Mutational Analysis of Circulating Tumor DNA in Patients With Estrogen Receptor-Positive/Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer Receiving Palbociclib: Results From the TREnd Trial.

PURPOSE: To identify prognostic circulating biomarkers to cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i), we performed a mutational analysis on circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) samples from patients included in the TREnd trial, which randomly assigned patients to receive the CDK4/6i palbociclib alone or with the endocrine treatment (ET) to which they had progressed. METHODS: Forty-six patients were enrolled in this substudy. Plasma was collected before treatment (T0), after the first cycle of therapy (T1), and at the time of progression (T2). ctDNA hybridization and capture were performed using the Illumina TruSight Tumor 170 Kit. Acquired mutations were confirmed by digital polymerase chain reaction. Progression-free survival analysis was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test. RESULTS: The most frequently mutated genes at T0 were ESR1 (23%), PIK3CA (17%), AR, FGFR2, and TP53 (10%). Mutations in ESR1 at T0 conferred higher risk of progression in the entire population (P = .02) and in patients treated with palbociclib + ET (P = .04). ESR1 mutation effect remained significant after correction for clinical variables (P = .03). PIK3CA mutations at T0 were not prognostic, but higher risk of progression was observed when a broader analysis of PI3K pathway was performed (P = .04). At T2, we observed the emergence of nine new mutations in seven genes. CONCLUSION: Mutations in ESR1 and in PI3K pathway genes at T0 were associated with worse prognosis in palbociclib-treated patients. We describe the emergence of newly acquired mutations in palbociclib-treated patients, which might potentially affect subsequent treatment.

Sequential immunotherapy and targeted therapy for metastatic BRAF V600 mutated melanoma: 4-year survival and biomarkers evaluation from the phase II SECOMBIT trial.

No prospective data were available prior to 2021 to inform selection between combination BRAF and MEK inhibition versus dual blockade of programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) as first-line treatment options for BRAFV600-mutant melanoma. SECOMBIT (NCT02631447) was a randomized, three-arm, noncomparative phase II trial in which patients were randomized to one of two sequences with immunotherapy or targeted therapy first, with a third arm in which an 8-week induction course of targeted therapy followed by a planned switch to immunotherapy was the first treatment. BRAF/MEK inhibitors were encorafenib plus binimetinib and checkpoint inhibitors ipilimumab plus nivolumab. Primary outcome of overall survival was previously reported, demonstrating improved survival with immunotherapy administered until progression and followed by BRAF/MEK inhibition. Here we report 4-year survival outcomes, confirming long-term benefit with first-line immunotherapy. We also describe preliminary results of predefined biomarkers analyses that identify a trend toward improved 4-year overall survival and total progression-free survival in patients with loss-of-function mutations affecting JAK or low baseline levels of serum interferon gamma (IFNy). These long-term survival outcomes confirm immunotherapy as the preferred first-line treatment approach for most patients with BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma, and the biomarker analyses are hypothesis-generating for future investigations of predictors of durable benefit with dual checkpoint blockade and targeted therapy.

Estimating survival in patients with melanoma brain metastases: prognostic value of lactate dehydrogenase.

Patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBM) have poor prognosis, albeit advances in locoregional and systemic treatments. The melanoma-specific Graded Prognostic Assessment (GPA) effectively stratifies survival for patients with MBM. Nevertheless, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), a well known prognostic factor for patients with melanoma, is not represented in the GPA scores and might add prognostic information for patients with MBM. In this study, 150 consecutive patients with MBM were retrospectively analyzed with the aim of evaluating independent prognostic factors for MBM patients, including LDH. Furthermore, we implemented a disease-specific prognostic score and estimated survival according to treatment modalities. On the basis of multivariable Cox regression analyses, six prognostic factors (age, BRAF status, number of MBM, number of extracranial metastatic sites, performance status, and LDH level) resulted statistically significant in terms of survival and were combined in a prognostic score to stratify patients in distinct prognostic groups ( P  < 0.0001). Among treatment modalities, a multimodal approach with stereotactic radiosurgery or neurosurgery associated with systemic therapy showed the best outcome (median overall survival: 12.32 months, 95% confidence interval, 7.92-25.30). This is the first study to demonstrate that LDH has independent prognostic value for patients with MBM and might be used to improve prognostic stratification, albeit external validation is mandatory. Survival of patients with MBM is affected by both disease-specific risk factors and treatment modalities, with locoregional treatments associated with better outcomes.

Outcomes in patients with BRAFV600-mutated melanoma and brain metastases at baseline treated with dabrafenib plus trametinib.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases (BM) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels above the upper limit of normal (ULN) are associated with poor prognosis in patients with melanoma. Although treatment with the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib and the MEK inhibitor trametinib have demonstrated long-term clinical benefit in patients with melanoma, data on their efficacy in patients with BM are limited. METHODS: DESCRIBE Italy is an observational, retrospective, real-world study evaluating dabrafenib plus trametinib in 499 patients with BRAFV600-mutant stage III unresectable or stage IV melanoma from various sites across Italy. Here, we analyzed the clinical outcomes for the subgroup of patients receiving first-line treatment and presenting with BM at diagnosis and assessed the impact of predictive factors such as LDH levels and the presence of other metastases on median progression-free survival (mPFS). RESULTS: Overall, 325 evaluable patients were on first-line therapy and are the focus of this analysis; of these, 76 patients (23.4%) had BM at baseline. mPFS was lower for patients with BM at baseline compared with overall patients (8.7 months vs 9.3 months, respectively). Patients with BM at diagnosis and LDH >ULN had a considerably shorter mPFS compared with patients with LDH ⩽ULN (5.3 months vs 9.9 months, respectively). mPFS was noticeably longer for patients with cerebral metastases only compared with patients with cerebral and other metastases (15.0 months vs 8.7 months, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Dabrafenib plus trametinib showed effectiveness in a real-world population of patients with advanced BRAFV600-mutated melanoma and BM at baseline, supporting its use in this population with poor outcomes.

The Pattern of Progression to First-Line Treatment with Dabrafenib and Trametinib in Patients with Unresectable or Metastatic, BRAF-Mutated, Cutaneous Melanoma: Results of the Observational T-WIN Study.

In patients with B-RAF-mutated cutaneous melanoma, targeted therapies are the treatment of choice to achieve a rapid response. In this multicentric, prospective, observational study, patients with B-RAF-mutated cutaneous melanoma who were treated with dabrafenib and trametinib were categorized in two cohorts (cohort A: limited disease (n = 104) and cohort B: bulky disease (n = 97)) according to lactate dehydrogenase levels. The primary endpoint was the progression pattern; the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety data. From baseline to time of progression, there was a progression from nodal to other sites of disease in cohort A and from skin and nodal to other sites in cohort B. In both the cohorts, the number of involved organs and metastases at each location decreased. The median OS was 32.4 months (95% CI: 20.1 months (not estimable)) for cohort A, and 10.5 months (95% CI: 8.3-14.4 months) for cohort B; median PFS was 12.4 months (95% CI: 10.9-17.0 months) for cohort A, and 8.1 months (95% CI: 6.3-9.4 months) for cohort B. No new safety signals were reported. This study describes the patterns of first-line treatment progression with dabrafenib and trametinib in Italian clinical practice. The effectiveness and safety data were consistent with previous trials and extended to a real-world heterogeneous population.

Sequencing of Ipilimumab Plus Nivolumab and Encorafenib Plus Binimetinib for Untreated BRAF-Mutated Metastatic Melanoma (SECOMBIT): A Randomized, Three-Arm, Open-Label Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: Limited prospective data are available on sequential immunotherapy and BRAF/MEK inhibition for BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma. METHODS: SECOMBIT is a randomized, three-arm, noncomparative phase II trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02631447). Patients with untreated, metastatic BRAFV600-mutant melanoma from 37 sites in nine countries were randomly assigned to arm A (encorafenib [450 mg orally once daily] plus binimetinib [45 mg orally twice daily] until progressive disease [PD] -> ipilimumab plus nivolumab [ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks and nivolumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks × four cycles -> nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks]), arm B [ipilimumab plus nivolumab until PD -> encorafenib plus binimetinib], or arm C (encorafenib plus binimetinib for 8 weeks -> ipilimumab plus nivolumab until PD -> encorafenib plus binimetinib). The primary end point was overall survival (OS) at 2 years. Secondary end points included total progression-free survival, 3-year OS, best overall response rate, duration of response, and biomarkers in the intent-to-treat population. Safety was analyzed throughout sequential treatment in all participants who received at least one dose of study medication. RESULTS: A total of 209 patients were randomly assigned (69 in arm A, 71 in arm B, and 69 in arm C). At a median follow-up of 32.2 (interquartile range, 27.9-41.6) months, median OS was not reached in any arm and more than 30 patients were alive in all arms. Assuming a null hypothesis of median OS of ≤ 15 months, the OS end point was met for all arms. The 2-year and 3-year OS rates were 65% (95% CI, 54 to 76) and 54% (95% CI, 41 to 67) in arm A, 73% (95% CI, 62 to 84) and 62% (95% CI, 48 to 76) in arm B, and 69% (95% CI, 59 to 80) and 60% (95% CI, 58 to 72) in arm C. No new safety signals emerged. CONCLUSION: Sequential immunotherapy and targeted therapy provide clinically meaningful survival benefits for patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma.

Palbociclib Rechallenge for Hormone Receptor-Positive/HER-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: Findings from the Phase II BioPER Trial.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and exploratory biomarkers of continuing palbociclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) beyond progression on prior palbociclib-based regimen in patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The multicenter, open-label, phase II BioPER trial included women who had experienced a progressive disease (PD) after having achieved clinical benefit on the immediately prior palbociclib plus ET regimen. Palbociclib (125 mg, 100 mg, or 75 mg daily orally for 3 weeks and 1 week off as per prior palbociclib-based regimen) plus ET of physician's choice were administered in 4-week cycles until PD or unacceptable toxicity. Coprimary endpoints were clinical benefit rate (CBR) and percentage of tumors with baseline loss of retinoblastoma (Rb) protein expression. Additional endpoints included safety and biomarker analysis. RESULTS: Among 33 patients enrolled, CBR was 34.4% [95% confidence interval (CI), 18.6-53.2; P < 0.001] and 13.0% of tumors (95% CI, 5.2-27.5) showed loss of Rb protein expression, meeting both coprimary endpoints. Median progression-free survival was 2.6 months (95% CI, 1.8-6.7). No new safety signals were reported. A signature that included baseline mediators of therapeutic resistance to palbociclib and ET (low Rb score, high cyclin E1 score, ESR1 mutation) was independently associated with shorter median progression-free survival (HR, 22.0; 95% CI, 1.71-282.9; P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining palbociclib after progression on prior palbociclib-based regimen seems to be a reasonable, investigational approach for selected patients. A composite biomarker signature predicts a subset of patients who may not derive a greater benefit from palbociclib rechallenge, warranting further validation in larger randomized controlled trials.

CDK4/6 Inhibitors as Upfront Treatment in a Patient with Breast Cancer Presenting with a Clinical Critic Situation: A Case Report and Review of the Literature.

CDK4/6 inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment algorithm of luminal metastatic breast cancer, becoming the recommended first-line therapy in association with endocrine therapy. However, due to its theoretically greater and more rapid tumor shrinkage, the upfront use of chemotherapy is considered in some clinical situations like visceral crisis. At the state of the art level, a paucity of data is available about the use of CDK4/6 inhibitors in patients presenting with visceral crisis or with life-threatening conditions since this population was historically excluded from clinical trials. In addition, data regarding direct comparison between combinations of chemotherapy and CDK4/6 inhibitors in terms of efficacy, rapidity of responses and long-term outcomes are lacking. We report the case of a 68-year-old woman with luminal metastatic breast cancer presenting at diagnosis with a critical and potentially life-threatening condition. The patient was treated with first-line Abemaciclib plus letrozole and achieved a rapid partial response with sudden clinical stabilization. Although the patient did not technically present with a visceral crisis, this case presentation also endorsed the upfront use of CDK4/6 inhibitor combinations in critical clinical situations in the absence of severe organ dysfunction and after multidisciplinary discussion.

Comparison Between First Line Target Therapy and Immunotherapy in Different Prognostic Categories of BRAF Mutant Metastatic Melanoma Patients: An Italian Melanoma Intergroup Study.

Background: BRAF and MEK inhibitors target therapies (TT) and AntiPD1 immunotherapies (IT) are available first-line treatments for BRAF v600 mutant metastatic melanoma patients. ECOG PS (E), baseline LDH (L), and baseline number of metastatic sites (N) are well-known clinical prognostic markers that identify different prognostic categories of patients. Direct comparison between first-line TT and IT in different prognostic categories could help in first line treatment decision. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis conducted in 14 Italian centers on about 454 metastatic melanoma patients, divided in 3 groups: group A-patients with E = 0, L within normal range, and N less than 3; group B-patients not included in group A or C; group C-patients with E > 0, L over the normal range, and N more than 3. For each prognostic group, we compared TT and IT in terms of progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and disease control rate (DCR). Results: In group A, results in 140 TT and 36 IT-treated patients were, respectively, median PFS 35.5 vs 11.6 months (HR (95% CI) 1.949 (1.180-3.217) p value 0.009); median OS not reached vs 55 months (HR (95% CI) 1.195 (0.602-2.373) p value 0.610); DCR 99% vs 75% p value <0.001). In group B, results in 196 TT and 38 IT-treated patients were, respectively, median PFS 11.5 vs 5 months (HR 1.535 (1.036-2.275) p value 0.033); median OS 19 vs 20 months (HR 0.886 (0.546-1.437) p value 0.623); DCR 85% vs 47% p value <0.001). In group C, results in 41 TT and 3 IT-treated patients were, respectively, median PFS 6.4 vs 1.8 months (HR 4.860 (1.399-16) p value 0.013); median OS 9 vs 5 months (HR 3.443 (0.991-11.9) p value 0.052); DCR 66% vs 33% p value 0.612). Conclusions: In good prognosis, group A-TT showed statistically significant better PFS than IT, also in a long-term period, suggesting that TT can be a good first line option for this patient category. It is only in group B that we observed a crossing of the survival curves after the 3rd year of observation in favor of IT. Few patients were enrolled in group C, so few conclusions can be made on it.

Multidisciplinary Team Meeting Proposal and Final Therapeutic Choice in Early Breast Cancer: Is There an Agreement?

Background: A multidisciplinary team meeting (MDM) approach in breast cancer (BC) management is a standard of care. One of the roles of MDMs is to identify the best diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for patients (pts) with new diagnosis of early BC. The purpose of this study was to define whether there was an agreement between the planned program (i.e., MDMs-based decision) and that actually applied. In addition, the study explored factors associated with discordance. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of a consecutive series of 291 patients with new diagnosis of early BC, discussed at MDMs at the University Hospital of Udine (Italy), from January 2017 to June 2018. The association between clinico-biological factors and discordance between what was decided during the MDMs and what was consequently applied by the oncologist was explored through uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Results: The median age was 62 years (range 27-88 years). Among invasive early BC patients, the most frequent phenotype was luminal A (38%), followed by luminal B (33%), HER2-positive (12%), and triple-negative (5%). In situ carcinoma (DCIS) represented 12% of cases. The median time from MDM discussion to first oncologic examination was 2 weeks. The rate of discordance between MDM-based decision and final choice, during a face-to-face consultation with the oncologist, was 15.8% (46/291). The most frequent reason for changing the MDM-based program was clinical decision (87%). Follow-up was preferred to the chemotherapy (CT) proposed within the MDMs in 15% of cases, and to the endocrine therapy (ET) in 39% of cases (among these, 44.5% had a diagnosis of DCIS). Therapeutic change from sequential CT-ET to ET alone was chosen in 16/46 pts (35%): among these patients, seven had a luminal B disease and six had an HER2-positive disease. On univariate analysis, factors associated with discordance were values of Ki-67 14%-30% (OR 3.91; 95% CI 1.19-12.9), age >70 years (OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.28-4.63), housewife/retired status (OR 2.35, 95% CI 1.14-4.85), polypharmacy (OR 1.95; 95% CI 1.02-3.72), postmenopausal status (OR 4.15; 95% CI 1.58-10.9), and high Charlson Comorbidity Index (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.09-1.57). The association with marital status, educational level, alcohol and smoke habits, presence of a caregiver, parity, grading, histotype and phenotype, and stage was not statistically significant. On multivariate analysis, only Ki-67 value maintained its statistical significance. Conclusion: The results of our study could be useful for enhancing the role of MDMs in the clinical decision-making process in early BC.

Basal and one-month differed neutrophil, lymphocyte and platelet values and their ratios strongly predict the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors immunotherapy in patients with advanced BRAF wild-type melanoma.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the capability of basal and one-month differed white blood cells (WBC), neutrophil, lymphocyte and platelet values and their ratios (neutrophils-to-lymphocytes ratio, NLR, and platelets-to-lymphocytes ratio, PLR) in predicting the response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in metastatic melanoma (MM). METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 272 BRAF wild-type MM patients treated with first line ICI. Bivariable analysis was used to correlate patient/tumor characteristics with clinical outcomes. Variations between time 1 and time 0 (Δ) of blood parameters were also calculated and dichotomized using cut-off values assessed by ROC curve. RESULTS: At baseline, higher neutrophils and NLR negatively correlated with PFS, OS and disease control rate (DCR). Higher PLR was also associated with worse OS. In multivariable analysis, neutrophils (p = 0.003), WBC (p = 0.069) and LDH (p = 0.07) maintained their impact on PFS, while OS was affected by LDH (p < 0.001), neutrophils (p < 0.001) and PLR (p = 0.022), while DCR by LDH (p = 0.03) and neutrophils (p = 0.004). In the longitudinal analysis, PFS negatively correlated with higher Δplatelets (p = 0.039), ΔWBC (p < 0.001), and Δneutrophils (p = 0.020), and with lower Δlymphocytes (p < 0.001). Moreover, higher ΔNLR and ΔPLR identified patients with worse PFS, OS and DCR. In the multivariable model, only ΔNLR influenced PFS (p = 0.004), while OS resulted affected by higher ΔWBC (p < 0.001) and lower Δlymphocytes (p = 0.038). Higher ΔWBC also affected the DCR (p = 0.003). When clustering patients in 4 categories using basal LDH and ΔNLR, normal LDH/lower ΔNLR showed a higher PFS than high LDH/higher ΔNLR (20 vs 5 months). Moreover, normal LDH/higher Δlymphocytes had a higher OS than high LDH/lower Δlymphocytes (50 vs. 10 months). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline and early variations of blood cells, together with basal LDH, strongly predict the efficacy of ICI in MM. Our findings propose simple, inexpensive biomarkers for a better selection of patient treatments. Prospective multicenter studies are warranted to confirm these data.

Detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection prevalence in 860 cancer patients with a combined screening procedure including triage, molecular nasopharyngeal swabs and rapid serological test. A report from the first epidemic wave.

INTRODUCTION: Even if now we have available the weapon of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, the patients with cancer remains a very frail population in which frequently the immunologic response to vaccination may be impaired. In this setting, the SARS-CoV-2 infection screening retains a great value. However, there are still limited data on the feasibility and efficacy of combined screening procedures to assess the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (including asymptomatic cases) in cancer outpatients undergoing antineoplastic therapy. PATIENTS AND RESULTS: From May 1, 2020, to June 15, 2020, during the first wave of SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, 860 consecutive patients, undergoing active anticancer therapy, were evaluated and tested for SARS-CoV-2 with a combined screening procedure, including a self-report questionnaire, a molecular nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and a rapid serological immunoassay (for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG/IgM antibodies). The primary endpoint of the study was to estimate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection (including asymptomatic cases) in consecutive and unselected cancer outpatients by a combined screening modality. A total of 2955 SARS-CoV-2 NPS and 860 serological tests, in 475 patients with hematologic cancers and in 386 with solid tumors, were performed. A total of 112 (13%) patients self-reported symptoms potentially COVID-19 related. In 1/860 cases (< 1%) SARS-CoV-2 NPS was positive and in 14 cases (1.62%) the specific serological test was positive (overall prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection 1.62%). Of the 112 cases who declared symptoms potentially COVID-19-related, only 2.7% (3/112) were found SARS-CoV-2 positive. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study reporting the feasibility of a combined screening procedure (including triage, NPS and serologic test) to evaluate the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer patients receiving active therapy, during the first epidemic wave and under the restrictive lockdown measures, in one of the active areas of the SARS-CoV-2 circulation. Lacking specific recommendations for the detection of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 cases, a combined diagnostic screening might be more effective to detect the exact prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in neoplastic patient population. The prevalence can obviously change according to the territorial context, the entity of the restrictive measures adopted and the phase of the epidemic curve. However, its exact and real-time knowledge could be important to balance risks/benefits of oncologic treatments, avoiding (if the prevalence is low) the reduction of dose intensity or the selection of less intensive (but also less effective) anti-cancer therapies.

Retrospective Chart Review of Dabrafenib Plus Trametinib in Patients with Metastatic BRAF V600-Mutant Melanoma Treated in the Individual Patient Program (DESCRIBE Italy).

BACKGROUND: Real-world data on extended follow-up of patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma are limited. We investigated dabrafenib plus trametinib (dab + tram) outside of a clinical trial setting (Individual Patient Program; DESCRIBE Italy). OBJECTIVE: To describe the baseline features, treatment patterns, efficacy, and safety outcomes in patients with BRAF V600-mutant unresectable or metastatic melanoma who had received dab + tram as part of the Managed Access Program (MAP) in Italy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational, retrospective chart review was conducted in Italian patients with BRAF V600-mutant unresectable stage III/IV melanoma receiving dab + tram as part of the MAP. Baseline features, treatment patterns, efficacy, and safety outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 499 patients were included in this analysis. BRAF V600E mutation was seen in 81.4% of patients. Overall response rate achieved in 243 of the 390 evaluable patients was 62.3% (95% CI 57.5-67.1). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.3 months (95% CI 8.6-10.6). Subgroup analyses revealed that patients with normal lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and ≤ three metastatic sites without brain metastases at baseline had better outcomes. With normal LDH at baseline, median PFS for patients with one or two metastatic sites other than cerebral was 18 months. No new safety signals were observed. Treatment was permanently discontinued because of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in 9.2% of patients, and pyrexia (27.3%) was the most common TEAE, with a lower incidence than that in the phase 3 studies of dab + tram. CONCLUSION: Treatment of BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic melanoma with dab + tram in the real-world setting was effective and safe, including the unselected population with several patients having a high tumor burden - concordant with the results of the pivotal phase 3 studies of dab + tram.

Vitamin D Supplementation and Disease-Free Survival in Stage II Melanoma: A Randomized Placebo Controlled Trial.

Patients with newly resected stage II melanoma (n = 104) were randomized to receive adjuvant vitamin D3 (100,000 IU every 50 days) or placebo for 3 years to investigate vitamin D3 protective effects on developing a recurrent disease. Median age at diagnosis was 50 years, and 43% of the patients were female. Median serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D (25OHD) level at baseline was 18 ng/mL, interquartile range (IQ) was 13-24 ng/mL, and 80% of the patients had insufficient vitamin D levels. We observed pronounced increases in 25OHD levels after 4 months in the active arm (median 32.9 ng/mL; IQ range 25.9-38.4) against placebo (median 19.05 ng/mL; IQ range 13.0-25.9), constantly rising during treatment. Remarkably, patients with low Breslow score (<3 mm) had a double increase in 25OHD levels from baseline, whereas patients with Breslow score ≥3 mm had a significantly lower increase over time. After 12 months, subjects with low 25OHD levels and Breslow score ≥3 mm had shorter disease-free survival (p = 0.02) compared to those with Breslow score <3 mm and/or high levels of 25OHD. Adjusting for age and treatment arm, the hazard ratio for relapse was 4.81 (95% CI: 1.44-16.09, p = 0.011). Despite the evidence of a role of 25OHD in melanoma prognosis, larger trials with vitamin D supplementation involving subjects with melanoma are needed.

CDK4/6 Inhibitors in Melanoma: A Comprehensive Review.

Historically, metastatic melanoma was considered a highly lethal disease. However, recent advances in drug development have allowed a significative improvement in prognosis. In particular, BRAF/MEK inhibitors and anti-PD1 antibodies have completely revolutionized the management of this disease. Nonetheless, not all patients derive a benefit or a durable benefit from these therapies. To overtake this challenges, new clinically active compounds are being tested in the context of clinical trials. CDK4/6 inhibitors are drugs already available in clinical practice and preliminary evidence showed a promising activity also in melanoma. Herein we review the available literature to depict a comprehensive landscape about CDK4/6 inhibitors in melanoma. We present the molecular and genetic background that might justify the usage of these drugs, the preclinical evidence, the clinical available data, and the most promising ongoing clinical trials.

First- and second-line treatment strategies for hormone-receptor (HR)-positive HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: A real-world study.

BACKGROUND: Endocrine therapy (ET) plus cyclin-dependent-kinases 4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) represents the standard treatment for luminal-metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, prospective head-to-head comparisons are still lacking for 1st line (L) options, and it is still crucial to define the best strategy between 1st and 2nd L. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 717 consecutive luminal-MBC pts treated between 2008 and 2020 were analyzed at the Oncology Department of Aviano and Udine, Italy. Differences about survival outcomes (OS, PFS and PPS) were tested by log-rank test. The attrition rate (AR) between 1st and 2ndL was calculated. RESULTS: At 1stL, pts were treated with ET (49%), chemotherapy (CT) (31%) and ET-CDKi (20%) while, at 2ndL, 33% received ET, 33% CT and 8% ET-CDKi. Overall AR was 10%, 7% for CT, 8% for ET and 17% for ET-CDKi. By multivariate analysis, 1stL ET-CDK4/6i showed a better mPFS1 and OS. Moreover, 2ndL ET-CDK4/6i demonstrated better mPFS2 compared to ET and CT. Notably, 1stL ET-CDKi resulted in higher mPFS than 2ndL ET-CDKi. Intriguingly, 1stL ET-CDK4/6i was associated with worse mPPS compared to CT and ET. Secondarily, 1stL ET-CDK4/6i followed by CT had worse OS compared to 1stL ET-CDK4/6i followed by ET. Notably, none of baseline characteristics at 2ndL influenced 2ndL treatment choice (ET vs. CT) after ET-CDKi. CONCLUSION: Our real-world data demonstrated that ET-CDKi represents the best option for 1stL luminal-MBC compared to ET and CT. Also, the present study pointed out that 2ndL ET, potentially combined with other molecules, could be a feasible option after CDK4/6i failure, postponing CT on later lines.

Circulating tumor cells and palbociclib treatment in patients with ER-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: results from a translational sub-study of the TREnd trial.

BACKGROUND: Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are prognostic in patients with advanced breast cancer (ABC). However, no data exist about their use in patients treated with palbociclib. We analyzed the prognostic role of CTC counts in patients enrolled in the cTREnd study, a pre-planned translational sub-study of TREnd (NCT02549430), that randomized patients with ABC to palbociclib alone or palbociclib plus the endocrine therapy received in the prior line of treatment. Moreover, we evaluated RB1 gene expression on CTCs and explored its prognostic role within the cTREnd subpopulation. METHODS: Forty-six patients with ER-positive, HER2-negative ABC were analyzed. Blood samples were collected before starting palbociclib treatment (timepoint T0), after the first cycle of treatment (timepoint T1), and at disease progression (timepoint T2). CTCs were isolated and counted by CellSearch® System using the CellSearch™Epithelial Cell kit. Progression-free survival (PFS), clinical benefit (CB) during study treatment, and time to treatment failure (TTF) after study treatment were correlated with CTC counts. Samples with ≥ 5 CTCs were sorted by DEPArray system® (DA). RB1 and GAPDH gene expression levels were measured by ddPCR. RESULTS: All 46 patients were suitable for CTCs analysis. CTC count at T0 did not show significant prognostic value in terms of PFS and CB. Patients with at least one detectable CTC at T1 (n = 26) had a worse PFS than those with 0 CTCs (n = 16) (p = 0.02). At T1, patients with an increase of at least three CTCs showed reduced PFS compared to those with no increase (mPFS = 3 versus 9 months, (p = 0.004). Finally, patients with ≥ 5 CTCs at T2 (n = 6/23) who received chemotherapy as post-study treatment had a shorter TTF (p = 0.02). Gene expression data for RB1 were obtained from 19 patients. CTCs showed heterogeneous RB1 expression. Patients with detectable expression of RB1 at any timepoint showed better, but not statistically significant, outcomes than those with undetectable levels. CONCLUSIONS: CTC count seems to be a promising modality in monitoring palbociclib response. Moreover, CTC count at the time of progression could predict clinical outcome post-palbociclib. RB1 expression analysis on CTCs is feasible and may provide additional prognostic information. Results should be interpreted with caution given the small studied sample size.

Feasibility and Predictive Performance of a Triage System for Patients with Cancer During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Triage procedures have been implemented to limit hospital access and minimize infection risk among patients with cancer during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. In the absence of prospective evidence, we aimed to evaluate the predictive performance of a triage system in the oncological setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzes hospital admissions to the oncology and hematology department of Udine, Italy, during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 30 to April 30, 2020). A total of 3,923 triage procedures were performed, and data of 1,363 individual patients were reviewed. RESULTS: A self-report triage questionnaire identified 6% of triage-positive procedures, with a sensitivity of 66.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 43.0%-85.4%), a specificity of 94.3% (95% CI, 93.5%-95.0%), and a positive predictive value of 5.9% (95% CI, 4.3%-8.0%) for the identification of patients who were not admitted to the hospital after medical review. Patients with thoracic cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.69; 95% CI, 1.13-2.53, p = .01), younger age (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.15-2.01, p < .01), and body temperature at admission ≥37°C (OR, 9.52; 95% CI, 5.44-16.6, p < .0001) had increased risk of positive triage. Direct hospital access was warranted to 93.5% of cases, a further 6% was accepted after medical evaluation, whereas 0.5% was refused at admission. CONCLUSION: A self-report questionnaire has a low positive predictive value to triage patients with cancer and suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) symptoms. Differential diagnosis with tumor- or treatment-related symptoms is always required to avoid unnecessary treatment delays. Body temperature measurement improves the triage process's overall sensitivity, and widespread SARS-CoV-2 testing should be implemented to identify asymptomatic carriers. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This is the first study to provide data on the predictive performance of a triage system in the oncological setting during the coronavirus disease outbreak. A questionnaire-based triage has a low positive predictive value to triage patients with cancer and suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) symptoms, and a differential diagnosis with tumor- or treatment-related symptoms is mandatory to avoid unnecessary treatment delays. Consequently, adequate recourses should be reallocated for a triage implementation in the oncological setting. Of note, body temperature measurement improves the overall sensitivity of the triage process, and widespread testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection should be implemented to identify asymptomatic carriers.

No Impact of NRAS Mutation on Features of Primary and Metastatic Melanoma or on Outcomes of Checkpoint Inhibitor Immunotherapy: An Italian Melanoma Intergroup (IMI) Study.

AIMS: It is debated whether the NRAS-mutant melanoma is more aggressive than NRAS wildtype. It is equally controversial whether NRAS-mutant metastatic melanoma (MM) is more responsive to checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy (CII). 331 patients treated with CII as first-line were retrospectively recruited: 162 NRAS-mutant/BRAF wild-type (mut/wt) and 169 wt/wt. We compared the two cohorts regarding the characteristics of primary and metastatic disease, disease-free interval (DFI) and outcome to CII. No substantial differences were observed between the two groups at melanoma onset, except for a more frequent ulceration in the wt/wt group (p = 0.03). Also, the DFI was very similar in the two cohorts. In advanced disease, we only found lung and brain progression more frequent in the wt/wt group. Regarding the outcomes to CII, no significant differences were reported in overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) (42% versus 37%, 60% versus 59%, 12 (95% CI, 7-18) versus 9 months (95% CI, 6-16) and 32 (95% CI, 23-49) versus 27 months (95% CI, 16-35), respectively). Irrespectively of mutational status, a longer OS was significantly associated with normal LDH, <3 metastatic sites, lower white blood cell and platelet count, lower neutrophil-to-lymphocyte (N/L) ratio. Our data do not show increased aggressiveness and higher responsiveness to CII in NRAS-mutant MM.

Immunotherapy for older patients with melanoma: From darkness to light?

Approximately 40% of malignant melanomas are diagnosed in patients older than 65 years. Elderly patients with melanoma present clinicopathological features related to a more aggressive biology, and they are often diagnosed with advanced stage of disease. Interestingly, in older patients the immune system can be altered with changes both in the innate system and in the adaptive immune system with the acquisition of a pro-inflammatory and immune suppressive phenotype. Immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors has reshaped the treatment strategies and prognosis of patients with melanoma, and particularly, older age should not be considered a contraindication for immunotherapy. However, data regarding efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in elderly population are still limited because frail older patients are generally excluded from clinical trials. Recently, real-world data have shed light on similar efficacy and safety of immunotherapy in older population compared with younger counterpart. The aim of the present review was to summarize the available knowledge on the underlying immune system in older patients with a diagnosis of melanoma and the immunotherapeutic approaches in this population.