p = 0.0006 respectively). There was no difference in overall response (OR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD) and local progression free survival (LPFS) between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Oncological outcomes and complete response rates are worse in patients who have received immunotherapy prior to ILP compared with immunotherapy naïve patients. Despite this, ILP is still a valuable second line treatment for local control in patients who have multiple, bulky and/or recurrent ITM post immunotherapy.

Trends in survival and costs in metastatic melanoma in the era of novel targeted and immunotherapeutic drugs.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate trends in survival and health care costs in metastatic melanoma in the era of targeted and immunotherapeutic drugs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data on survival and health care resource use were retrieved from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate overall survival. Health care costs and budget impact were computed by applying unit costs to individual patient resource use. All outcomes were stratified by year of diagnosis. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were balanced across cohort years. The percentage of patients receiving systemic treatment increased from 73% in 2013 to 90% in 2018. Patients received on average 1.85 [standard deviation (SD): 1.14] lines of treatment and 41% of patients received at least two lines of treatment. Median survival increased from 11.8 months in 2013 [95% confidence interval (CI): 10.7-13.7 months] to 21.1 months in 2018 (95% CI: 18.2 months-not reached). Total mean costs were €100 330 (SD: €103 699); systemic treatments accounted for 84% of the total costs. Costs for patients who received systemic treatment [€118 905 (SD: €104 166)] remained reasonably stable over the years even after the introduction of additional (combination of) novel drugs. From mid-2013 to 2018, the total budget impact for all patients was €452.79 million. CONCLUSION: Our study shows a gain in survival in the era of novel targeted and immunotherapeutic drugs. These novel drugs came, however, along with substantial health care costs. Further insights into the cost-effectiveness of the novel drugs are crucial for ensuring value for money in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma.

Pathological response and tumour bed histopathological features correlate with survival following neoadjuvant immunotherapy in stage III melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for pathological evaluation of neoadjuvant specimens and pathological response categories have been developed by the International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium (INMC). As part of the Optimal Neo-adjuvant Combination Scheme of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab (OpACIN-neo) clinical trial of neoadjuvant combination anti-programmed cell death protein 1/anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 immunotherapy for stage III melanoma, we sought to determine interobserver reproducibility of INMC histopathological assessment principles, identify specific tumour bed histopathological features of immunotherapeutic response that correlated with recurrence and relapse-free survival (RFS) and evaluate proposed INMC pathological response categories for predicting recurrence and RFS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinicopathological characteristics of lymph node dissection specimens of 83 patients enrolled in the OpACIN-neo clinical trial were evaluated. Two methods of assessing histological features of immunotherapeutic response were evaluated: the previously described immune-related pathologic response (irPR) score and our novel immunotherapeutic response score (ITRS). For a subset of cases (n = 29), cellular composition of the tumour bed was analysed by flow cytometry. RESULTS: There was strong interobserver reproducibility in assessment of pathological response (κ = 0.879) and percentage residual viable melanoma (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.965). The immunotherapeutic response subtype with high fibrosis had the strongest association with lack of recurrence (P = 0.008) and prolonged RFS (P = 0.019). Amongst patients with criteria for pathological non-response (pNR, >50% viable tumour), all who recurred had ≥70% viable melanoma. Higher ITRS and irPR scores correlated with lack of recurrence in the entire cohort (P = 0.002 and P ≤ 0.0001). The number of B lymphocytes was significantly increased in patients with a high fibrosis subtype of treatment response (P = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: There is strong reproducibility for assessment of pathological response using INMC criteria. Immunotherapeutic response of fibrosis subtype correlated with improved RFS, and may represent a biomarker. Potential B-cell contribution to fibrosis development warrants further study. Reclassification of pNR to a threshold of ≥70% viable melanoma and incorporating additional criteria of <10% fibrosis subtype of response may identify those at highest risk of recurrence, but requires validation.

Survival and biomarker analyses from the OpACIN-neo and OpACIN neoadjuvant immunotherapy trials in stage III melanoma.

Neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab showed high pathologic response rates (pRRs) in patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma in the phase 1b OpACIN ( NCT02437279 ) and phase 2 OpACIN-neo ( NCT02977052 ) studies1,2. While the results are promising, data on the durability of these pathologic responses and baseline biomarkers for response and survival were lacking. After a median follow-up of 4 years, none of the patients with a pathologic response (n = 7/9 patients) in the OpACIN study had relapsed. In OpACIN-neo (n = 86), the 2-year estimated relapse-free survival was 84% for all patients, 97% for patients achieving a pathologic response and 36% for nonresponders (P < 0.001). High tumor mutational burden (TMB) and high interferon-gamma-related gene expression signature score (IFN-γ score) were associated with pathologic response and low risk of relapse; pRR was 100% in patients with high IFN-γ score/high TMB; patients with high IFN-γ score/low TMB or low IFN-γ score/high TMB had pRRs of 91% and 88%; while patients with low IFN-γ score/low TMB had a pRR of only 39%. These data demonstrate long-term benefit in patients with a pathologic response and show the predictive potential of TMB and IFN-γ score. Our findings provide a strong rationale for a randomized phase 3 study comparing neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab versus standard adjuvant therapy with antibodies against the programmed cell death protein-1 (anti-PD-1) in macroscopic stage III melanoma.

Survival outcomes of patients with advanced melanoma from 2013 to 2017: Results of a nationwide population-based registry.

BACKGROUND: The treatment landscape has completely changed for advanced melanoma. We report survival outcomes and the differential impact of prognostic factors over time in daily clinical practice. METHODS: From a Dutch nationwide population-based registry, patients with advanced melanoma diagnosed from 2013 to 2017 were analysed (n = 3616). Because the proportional hazards assumption was violated, a multivariable Cox model restricted to the first 6 months and a multivariable landmark Cox model from 6 to 48 months were used to assess overall survival (OS) of cases without missing values. The 2017 cohort was excluded from this analysis because of the short follow-up time. RESULTS: Median OS of the 2013 and 2016 cohort was 11.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.4-13.5) and 17.7 months (95% CI: 14.9-19.8), respectively. Compared with the 2013 cohort, the 2016 cohort had superior survival in the Cox model from 0 to 6 months (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.55 [95% CI: 0.43-0.72]) and in the Cox model from 6 to 48 months (HR = 0.68 [95% CI: 0.57-0.83]). Elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, distant metastases in ≥3 organ sites, brain and liver metastasis and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of ≥1 had stronger association with inferior survival from 0 to 6 months than from 6 to 48 months. BRAF-mutated melanoma had superior survival in the first 6 months (HR = 0.50 [95% CI: 0.42-0.59]). CONCLUSION(S): Prognosis for advanced melanoma in the Netherlands has improved from 2013 to 2016. Prognostic importance of most evaluated factors was higher in the first 6 months after diagnosis. BRAF-mutated melanoma was only associated with superior survival in the first 6 months.

The value of lymph node ultrasound and whole body 18F-FDG PET/CT in stage IIB/C melanoma patients prior to SLNB.

BACKGROUND: Stage IIB/IIC (8th AJCC) melanoma patients are known to have high-risk primary tumors, however they follow the same routine to sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) as more low risk tumors. Guidelines are not conclusive regarding the use of preoperative imaging for these patients. The aim of this pilot study was to assess the value of ultrasound (US) and 18F-FDG PET/CT prior to lymphoscintigraphy (LSG) and SLNB for stage IIB/C melanoma patients. METHODS: From 2019-04 till 2020-01, all stage IIB/C melanoma patients underwent US of the regional lymph nodes and whole body 18F-FDG PET/CT before their planned LSG and SLNB. Suspected metastases were confirmed with fine needle aspiration (FNA), prior to surgery. RESULTS: In total 23 patients were screened: six had metastases detected by imaging, two by US, one by 18F-FDG PET/CT and three were detected by both imaging modalities. All metastases were nodal and therefore treatment was altered to lymph node dissection and all but one also received adjuvant therapy. Eight (47%) of the 17 patients without macroscopic disease, still had a positive SN. Sensitivity, specificity and false negative rate for US and 18F-FDG PET/CT were 36%, 89%, 64% and 29%, 100% and 71%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Preoperative negative imaging does not exclude the presence of SN metastases, therefore SLNB cannot be foregone. However, US detected metastases in 22% of patients, altering their treatment, which suggests it is effective in the work-up of stage IIB/C melanoma. Staging with 18F-FDG PET/CT is not of added value prior to LSG and SLNB and should therefore not be used.

Adequate surgical margins for dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans - A multi-centre analysis.

BACKGROUND: Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) is a locally aggressive tumour. Adequate margins have a positive impact on recurrence rates. The aim of this study is to assess how adequate margins are achieved and secondly which additional treatment modalities might be necessary to achieve adequate margins. MATERIAL & METHODS: Patients with DFSP treated between 1991 and 2016 at three tertiary centres were included. Patient- and tumour characteristics were obtained from a prospectively held database and patient files. RESULTS: A total of 279 patients with a median age of 39 (Interquartile range [IQ], 31-50) years and a median follow-up of 50 (IQ, 18-96) months were included. When DFSP was preoperatively confirmed by biopsy and resected with an oncological operation in a tertiary centre, in 86% was had clear pathological margins after one excision. Wider resection margins were significantly correlated with more reconstructions (p = 0.002). A substantial discrepancy between the primary surgical macroscopic and the pathological margins was found with a median difference of 22 (range, 10-46) mm (Fig. 1). There was no significant influence of the width of the pathological clear margins (if > 1 mm) and the recurrence rate (p = 0.710). CONCLUSION: The wider the resection margins, the more likely it is to obtain clear pathological margins, but the more likely patients will need any form of reconstruction after resection. The aim of the primary excision should be wide surgical resection, where the width of the margin should be balanced against the need for reconstructions and surgical morbidity.

ESMO consensus conference recommendations on the management of locoregional melanoma: under the auspices of the ESMO Guidelines Committee.

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a consensus conference on melanoma on 5-7 September 2019 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The conference included a multidisciplinary panel of 32 leading experts in the management of melanoma. The aim of the conference was to develop recommendations on topics that are not covered in detail in the current ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline and where available evidence is either limited or conflicting. The main topics identified for discussion were: (i) the management of locoregional disease; (ii) targeted versus immunotherapies in the adjuvant setting; (iii) targeted versus immunotherapies for the first-line treatment of metastatic melanoma; (iv) when to stop immunotherapy or targeted therapy in the metastatic setting; and (v) systemic versus local treatment of brain metastases. The expert panel was divided into five working groups in order to each address questions relating to one of the five topics outlined above. Relevant scientific literature was reviewed in advance. Recommendations were developed by the working groups and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This manuscript presents the results relating to the management of locoregional melanoma, including findings from the expert panel discussions, consensus recommendations and a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation. All participants approved the final manuscript.

ESMO consensus conference recommendations on the management of metastatic melanoma: under the auspices of the ESMO Guidelines Committee.

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a consensus conference on melanoma on 5-7 September 2019 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The conference included a multidisciplinary panel of 32 leading experts in the management of melanoma. The aim of the conference was to develop recommendations on topics that are not covered in detail in the current ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline and where available evidence is either limited or conflicting. The main topics identified for discussion were (i) the management of locoregional disease; (ii) targeted versus immunotherapies in the adjuvant setting; (iii) targeted versus immunotherapies for the first-line treatment of metastatic melanoma; (iv) when to stop immunotherapy or targeted therapy in the metastatic setting; and (v) systemic versus local treatment for brain metastases. The expert panel was divided into five working groups to each address questions relating to one of the five topics outlined above. Relevant scientific literature was reviewed in advance. Recommendations were developed by the working groups and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This manuscript presents the results relating to the management of metastatic melanoma, including findings from the expert panel discussions, consensus recommendations and a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation. All participants approved the final manuscript.

Surgical removal of the index node marked using magnetic seed localization to assess response to neoadjuvant immunotherapy in patients with stage III melanoma.

This pilot study explored the value of localized index node removal after neoadjuvant immunotherapy in patients with stage III melanoma, for use as a response indicator to guide the extent of completion lymph node dissection. Promising technology.

Development and validation of a nomogram to predict recurrence and melanoma-specific mortality in patients with negative sentinel lymph nodes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with melanoma and negative sentinel nodes (SNs) have varying outcomes, dependent on several prognostic factors. Considering all these factors in a prediction model might aid in identifying patients who could benefit from a personalized treatment strategy. The objective was to construct and validate a nomogram for recurrence and melanoma-specific mortality (MSM) in patients with melanoma and negative SNs. METHODS: A total of 3220 patients with negative SNs were identified from a cohort of 4124 patients from four EORTC Melanoma Group centres who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy. Prognostic factors for recurrence and MSM were studied with Cox regression analysis. Significant factors were incorporated in the models. Performance was assessed by discrimination (c-index) and calibration in cross-validation across the four centres. A nomogram was developed for graphical presentation. RESULTS: There were 3180 eligible patients. The final prediction model for recurrence and the calibrated model for MSM included three independent prognostic factors: ulceration, anatomical location and Breslow thickness. The c-index was 0·74 for recurrence and 0·76 for the calibrated MSM model. Cross-validation across the four centres showed reasonable model performance. A nomogram was developed based on these models. One-third of the patients had a 5-year recurrence probability of 8·2 per cent or less, and one-third had a recurrence probability of 23·0 per cent or more. CONCLUSION: A nomogram for predicting recurrence and MSM in patients with melanoma and negative SNs was constructed and validated. It could provide personalized estimates useful for tailoring surveillance strategies (reduce or increase intensity), and selection of patients for adjuvant therapy or clinical trials.

Pathological assessment of resection specimens after neoadjuvant therapy for metastatic melanoma.

Background: Clinical trials have recently evaluated safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy among patients with surgically resectable regional melanoma metastases. To capture informative prognostic data connected to pathological response in such trials, it is critical to standardize pathologic assessment and reporting of tumor response after this treatment. Methods: The International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium meetings in 2016 and 2017 assembled pathologists from academic centers to develop consensus guidelines for pathologic examination and reporting of surgical specimens from AJCC (8th edition) stage IIIB/C/D or oligometastatic stage IV melanoma patients treated with neoadjuvant-targeted or immune therapy. Patterns of pathologic response are provided context to inform these guidelines. Results: Based on our collective experience and guided by efforts in well-established neoadjuvant settings like breast cancer, procedures directing handling of pre- and post-neoadjuvant therapy-treated melanoma specimens are provided to facilitate comparison of findings across different trials and centers. Definitions of pathologic response are provided together with guidelines for reporting and quantifying the extent of pathologic response. Finally, the spectrum of histopathologic responses observed following neoadjuvant-targeted and immune-checkpoint therapy is described and illustrated. Conclusions: Standardizing pathologic evaluation of resected melanoma metastases following neoadjuvant-targeted or immune-checkpoint therapy allows more robust stratification of patient outcomes. This includes recognizing the spectrum of histopathologic response patterns to neoadjuvant therapy and a standard approach to grading pathologic responses. Such an approach will facilitate comparison of results across clinical trials and inform ongoing correlative studies into the mechanisms of response and resistance to agents applied in the neoadjuvant setting.