Preferences of physicians for treatment-related toxicity vs. recurrence in melanoma (GERMELATOX-A): the doctors' perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Adjuvant treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as PD1-antibodies (ICI) ± CTLA4-antibodies (cICI) or targeted therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors (TT), has shown a significant improvement in disease-free survival (DFS) for high-risk melanoma patients. However, due to specific side effects, the choice of treatment is often influenced by the risk of toxicity. Therefore, the role of physicians in treatment decisions of patients is crucial. This study investigated for the first time in a multicenter setting the attitudes and preferences of dermatooncologists in Germany and Switzerland regarding adjuvant treatment with (c)ICI and TT. METHODS: In the GERMELATOX-A study, 108 physicians (median age: 32 yrs, 67.6% female) from 11 skin cancer centers were surveyed to rate typical side effect scenarios of (c)ICI and TT treatments and then compared to patients' ratings evaluated in a previous analysis from the same centers. The scenarios described mild-to-moderate or severe toxicity and included melanoma relapse leading to death. The physicians were asked about the level of side effects they would tolerate in exchange for a reduction in melanoma relapse and an increase in survival at 5 years. RESULTS: The preferences of physicians and patients revealed significant differences regarding adjuvant melanoma treatment with (c)ICI and TT (p < 0.05). Compared to patients, physicians tend to value a melanoma relapse less severe, according to a visual analog scale. They were also less threatened by all scenarios of side effects during adjuvant treatment with (c)ICI or TT, compared to patients. Physicians required lower risk reductions for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) for both ICI and TT and their drug-related side effects to accept these treatments. In case of severe side effects, physicians required similar 5-year DFS rates for ICI and TT (60-65%), while patients needed a 15% improvement of 5-year DFS for ICI compared to TT (80%/65%). For survival, physicians expected an OS improvement of + 10% for all three treatment modalities, whereas patients required a higher increase: + 18-22% for ICI and + 15% for TT. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the importance of understanding the patient's perspective and a potential difference to the doctor's view when making decisions about adjuvant melanoma treatment with (c)ICI and TT, especially as these treatments are increasingly being implemented in earlier stages.

Association of antibiotic treatment with survival outcomes in treatment-naïve melanoma patients receiving immune checkpoint blockade.

PURPOSE: The interaction of gut microbiome and immune system is being studied with increasing interest. Disturbing factors, such as antibiotics may impact the immune system via gut and interfere with tumor response to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB). METHODS: In this multicenter retrospective cohort study exclusively treatment-naïve patients with cutaneous or mucosal melanoma treated with first-line anti-PD-1 based ICB for advanced, non-resectable disease between 06/2013 and 09/2018 were included. Progression-free (PFS), and overall survival (OS) according to antibiotic exposure (within 60 days prior to ICB and after the start of ICB vs. no antibiotic exposure) were analyzed. To account for immortal time bias, data from patients with antibiotics during ICB were analyzed separately in the time periods before and after start of antibiotics. RESULTS: Among 578 patients with first-line anti-PD1 based ICB, 7% of patients received antibiotics within 60 days prior to ICB and 19% after starting ICB. Antibiotic exposure prior to ICB was associated with worse PFS (adjusted HR 1.75 [95% CI 1.22-2.52]) and OS (adjusted HR 1.64 [95% CI 1.04-2.58]) by multivariate analysis adjusting for potential confounders. The use of antibiotics after the start of ICB had no effect on either PFS (adjusted HR 1.19; 95% CI 0.89-1.60) or OS (adjusted HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.75-1.57). CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic exposure within 60 days prior to ICB seems to be associated with worse PFS and OS in melanoma patients receiving first-line anti-PD1 based therapy, whereas antibiotics after the start of ICB do not appear to affect PFS or OS.

Treatment management for BRAF-mutant melanoma patients with tumor recurrence on adjuvant therapy: a multicenter study from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant therapy with immune-checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) or BRAF/MEK-directed targeted therapy (TT) improves recurrence-free survival (RFS) for patients with advanced, BRAFV600-mutant (BRAFmut) resected melanoma. However, 40% of these patients will develop distant metastases (DM) within 5 years, which require systemic therapy. Little data exist to guide the choice of upfront adjuvant therapy or treatment management upon DM. This study evaluated the efficacy of subsequent treatments following tumor recurrence upon upfront adjuvant therapy. METHODS: For this multicenter cohort study, we identified 515 BRAFmut patients with resected stage III melanoma who were treated with PD-1 inhibitors (anti-PD1) or TT in the adjuvant setting. Disease characteristics, treatment regimens, details on tumor recurrence, subsequent treatment management, and survival outcomes were collected within the prospective, real-world skin cancer registry ADOReg. Primary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) following DM and best tumor response to first-line (1L) treatments. RESULTS: Among 515 eligible patients, 273 patients received adjuvant anti-PD1 and 242 adjuvant TT. At a median follow-up of 21 months, 54.6% of anti-PD1 patients and 36.4% of TT patients recurred, while 39.6% (anti-PD1) and 29.3% (TT) developed DM. Risk of recurrence was significantly reduced in patients treated with TT compared with anti-PD1 (adjusted HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.68, p<0.001). Likewise, median RFS was significantly longer in TT-treated patients (31 vs 17 months, p<0.001). Patients who received TT as second adjuvant treatment upon locoregional recurrence had a longer RFS2 as compared with adjuvant CPI (41 vs 6 months, p=0.009). Patients who recurred at distant sites following adjuvant TT showed favorable response rates (42.9%) after switching to 1L ipilimumab+nivolumab (ipi+nivo). Patients with DM during adjuvant anti-PD1 achieved response rates of 58.7% after switching to 1L TT and 35.3% for 1L ipi+nivo. Overall, median PFS was significantly longer in patients who switched treatments for stage IV disease (median PFS 9 vs 5 months, p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: BRAFmut melanoma patients who developed DM upon upfront adjuvant therapy achieve favorable tumor control and prolonged PFS after switching treatment modalities in the first-line setting of stage IV disease. Patients with locoregional recurrence benefit from complete resection of recurrence followed by a second adjuvant treatment with TT.

Immune checkpoint inhibition in patients with NRAS mutated and NRAS wild type melanoma: a multicenter Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group study on 637 patients from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

BACKGROUND: Melanomas frequently harbour somatic mutations in BRAF (40%) or NRAS (20%). Impact of NRAS mutations on the therapeutic outcome of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) remains controversial. Potential correlation of the NRAS mutational status and programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression in melanoma is unknown. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Advanced, non-resectable melanoma patients with known NRAS mutation status treated with first-line ICI between 06/2014 and 05/2020 in the prospective multicenter skin cancer registry ADOREG were included. Overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) according to NRAS status were analysed. A multivariate Cox model was used to analyse factors associated with PFS and OS; survival was analysed using the Kaplan-Meier approach. RESULTS: Among 637 BRAF wild-type patients, 310 (49%) had an NRAS mutation with Q61R (41%) and Q61K (32%). NRAS-mutated (NRASmut) melanomas were significantly more often located on the lower extremities and trunk (p = 0.001); nodular melanoma was the most common subtype (p < 0.0001). No significant differences were found for PFS and OS for anti-PD1 monotherapy (2-year PFS 39%, [95% confidence interval (CI), 33-47] in NRASmut patients and 41% [95% CI, 35-48] in NRAS-wild type (NRASwt) patients; 2-year OS was 54% [95% CI, 48-61] in NRASmut patients and 57% [95% CI, 50-64] in NRASwt patients) and anti-PD1 plus anti-CTLA4 therapy between both cohorts (2-year PFS was 54% [95% CI, 44-66] in NRASmut patients and 53% [95% CI, 41-67] in NRASwt patients; 2-year OS was 58% [95% CI, 49-70] in NRASmut patients and 62% [95% CI, 51-75] in NRASwt patients). The ORR to anti-PD1 was 35% for NRASwt patients and 26% for NRASmut patients and 34% compared to 32% for combinational therapy. Data on PD-L1 expression was available in 82 patients (13%). PD-L1 expression (>5%) was not correlated to NRAS mutational status. In multivariate analysis, elevated lactate dehydrogenase, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 1, and brain metastases were significantly associated with a higher risk of death in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: The PFS and OS were not affected by NRAS mutational status in patients treated with anti-PD1-based ICI. Similar ORR was seen in NRASwt and NRASmut patients. Tumour PD-L1 expression did not correlate with NRAS mutational status.

Raising awareness of immune-related side effects in oncological patients under palliative care: a report of two cases.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have emerged as a successful treatment option for diverse cancer entities. However, ICI therapy can be associated with immune-related adverse events (irAE) that can affect any organ system. These side effects can be severe, irreversible and sometimes even fatal. Due to the presentation as diverse and often unspecific clinical patterns, end-of-life care concepts may be pursued hastily suspecting disease progression in oncological patients receiving palliative care (PC). CASE DESCRIPTION: This report describes two cancer patients whose symptom burden was caused by such irAEs: One patient with metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) presenting with disorientation and urinary incontinence, another patient with metastatic melanoma presenting with a sudden and unspecific deterioration of the overall condition. After imaging and blood sampling, an encephalitis and an immune-mediated diabetes mellitus were diagnosed. After treatment with corticosteroids and hydration alongside insulin substitution both patients experienced a complete symptom relief. CONCLUSIONS: We aim to emphasize the importance of continued collaboration between primary care givers and PC teams as well as raise awareness among PC providers of severe immune-related side effects in cancer patients receiving ICI. Especially within this patient cohort, PC teams play a crucial part in detecting possible irAEs, which resolve in the majority of cases when receiving early guideline-adapted treatment.

Brain metastasis and survival outcomes after first-line therapy in metastatic melanoma: a multicenter DeCOG study on 1704 patients from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of effective systemic therapies, a significant number of advanced melanoma patients develops brain metastases. This study investigated differences in incidence and time to diagnosis of brain metastasis and survival outcomes dependent on the type of first-line therapy. METHODS: Patients with metastatic, non-resectable melanoma (AJCCv8 stage IIIC-V) without brain metastasis at start of first-line therapy (1L-therapy) were identified from the prospective multicenter real-world skin cancer registry ADOREG. Study endpoints were incidence of brain metastasis, brain metastasis-free survival (BMFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 1704 patients, 916 were BRAF wild-type (BRAFwt) and 788 were BRAF V600 mutant (BRAFmut). Median follow-up time after start of 1L-therapy was 40.4 months. BRAFwt patients received 1L-therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) against CTLA-4+PD-1 (n=281) or PD-1 (n=544). In BRAFmut patients, 1L-therapy was ICI in 415 patients (CTLA-4+PD-1, n=108; PD-1, n=264), and BRAF+MEK targeted therapy (TT) in 373 patients. After 24 months, 1L-therapy with BRAF+MEK resulted in a higher incidence of brain metastasis compared with PD-1±CTLA-4 (BRAF+MEK, 30.3%; CTLA-4+PD-1, 22.2%; PD-1, 14.0%). In multivariate analysis, BRAFmut patients developed brain metastases earlier on 1L-therapy with BRAF+MEK than with PD-1±CTLA-4 (CTLA-4+PD-1: HR 0.560, 95% CI 0.332 to 0.945, p=0.030; PD-1: HR 0.575, 95% CI 0.372 to 0.888, p=0.013). Type of 1L-therapy, tumor stage, and age were independent prognostic factors for BMFS in BRAFmut patients. In BRAFwt patients, tumor stage was independently associated with longer BMFS; ECOG Performance status (ECOG-PS), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and tumor stage with OS. CTLA-4+PD-1 did not result in better BMFS, PFS, or OS than PD-1 in BRAFwt patients. For BRAFmut patients, multivariate Cox regression revealed ECOG-PS, type of 1L-therapy, tumor stage, and LDH as independent prognostic factors for PFS and OS. 1L-therapy with CTLA-4+PD-1 led to longer OS than PD-1 (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.122 to 3.455, p=0.018) or BRAF+MEK (HR 2.41, 95% CI 1.432 to 4.054, p=0.001), without PD-1 being superior to BRAF+MEK. CONCLUSIONS: In BRAFmut patients 1L-therapy with PD-1±CTLA-4 ICI resulted in a delayed and less frequent development of brain metastasis compared with BRAF+MEK TT. 1L-therapy with CTLA-4+PD-1 showed superior OS compared with PD-1 and BRAF+MEK. In BRAFwt patients, no differences in brain metastasis and survival outcomes were detected for CTLA-4+PD-1 compared with PD-1.

Health-related quality of life (EuroQol 5D-5L) in patients with autoimmunity in the context of immunotherapy: A large dataset comprising cancer patients after cessation of checkpoint inhibitor therapy and patients with autoimmune diseases.

This dataset contains demographic, clinical, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data from 2905 patients including 200 cancer patients after immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) cessation and 2705 patients with a wide variety of autoimmune diseases. Within this multicenter, cross-sectional survey study data were collected questionnaire-based in cancer patients (ICI-patients) ≥ 18 years of age who had received at least one dose of ICI with ≥ 12 weeks since ICI discontinuation. Patients with autoimmune diseases (AI-patients) were ≥ 18 years, had at least one autoimmune disease and had never received ICI. ICI-patients were recruited in three skin cancer centers and via support groups. AI-patients were recruited in an outpatient clinic for internal medicine and via support groups. Specific questionnaires for ICI-patients/AI-patients were provided paper-based for patients from outpatient clinics and online for patients from support groups. Both questionnaires contained sections with demographic information, clinical data, and the standardized patient-reported outcome measure EuroQol 5D-5L (EQ-5D-5L) to assess HRQoL. Clinical data focused on autoimmunity and therapy of autoimmunity in (1) ICI-patients referring to particularly persistent immune-related adverse events (persistent irAEs) and in (2) AI-patients referring to respective autoimmune diseases. Additionally, specific items on cancer and cancer therapy were included in ICI-patients, and AI-patients were asked about the presence of acute exacerbations of autoimmune diseases. This dataset contains the raw data for ICI-patients and AI-patients, analyzed data on patient demographics, clinical characteristics and HRQoL scores among ICI-patients with/without persistent irAEs and among AI-patients. The data provide a basis for further investigations within the cohort of ICI-patients after ICI cessation and/or for AI-patients with different autoimmune diseases with regard to HRQoL, autoimmunity and therapy of autoimmunity.

Reinduction of Hedgehog Inhibitors after Checkpoint Inhibition in Advanced Basal Cell Carcinoma: A Series of 12 Patients.

For patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma (aBCC) first-line treatment with hedgehog inhibitors (HHIs) and second-line treatment with PD1 inhibitors (PD1i) is available, offering combination and sequencing options. Here, we focus on the efficacy and safety of HHI reinduction after PD1i failure. Retrospective data analysis was performed with 12 patients with aBCC (locally advanced (n = 8)/metastatic (n = 4)). These patients (male:female 6:6, median age 68 years) initially received HHIs, leading to complete/partial response (66%) or stable disease (33%). Median treatment duration was 20.8 (2-64.5) months until discontinuation due to progression (n = 8), adverse events (n = 3), or patient request (n = 1). Subsequent PD1 inhibition (pembrolizumab 42%, cemiplimab 58%) yielded a partial response (8%), stable disease (33%), or progression (59%). Median treatment duration was 4.1 (0.8-16.3) months until discontinuation due to progression (n = 9), adverse events (n = 1), patient request (n = 1), or missing drug approval (n = 1). HHI reinduction resulted in complete/partial response (33%), stable disease (50%), or progression (17%). Median treatment duration was 3.6 (1-29) months. Response duration in the four responding patients was 2-29+ months. Thus, a subgroup of patients with aBCC responded to reinduction of HHI following PD1i failure. Therefore, this sequential treatment represents a feasible treatment option.

Persistent immune-related adverse events after cessation of checkpoint inhibitor therapy: Prevalence and impact on patients' health-related quality of life.

BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) may induce persistent immune-related adverse events (irAEs). We investigated persistent irAEs and implications on patients' lives compared to non-ICI-induced autoimmune diseases (AIs). METHODS: The multicentre, cross-sectional study comprised 200 patients with cancer ≥12 weeks after ICI cessation (ICI-patients) and 2705 patients with AIs (AI-patients), recruited in German outpatient clinics and support groups. The prevalence of persistent irAEs subdivided in long-term (12 weeks to <12 months) and chronic irAEs (≥12 months) since ICI discontinuation, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using the EuroQol 5D-5L (EQ-Index/VAS score), and burden of autoimmune symptoms and respective therapies were assessed. RESULTS: Long-term/chronic irAEs occurred in 51.9%/35.5% of outpatient ICI-patients, including arthralgia (16.7%/16.1%), myalgia (13.0%/14.0%), hypothyroidism (11.1%/10.8%), xerostomia (7.4%/8.6%), vitiligo (13.0%/7.5%) and hypophysitis (9.3%/7.5%). ICI-patients with long-term/chronic irAEs reported clinically significantly reduced HRQoL compared to ICI-patients without long-term/chronic irAEs (EQ-Index score: 0.767/0.752 versus 0.920/0.923, p < 0.001/0.001; EQ-VAS score: 52.2/52.0 versus 63.6/74.7, p =/< 0.040/0.001). Multiple linear regression analyses confirmed clinically significant reductions in HRQoL scores by chronic irAEs (EQ-Index/VAS score: -0.163/-23.4, p < 0.001/0.001). HRQoL, burden of autoimmune symptoms and burden of respective therapies in ICI-patients with chronic irAEs were similar to AI-patients with non-exacerbated AIs. Patients with chronic irAEs felt inadequately informed about side-effects compared to patients without chronic irAEs (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Persistent irAEs impose a significant burden on patients after ICI cessation. Especially in early tumour stages, risk-benefit ratios must be carefully evaluated, and patients need to be informed about potential long-term sequelae.

Impact of radiotherapy and sequencing of systemic therapy on survival outcomes in melanoma patients with previously untreated brain metastasis: a multicenter DeCOG study on 450 patients from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

BACKGROUND: Despite of various therapeutic strategies, treatment of patients with melanoma brain metastasis (MBM) still is a major challenge. This study aimed at investigating the impact of type and sequence of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) and targeted therapy (TT), radiotherapy, and surgery on the survival outcome of patients with MBM. METHOD: We assessed data of 450 patients collected within the prospective multicenter real-world skin cancer registry ADOREG who were diagnosed with MBM before start of the first non-adjuvant systemic therapy. Study endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 450 MBM patients, 175 (38.9%) received CTLA-4+PD-1 ICB, 161 (35.8%) PD-1 ICB, and 114 (25.3%) BRAF+MEK TT as first-line treatment. Additional to systemic therapy, 67.3% of the patients received radiotherapy (stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS); conventional radiotherapy (CRT)) and 24.4% had surgery of MBM. 199 patients (42.2%) received a second-line systemic therapy. Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed the application of radiotherapy (HR for SRS: 0.213, 95% CI 0.094 to 0.485, p<0.001; HR for CRT: 0.424, 95% CI 0.210 to 0.855, p=0.016), maximal size of brain metastases (HR for MBM >1 cm: 1.977, 95% CI 1.117 to 3.500, p=0.019), age (HR for age >65 years: 1.802, 95% CI 1.016 to 3.197, p=0.044), and ECOG performance status (HR for ECOG ≥2: HR: 2.615, 95% CI 1.024 to 6.676, p=0.044) as independent prognostic factors of OS on first-line therapy. The type of first-line therapy (ICB vs TT) was not independently prognostic. As second-line therapy BRAF+MEK showed the best survival outcome compared with ICB and other therapies (HR for CTLA-4+PD-1 compared with BRAF+MEK: 13.964, 95% CI 3.6 to 54.4, p<0.001; for PD-1 vs BRAF+MEK: 4.587 95% CI 1.3 to 16.8, p=0.022 for OS). Regarding therapy sequencing, patients treated with ICB as first-line therapy and BRAF+MEK as second-line therapy showed an improved OS (HR for CTLA-4+PD-1 followed by BRAF+MEK: 0.370, 95% CI 0.157 to 0.934, p=0.035; HR for PD-1 followed by BRAF+MEK: 0.290, 95% CI 0.092 to 0.918, p=0.035) compared with patients starting with BRAF+MEK in first-line therapy. There was no significant survival difference when comparing first-line therapy with CTLA-4+PD-1 ICB with PD-1 ICB. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with MBM, the addition of radiotherapy resulted in a favorable OS on systemic therapy. In BRAF-mutated MBM patients, ICB as first-line therapy and BRAF+MEK as second-line therapy were associated with a significantly prolonged OS.

MAPKinase inhibition after failure of immune checkpoint blockade in patients with advanced melanoma - An evaluation of the multicenter prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG.

OBJECTIVES: Forty to sixty percent of patients with advanced melanoma show primary resistance to PD-1-based immunotherapy, 30-40% of initial responders also progress. Here, we evaluated the outcome of second-line targeted therapy (TT) after progression on PD-1-based immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) in BRAFV600-mutated melanoma. In addition, we report data on the activity of re-exposure with PD-1-based regimes. METHODS: Patients with advanced (non-resectable stage III or IV, AJCC 2017, 8th edition) melanoma progressing on PD-1-based ICI (nivolumab, pembrolizumab or ipilimumab plus nivolumab) and receiving second-line BRAF plus MEK inhibition were identified from the prospective multicenter skin cancer registry ADOREG. RESULTS: We identified 108 patients with unresectable stage III or stage IV melanoma progressing on first-line ICI (nivolumab, pembrolizumab or ipilimumab plus nivolumab) and receiving second-line combined BRAF/MEK inhibition. Seventy-three percent of the cohort presented with primary PD-1 resistant disease. Median progression-free survival (PFS) on ICI was 2.6 (95% CI 2.2-2.9) months. Median PFS on subsequent TT was 6.6 (95% CI 5.4-7.8) months. Median OS from start of second-line TT was 16.0 (95% CI 11.2-20.8) months. The 3-year PFS and OS rates on second-line TT were 16% and 30%. The objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) to TT were 42.6% and 55.6%. In patients with brain metastases, the ORR and DCR were 31.4% and 43.1%. Patients without brain metastases showed an ORR and DCR of 52.6% and 66.7%, respectively. Response to first-line ICI was associated with a numerically higher ORR and DCR to second-line TT and improved OS on TT. Twenty-three patients received third-line ICI of whom two patients showed an objective response. CONCLUSIONS: BRAF plus MEK inhibition shows meaningful activity and outcome in patients with advanced melanoma resistant to anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy. Rates of long-term benefit and survival in our study were similar to those reported for treatment-naïve patients receiving first-line MAPKi.

Genetic characterization of advanced conjunctival melanoma and response to systemic treatment.

BACKGROUND: Conjunctival melanoma is a rare type of ocular melanoma, which is prone to local recurrence and metastasis and can lead to patient death. Novel therapeutic strategies have revolutionized cutaneous melanoma management. The efficacy of these therapies in conjunctival melanoma, however, has not been evaluated in larger patient cohorts. METHODS: In this multi-center retrospective cohort study with additional screening of the ADOREG database, data were collected from 34 patients with metastatic conjunctival melanoma who received targeted therapy (TT) (BRAF ± MEK inhibitors) or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) (anti-PD-1 ± anti-CTLA4). In 15 cases, tissue was available for targeted next-generation-sequencing (611 genes) and RNA sequencing. Driver mutations, tumor mutational burden, copy number variations and inflammatory/IFNγ gene expression signatures were determined. RESULTS: Genetic characterization identified frequent BRAF (46.7%, 7/15), NRAS (26.7%, 4/15), NF1 (20%, 3/15), and TERT promoter (46.7%, 7/15) mutations. UV associated C>T and CC>TT mutations were common. Median follow-up time after start of first TT or ICI therapy was 13.2 months. In 26 patients receiving first-line ICI, estimated one-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 42.0%, PFS and overall survival (OS) 6.2 and 18.0 months, respectively. First-line TT was given to 8 patients, estimated one-year PFS rate was 54.7%, median PFS and OS 12.6 and 29.1 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the role of UV irradiation in conjunctival melanoma and the genetic similarity with cutaneous melanoma. Conjunctival melanoma patients with advanced disease benefit from both targeted therapies (BRAF ± MEK inhibitors) and immune checkpoint inhibitors.

Grade 4 Neutropenia Secondary to Immune Checkpoint Inhibition - A Descriptive Observational Retrospective Multicenter Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are increasingly being used to treat numerous cancer types. Together with improved recognition of toxicities, this has led to more frequent identification of rare immune-related adverse events (irAE), for which specific treatment strategies are needed. Neutropenia is a rare hematological irAE that has a potential for a high mortality rate because of its associated risk of sepsis. Prompt recognition and timely treatment of this life-threatening irAE are therefore critical to the outcome of patients with immune-related neutropenia. METHODS: This multicenter international retrospective study was conducted at 17 melanoma centers to evaluate the clinical characteristics, diagnostics, treatment, and outcomes of melanoma patients with grade 4 neutropenia (<500 neutrophils/µl blood) treated with ICI between 2014 and 2020. Some of these patients received metamizole in addition to ICI (ICI+/met+). Bone marrow biopsies (BMB) of these patients were compared to BMB from non-ICI treated patients with metamizole-induced grade 4 neutropenia (ICI-/met+). RESULTS: In total, 10 patients (median age at neutropenia onset: 66 years; seven men) with neutropenia were identified, equating to an incidence of 0.14%. Median onset of neutropenia was 6.4 weeks after starting ICI (range 1.4-49.1 weeks). Six patients showed inflammatory symptoms, including fever (n=3), erysipelas (n=1), pharyngeal abscess (n=1), and mucositis (n=1). Neutropenia was diagnosed in all patients by a differential blood count and additionally performed procedures including BMB (n=5). Nine of 10 patients received granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) to treat their grade 4 neutropenia. Four patients received systemic steroids (including two in combination with G-CSF, and one in combination with G-CSF and additional ciclosporin A). Four patients were treated with one or more antibiotic treatment lines, two with antimycotic treatment, and one with additional antiviral therapy. Five patients received metamizole concomitantly with ICI. One fatal outcome was reported. BMB indicated a numerically lower CD4+ to CD8+ T cells ratio in patients with irNeutropenia than in those with metamizole-induced neutropenia. CONCLUSION: Grade 4 neutropenia is a rare but potentially life-threatening side effect of ICI treatment. Most cases were sufficiently managed using G-CSF; however, adequate empiric antibiotic, antiviral, and antimycotic treatments should be administered if neutropenic infections are suspected. Immunosuppression using corticosteroids may be considered after other causes of neutropenia have been excluded.

Complete Metabolic Response in FDG-PET-CT Scan before Discontinuation of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Correlates with Long Progression-Free Survival.

Checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized the treatment of patients with metastasized melanoma. However, it remains unclear when to stop treatment. We retrospectively analyzed 45 patients (median age 64 years; 58% male) with metastasized melanoma from 3 cancer centers that received checkpoint inhibitors and discontinued therapy due to either immune-related adverse events or patient decision after an (18F)2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) combined with a low-dose CT scan (FDG-PET-CT) scan without signs for disease progression. After a median of 21 (range 1-42) months of immunotherapy an FDG-PET-CT scan was performed to evaluate disease activity. In these, 32 patients (71%) showed a complete metabolic response (CMR) and 13 were classified as non-CMR. After a median follow-up of 34 (range 1-70) months, 3/32 (9%) of CMR patients and 6/13 (46%) of non-CMR patients had progressed (p = 0.007). Progression-free survival (PFS), as estimated from the date of last drug administration, was significantly longer among CMR patients than non-CMR (log-rank: p = 0.001; hazard ratio: 0.127; 95% CI: 0.032-0.511). Two-year PFS was 94% among CMR patients and 62% among non-CMR patients. Univariable Cox regression showed that metabolic response was the only parameter which predicted PFS (p = 0.004). Multivariate analysis revealed that metabolic response predicted disease progression (p = 0.008). In conclusion, our findings suggest that patients with CMR in an FDG-PET-CT scan may have a favorable outcome even if checkpoint inhibition is discontinued.

PET/CT in malignant melanoma: a two-tiered healthcare system? Updated healthcare situation regarding initial staging of malignant melanoma with PET/CT.

BACKGROUND: Patients with stage IIC malignant melanoma are recommended to undergo cross-sectional imaging for initial staging. PET/CT is superior to other methods regarding its diagnostic accuracy of the tumor spread in stage III. So far there is no meaningful data on the nationwide availability, usage and cost recovery of this imaging technique. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Questionnaires on the healthcare situation in 2018 were sent to all German dermatology clinics and PET/CT centers in March and April 2019. RESULTS: 61.2 % of the dermatology clinics (71/115) and 48.2 % of the PET/CT centers (77/160) took part in the survey. A total of 22,645 patients with malignant melanoma were seen in these clinics in 2018. 16.8 % of the patients with stage IIC melanoma received a PET/CT for primary staging. The costs of this examination were covered for all statutory and privately insured patients in 40 % and 68 % of dermatology clinics (20/50 and 34/50), respectively. 68.0 % (34/50) of all dermatology clinics reported relevant changes of treatment according to PET/CT findings. Long examination periods by the health insurance companies and the time required to submit the application were the most common reasons for dermatology clinics to reject a request for PET/CT. Relevant incidental findings were reported in 90.2 % (47/51) of all PET/CT centers. CONCLUSIONS: There are clear differences in the nationwide availability and cost coverage of PET/CT in primary staging for stage IIC melanoma. For these reasons, a two-tiered healthcare system may be assumed.

Hematological immune related adverse events after treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: With the increasing use of checkpoint inhibitors, rare immune-related adverse events (irAE) are being identified. Haematological irAE (hem-irAE) are difficult to treat and have shown high mortality rates. In order to improve side-effect management for these potentially life-threatening events, we analysed frequency, severity and outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who developed hem-irAE while being treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) therapy were retrospectively identified from 18 international cancer centres. RESULTS: In total, more than 7626 patients treated with ICI were screened, and 50 patients with hem-irAE identified. The calculated incidence amounts to 0.6% and median onset was 6 weeks after the ICI initiation (range 1-128 weeks). Thrombocytopenia and leucopaenia were the most frequent hem-irAE with 34% (17/50) and 34% (17/50), respectively, followed by anaemia 28% (14/50), hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (4% (2/50)), aplastic anaemia (2% (1/50)), acquired haemophilia A (2% (1/50)) and coagulation deficiency (2% (1/50)). Simultaneous thrombocytopenia and neutropenia occurred in two patients, concurrent anaemia and thrombocytopenia in one patient. Other than cessation of ICI (in 60%) and corticosteroids (in 78%), treatment included second-line immunosuppression in 24% of cases. Events resolved in 78% (39/50), while 18% (9/50) had persistent changes, and 2% (1/50) had fatal outcomes (agranulocytosis). CONCLUSION: Hem-irAE can affect all haematopoietic blood cell lineages and may persist or even be fatal. Management may require immunosuppression beyond corticosteroids. Although these irAE are rare, treating physicians should be aware, monitor blood counts regularly and promptly act upon detection.

Patterns of care and follow-up care of patients with uveal melanoma in German-speaking countries: a multinational survey of the German Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group (DeCOG).

PURPOSE: Uveal melanoma (UM) is an orphan cancer of high unmet medical need. Current patterns of care and surveillance remain unclear as they are situated in an interdisciplinary setting. METHODS: A questionnaire addressing the patterns of care and surveillance in the management of patients with uveal melanoma was distributed to 70 skin cancer centers in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Frequency distributions of responses for each item of the questionnaire were calculated. RESULTS: 44 of 70 (62.9%) skin cancer centers completed the questionnaire. Thirty-nine hospitals were located in Germany (88.6%), three in Switzerland (6.8%) and two in Austria (4.5%). The majority (68.2%) represented university hospitals. Most patients with metastatic disease were treated in certified skin cancer centers (70.7%, 29/41). Besides, the majority of patients with UM were referred to the respective skin cancer center by ophthalmologists (87.2%, 34/39). Treatment and organization of follow-up of patients varied across the different centers. 35.1% (14/37) of the centers stated to not perform any screening measures. CONCLUSION: Treatment patterns of patients with uveal melanoma in Germany, Austria and Switzerland remain extremely heterogeneous. A guideline for the treatment and surveillance is urgently needed.