Search

BACKGROUND: Targeting the MDM2-p53 interaction using AMG 232 is synergistic with MAPK inhibitors (MAPKi) in preclinical melanoma models. We postulated that AMG 232 plus MAPKi is safe and more effective than MAPKi alone in TP53-wild type, MAPKi-naïve metastatic melanoma. METHODS: Patients were treated with increasing (120 mg, 180 mg, 240 mg) oral doses of AMG 232 (seven-days-on, 15-days-off, 21-day cycle) plus dabrafenib (D) and trametinib (T) (Arm 1, BRAFV600-mutant) or T alone (Arm 2, BRAFV600-wild type). Patients were treated for seven days with AMG 232 alone before adding T±D. Safety and efficacy were assessed using CTCAE v4.0 and RECIST v1.1 criteria, respectively. Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed at baseline and steady-state levels for AMG 232. RESULTS: 31 patients were enrolled. Ten and 21 patients were enrolled in Arm 1 and Arm 2, respectively. The most common AMG 232-related adverse events (AEs) were nausea (87%), diarrhea (77%), and fatigue (74%). Seven patients (23%) were withdrawn from the study due to AMG 232-related AEs. Three dose-limiting AEs occurred (Arm 1, 180 mg, nausea; Arm 2, 240 mg, grade 3 pulmonary embolism; Arm 2, 180 mg, grade 4 thrombocytopenia). AMG 232 PK exposures were not altered when AMG 232 was combined with T±D. Objective responses were seen in 8/10 (Arm 1) and 3/20 (Arm 2) evaluable patients. The median progression-free survival for Arm 1 and Arm 2 was 19.0 months-not reached and 2.8 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: The maximum tolerated dose of AMG 232 for both arms was 120 mg. AMG 232 plus T±D exhibited a favorable PK profile. Although objective responses occurred in both arms, adding AMG 232 to T±D did not confer additional clinical benefit.

Over the past decade, cancer immunotherapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has significantly improved the outcome of many malignancies. However, with the broad use of ICIs, neurological immune related adverse events (irAE) are increasingly recognized. ICI-induced encephalitis (ICI-iE) is a particularly severe irAE, often leading to treatment termination, long-term sequalae or death. Despite its high morbidity and mortality, data on clinical features and diagnostic criteria are limited. We aimed to define clinical, radiologic and laboratory characteristics of ICI-iE and identify factors that discriminate it from anti-leucine-rich glioma-inactivated (anti-LGI)-1 encephalitis and herpes simplex virus (HSV)-1 encephalitis - two alternative causes of encephalitis - to increase the awareness of ICI-iE and improve its diagnosis and management. To that end, we retrospectively collected 30 cases of ICI-iE that were reported to the Side Effect Registry Immuno-Oncology (SERIO) and 46 cases of anti-LGI1 encephalitis or herpes simplex virus (HSV)-1 encephalitis that presented to a large German neurological referral center (Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin) between January 2015 and September 2021. Signs and symptoms, imaging and electroencephalogram features, laboratory findings and outcome measures were assessed using standardized case report forms as well as patients' medical records and compared between the groups. The data reported here represents the largest primary cohort of patients with ICI-iE to date and the first comparison with other types of encephalitis. As all three disorders - ICI-iE, HSV-1 encephalitis and anti-LGI1 encephalitis - are rare neurological entities, this dataset can be used as a reference in future clinical studies on ICI-induced neurotoxicity, neurological autoimmune disorders, and central nervous system infections.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant targeted therapy (TT) improves relapse free survival in patients with resected BRAF mutant stage III melanoma. The outcomes and optimal management of patients who relapse after adjuvant TT is unknown. METHODS: Patients from twenty-one centres with recurrent melanoma after adjuvant TT were included. Disease characteristics, adjuvant therapy, recurrence, treatment at relapse and outcomes were examined. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients developed recurrent melanoma; nineteen (22%) during adjuvant TT. Median time to first recurrence was 18 months and median follow-up from first recurrence was 31 months. Fifty-eight (68%) patients received immunotherapy (IT) or TT as 1st line systemic therapy at either first or subsequent recurrence and had disease that was assessable for response. Response to anti-PD-1 (±trial agent), combination ipilimumab-nivolumab, TT rechallenge and ipilimumab monotherapy was 63%, 62% 25% and 10% respectively. Twenty-eight (33%) patients had died at census, all from melanoma. Two-year OS was 84% for anti-PD-1 therapy (±trial agent), 92% for combination ipilimumab and nivolumab, 49% for TT and 45% for ipilimumab monotherapy (p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who relapse after adjuvant TT respond well to subsequent anti-PD-1 based therapy and have outcomes similar to those seen when first line anti-PD-1 therapy is used in stage IV melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of immunotherapy have excluded patients with pre-existing autoimmune disease. While the safety and efficacy of single agent ipilimumab and anti-PD1 antibodies in patients with autoimmune disease has been examined in retrospective studies, no data are available for combination therapy which has significantly higher toxicity risk. We sought to establish the safety and efficacy of combination immunotherapy for patients with advanced melanoma and pre-existing autoimmune diseases. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients with advanced melanoma and pre-existing autoimmune disease who received combination ipilimumab and anti-PD1 at 10 international centers from March 2015 to February 2020. Data regarding the autoimmune disease, treatment, toxicity and outcomes were examined in patients. RESULTS: Of the 55 patients who received ipilimumab and anti-PD1, the median age was 63 years (range 23-83). Forty-six were treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab and nine with ipilimumab and pembrolizumab.Eighteen patients (33%) had a flare of their autoimmune disease including 4 of 7 with rheumatoid arthritis, 3 of 6 with psoriasis, 5 of 10 with inflammatory bowel disease, 3 of 19 with thyroiditis, 1 of 1 with Sjogren's syndrome, 1 of 1 with polymyalgia and 1 of 1 with Behcet's syndrome and psoriasis. Eight (44%) patients ceased combination therapy due to flare. Thirty-seven patients (67%) had an unrelated immune-related adverse event (irAE), and 20 (36%) ceased combination immunotherapy due to irAEs. There were no treatment-related deaths. Patients on immunosuppression (OR 4.59; p=0.03) had a higher risk of flare.The overall response rate was 55%, with 77% of responses ongoing. Median progression free survival and overall survival were 10 and 24 months, respectively. Patients on baseline immunosuppression had an overall survival of 11 months (95% CI 3.42 to 18.58) compared with 31 months without (95% CI 20.89 to 41.11, p=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: In p

A significant number of patients (pts) with metastatic melanoma do not respond to anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD1) therapies. Identifying predictive biomarkers therefore remains an urgent need. We retrospectively analyzed plasma DNA of pts with advanced melanoma treated with PD-1 antibodies, nivolumab or pembrolizumab, for five PD-1 genotype single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs): PD1.1 (rs36084323, G>A), PD1.3 (rs11568821, G>A), PD1.5 (rs2227981, C>T) PD1.6 (rs10204225, G>A) and PD1.9 (rs2227982, C>T). Clinico-pathological and treatment parameters were collected, and presence of SNPs correlated with response, progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). 115 patients were identified with a median follow up of 18.7 months (range 0.26 - 52.0 months). All were Caucasian; 27% BRAF V600 mutation positive. At PD-1 antibody commencement, 36% were treatment-naïve and 52% had prior ipilimumab. The overall response rate was 43%, 19% achieving a complete response. Overall median PFS was 11.0 months (95% CI 5.4 - 17.3) and median OS was 31.1 months (95% CI 23.2 - NA). Patients with the G/G genotype had more complete responses than with A/G genotype (16.5% vs. 2.6% respectively) and the G allele of PD1.3 rs11568821 was significantly associated with a longer median PFS than the AG allele, 14.1 vs. 7.0 months compared to the A allele (p=0.04; 95% CI 0.14 - 0.94). No significant association between the remaining SNPs and responses, PFS or OS were observed. Despite limitations in sample size, this is the first study to demonstrate an association of a germline PD-1 polymorphism and PFS in response to anti-PD-1 therapy in pts with metastatic melanoma. Extrinsic factors like host germline polymorphisms should be considered with tumor intrinsic factors as predictive biomarkers for immune checkpoint regulators.

The aim of this study was to investigate the pathogenesis of combination ipilimumab and nivolumab-associated colitis (IN-COL) by measuring gut-derived and peripheral blood mononuclear cell (GMNC; PBMC) profiles. We studied GMNC and PBMC from patients with IN-COL, IN-treated with no adverse-events (IN-NAE), ulcerative colitis (UC) and healthy volunteers using flow cytometry. In the gastrointestinal-derived cells we found high levels of activated CD8 T cells and mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) cells in IN-COL, changes that were not evident in IN-NAE or UC. UC, but not IN-C, was associated with a high proportion of regulatory T cells (T ). We sought to determine if local tissue responses could be measured in peripheral blood. Peripherally, checkpoint inhibition instigated a rise in activated memory CD4 and CD8 T cells, regardless of colitis. Low circulating MAIT cells at baseline was associated with IN-COL patients compared with IN-NAE in one of two cohorts. UC, but not IN-COL, was associated with high levels of circulating plasmablasts. In summary, the alterations in T cell subsets measured in IN-COL-affected tissue, characterized by high levels of activated CD8 T cells and MAIT cells and a low proportion of T , reflected a pathology distinct from UC. These tissue changes differed from the periphery, where T cell activation was a widespread on-treatment effect, and circulating MAIT cell count was low but not reliably predictive of colitis. + + + + reg reg

INTRODUCTION: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is a diagnostic procedure developed in the 1990s. It is currently used to stage patients with primary cutaneous melanoma, provide prognostic information and guide management. The Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines state that SLNB should be considered for patients with cutaneous melanoma >1 mm in thickness (or >0.8 mm with high-risk pathology features). Until recently, sentinel lymph node (SLN) status was used to identify patients who might benefit from a completion lymph node dissection, a procedure that is no longer routinely recommended. SLN status is now also being used to identify patients who might benefit from systemic adjuvant therapies such as anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD1) checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy or BRAF-directed molecular targeted therapy, treatments that have significantly improved relapse-free survival for patients with resected stage III melanoma and improved overall survival of patients with unresectable stage III and stage IV melanoma. Australian and international data indicate that approximately half of eligible patients receive an SLNB. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This mixed-methods study seeks to understand the structural, contextual and cultural factors affecting implementation of the SLNB guidelines. Data collection will include: (1) cross-sectional questionnaires and semistructured interviews with general practitioners and dermatologists; (2) semistructured interviews with other healthcare professionals involved in the diagnosis and early definitive care of melanoma patients and key stakeholders including researchers, representatives of professional colleges, training organisations and consumer melanoma groups; and (3) documentary analysis of documents from government, health services and non-government organisations. Descriptive analyses and multivariable regression models will be used to examine factors related to SLNB practices and attitudes. Qualitative data will be analysed using

IMPORTANCE: Whether immune-related adverse events (irAEs) indicate drug activity in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between irAEs and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in the double-blind EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 clinical trial comparing pembrolizumab therapy and placebo for the treatment of patients with high-risk stage III melanoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1019 adults with stage III melanoma were randomly assigned on a 1:1 ratio to receive treatment with pembrolizumab therapy or placebo. Eligible patients were adults 18 years and older with complete resection of cutaneous melanoma metastatic to lymph nodes, classified with stage IIIA (at least 1 micrometastasis measuring >1 mm in greatest diameter), IIIB, or IIIC (without in-transit metastasis) cancer. Patients were randomized from August 26, 2015, to November 14, 2016. The clinical cutoff for the data set was October 2, 2017. Analyses were then performed on the database, which was locked on November 28, 2017. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were scheduled to receive 200 mg of pembrolizumab or placebo every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses for approximately 1 year or until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxic effects, major protocol violation, or withdrawal of consent. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The association between irAEs and RFS was estimated using a Cox model adjusted for sex, age, and AJCC-7 stage, with a time-varying covariate that had a value of 0 before irAE onset and 1 after irAE onset. RESULTS: Of 1011 patients who began treatment with pembrolizumab therapy or placebo, 622 (61.5%) were men and 389 (38.5%) were women; 386 patients (38.2%) were aged 50 to 64 years, 377 (37.3%) were younger than 50 years, and 248 (24.5%) were 65 years and older. Consistent with the reported main analysis in the intent-to-treat population, RFS was longer in the pembrolizumab arm compared with the placebo arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.56

PURPOSE: We conducted the phase III double-blind European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 1325/KEYNOTE-054 trial to evaluate pembrolizumab versus placebo in patients with resected high-risk stage III melanoma. On the basis of 351 recurrence-free survival (RFS) events at a 1.25-year median follow-up, pembrolizumab prolonged RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.57; P < .0001) compared with placebo. This led to the approval of pembrolizumab adjuvant treatment by the European Medicines Agency and US Food and Drug Administration. Here, we report an updated RFS analysis at the 3.05-year median follow-up. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1,019 patients with complete lymph node dissection of American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual (seventh edition; AJCC-7), stage IIIA (at least one lymph node metastasis > 1 mm), IIIB, or IIIC (without in-transit metastasis) cutaneous melanoma were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab at a flat dose of 200 mg (n = 514) or placebo (n = 505) every 3 weeks for 1 year or until disease recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. The two coprimary end points were RFS in the overall population and in those with programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive tumors. RESULTS: Pembrolizumab (190 RFS events) compared with placebo (283 RFS events) resulted in prolonged RFS in the overall population (3-year RFS rate, 63.7% v 44.1% for pembrolizumab v placebo, respectively; HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.68) and in the PD-L1-positive tumor subgroup (HR, 0.57; 99% CI, 0.43 to 0.74). The impact of pembrolizumab on RFS was similar in subgroups, in particular according to AJCC-7 and AJCC-8 staging, and BRAF mutation status (HR, 0.51 [99% CI, 0.36 to 0.73] v 0.66 [99% CI, 0.46 to 0.95] for V600E/K v wild type). CONCLUSION: In resected high-risk stage III melanoma, pembrolizumab adjuvant therapy provided a sustained and clinically meaningful improvement in RFS at 3-year median follow-up. This improvement was consistent across subgroups.

BackgroundPrevious analysis of COMBI-d (NCT01584648) demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with combination dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib monotherapy in BRAF V600E/K-mutant metastatic melanoma. This study was continued to assess 3-year landmark efficacy and safety after ≥36-month follow-up for all living patients.Patients and methodsThis double-blind, phase 3 study enrolled previously untreated patients with BRAF V600E/K-mutant unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma. Patients were randomized to receive dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily) plus trametinib (2 mg once daily) or dabrafenib plus placebo. The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints were OS, overall response, duration of response, safety, and pharmacokinetics.ResultsBetween 4 May and 30 November 2012, a total of 423 of 947 screened patients were randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib (n = 211) or dabrafenib monotherapy (n = 212). At data cut-off (15 February 2016), outcomes remained superior with the combination: 3-year PFS was 22% with dabrafenib plus trametinib versus 12% with monotherapy, and 3-year OS was 44% versus 32%, respectively. Twenty-five patients receiving monotherapy crossed over to combination therapy, with continued follow-up under the monotherapy arm (per intent-to-treat principle). Of combination-arm patients alive at 3 years, 58% remained on dabrafenib plus trametinib. Three-year OS with the combination reached 62% in the most favourable subgroup (normal lactate dehydrogenase and <3 organ sites with metastasis) versus only 25% in the unfavourable subgroup (elevated lactate dehydrogenase). The dabrafenib plus trametinib safety profile was consistent with previous clinical trial observations, and no new safety signals were detected with long-term use.ConclusionsThese data demonstrate that durable (≥3 years) survival is achievable with dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic me

BackgroundPrevious analysis of COMBI-d (NCT01584648) demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with combination dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib monotherapy in BRAF V600E/K-mutant metastatic melanoma. This study was continued to assess 3-year landmark efficacy and safety after ≥36-month follow-up for all living patients.Patients and methodsThis double-blind, phase 3 study enrolled previously untreated patients with BRAF V600E/K-mutant unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma. Patients were randomized to receive dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily) plus trametinib (2 mg once daily) or dabrafenib plus placebo. The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints were OS, overall response, duration of response, safety, and pharmacokinetics.ResultsBetween 4 May and 30 November 2012, a total of 423 of 947 screened patients were randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib (n = 211) or dabrafenib monotherapy (n = 212). At data cut-off (15 February 2016), outcomes remained superior with the combination: 3-year PFS was 22% with dabrafenib plus trametinib versus 12% with monotherapy, and 3-year OS was 44% versus 32%, respectively. Twenty-five patients receiving monotherapy crossed over to combination therapy, with continued follow-up under the monotherapy arm (per intent-to-treat principle). Of combination-arm patients alive at 3 years, 58% remained on dabrafenib plus trametinib. Three-year OS with the combination reached 62% in the most favourable subgroup (normal lactate dehydrogenase and <3 organ sites with metastasis) versus only 25% in the unfavourable subgroup (elevated lactate dehydrogenase). The dabrafenib plus trametinib safety profile was consistent with previous clinical trial observations, and no new safety signals were detected with long-term use.ConclusionsThese data demonstrate that durable (≥3 years) survival is achievable with dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic me

Purpose: BRAF V600E and V600K melanomas have distinct clinicopathologic features, and V600K appear to be less responsive to BRAFiMEKi. We investigated mechanisms for this and explored whether genotype affects response to immunotherapy. Experimental Design: Pretreatment formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumors from patients treated with BRAFiMEKi underwent gene expression profiling and DNA sequencing. Molecular results were validated using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data. An independent cohort of V600E/K patients treated with anti–PD-1 immunotherapy was examined. Results: Baseline tissue and clinical outcome with BRAFiMEKi were studied in 93 patients (78 V600E, 15 V600K). V600K patients had numerically less tumor regression (median, 31% vs. 52%, P ¼ 0.154) and shorter progression-free survival (PFS; median, 5.7 vs. 7.1 months, P ¼ 0.15) compared with V600E. V600K melanomas had lower expression of the ERK pathway feedback regulator dual-specificity phosphatase 6, confirmed with TCGA data (116 V600E, 17 V600K). Pathway analysis showed V600K had lower expression of ERK and higher expression of PI3K-AKT genes than V600E. Higher mutational load was observed in V600K, with a higher proportion of mutations in PIK3R1 and tumor-suppressor genes. In patients treated with anti–PD-1, V600K (n ¼ 19) had superior outcomes than V600E (n ¼ 84), including response rate (53% vs. 29%, P ¼ 0.059), PFS (median, 19 vs. 2.7 months, P ¼ 0.049), and overall survival (20.4 vs. 11.7 months, P ¼ 0.081). Conclusions: BRAF V600K melanomas appear to benefit less from BRAFiMEKi than V600E, potentially due to less reliance on ERK pathway activation and greater use of alternative pathways. In contrast, these melanomas have higher mutational load and respond better to immunotherapy.

Cancer immunotherapies provide survival benefits in responding patients, but many patients fail to respond. Identifying the biology of treatment response and resistance are a priority to optimize drug selection and improve patient outcomes. We performed transcriptomic and immune profiling on 158 tumor biopsies from melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1 monotherapy (n = 63) or combined anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 (n = 57). These data identified activated T cell signatures and T cell populations in responders to both treatments. Further mass cytometry analysis identified an EOMES+CD69+CD45RO+ effector memory T cell phenotype that was significantly more abundant in responders to combined immunotherapy compared with non-responders (n = 18). The gene expression profile of this population was associated with longer progression-free survival in patients treated with single agent and greater tumor shrinkage in both treatments.

PURPOSE: BRAF V600E and V600K melanomas have distinct clinicopathologic features, and V600K appear to be less responsive to BRAFi±MEKi. We investigated mechanisms for this and explored whether genotype affects response to immunotherapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Pretreatment formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumors from patients treated with BRAFi±MEKi underwent gene expression profiling and DNA sequencing. Molecular results were validated using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data. An independent cohort of V600E/K patients treated with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy was examined. RESULTS: Baseline tissue and clinical outcome with BRAFi±MEKi were studied in 93 patients (78 V600E, 15 V600K). V600K patients had numerically less tumor regression (median, -31% vs. -52%, P = 0.154) and shorter progression-free survival (PFS; median, 5.7 vs. 7.1 months, P = 0.15) compared with V600E. V600K melanomas had lower expression of the ERK pathway feedback regulator dual-specificity phosphatase 6, confirmed with TCGA data (116 V600E, 17 V600K). Pathway analysis showed V600K had lower expression of ERK and higher expression of PI3K-AKT genes than V600E. Higher mutational load was observed in V600K, with a higher proportion of mutations in PIK3R1 and tumor-suppressor genes. In patients treated with anti-PD-1, V600K (n = 19) had superior outcomes than V600E (n = 84), including response rate (53% vs. 29%, P = 0.059), PFS (median, 19 vs. 2.7 months, P = 0.049), and overall survival (20.4 vs. 11.7 months, P = 0.081). CONCLUSIONS: BRAF V600K melanomas appear to benefit less from BRAFi±MEKi than V600E, potentially due to less reliance on ERK pathway activation and greater use of alternative pathways. In contrast, these melanomas have higher mutational load and respond better to immunotherapy.

PURPOSE: BRAF V600E and V600K melanomas have distinct clinicopathologic features, and V600K appear to be less responsive to BRAFi±MEKi. We investigated mechanisms for this and explored whether genotype affects response to immunotherapy. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Pretreatment formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumors from patients treated with BRAFi±MEKi underwent gene expression profiling and DNA sequencing. Molecular results were validated using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data. An independent cohort of V600E/K patients treated with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy was examined. RESULTS: Baseline tissue and clinical outcome with BRAFi±MEKi were studied in 93 patients (78 V600E, 15 V600K). V600K patients had numerically less tumor regression (median, -31% vs. -52%, P = 0.154) and shorter progression-free survival (PFS; median, 5.7 vs. 7.1 months, P = 0.15) compared with V600E. V600K melanomas had lower expression of the ERK pathway feedback regulator dual-specificity phosphatase 6, confirmed with TCGA data (116 V600E, 17 V600K). Pathway analysis showed V600K had lower expression of ERK and higher expression of PI3K-AKT genes than V600E. Higher mutational load was observed in V600K, with a higher proportion of mutations in PIK3R1 and tumor-suppressor genes. In patients treated with anti-PD-1, V600K (n = 19) had superior outcomes than V600E (n = 84), including response rate (53% vs. 29%, P = 0.059), PFS (median, 19 vs. 2.7 months, P = 0.049), and overall survival (20.4 vs. 11.7 months, P = 0.081). CONCLUSIONS: BRAF V600K melanomas appear to benefit less from BRAFi±MEKi than V600E, potentially due to less reliance on ERK pathway activation and greater use of alternative pathways. In contrast, these melanomas have higher mutational load and respond better to immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: There is limited data on the efficacy of anti-programmed death 1 (PD-1) antibodies in patients (pts) with melanoma brain metastasis (BM), particularly those which are symptomatic. METHOD: We retrospectively assessed pts with melanoma BM treated with PD-1 antibodies, nivolumab and pembrolizumab. Clinicopathologic and treatment parameters were collected and outcomes determined for intracranial (IC) response rate (RR) using a modified RECIST criteria, with up to five IC target lesions used to determine IC response, disease control rate (DCR) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: A total of 66 pts were identified with a median follow up of 7.0 months (range 0.8-24.5 months). A total of 68% were male and 45% BRAF V600 mutation positive. At PD-1 antibody commencement, 50% had an elevated LDH; 64% had local therapy to BM prior to commencing anti-PD1, of which 5% had surgical resection, 14% stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), 18% whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), 27% had surgery and radiotherapy. Twenty-one per cent started anti-PD-1 as first line systemic therapy. No pt had prior anti-PD-1 treatment. The IC overall RR was 21 and DCR 56%. Responses occurred in 21% of pts with symptomatic BM. The median OS was 9.9 months (95% CI 6.93-17.74). Pts with symptomatic BM had shorter PFS than those without symptoms (2.7 vs 7.4 months, P=0.035) and numerically shorter OS (5.7 vs 13.0 months, P=0.068). Pts requiring corticosteroids also had a numerically shorter PFS (3.2 vs 7.4 months, P=0.081) and OS (4.8 vs 13.1 months, P=0.039). CONCLUSIONS: IC responses to anti-PD-1 antibodies occur in pts with BM, including those with symptomatic BM requiring corticosteroids. Prospective trials evaluating anti-PD-1 therapy in pts with BM are underway.

The Melanoma Research Foundation (MRF) has charted a comprehensive assessment of the current state of melanoma research and care. Intensive discussions among members of the MRF Scientific Advisory Council and Breakthrough Consortium, a group that included clinicians and scientists, focused on four thematic areas - diagnosis/early detection, prevention, tumor cell dormancy (including metastasis), and therapy (response and resistance). These discussions extended over the course of 2015 and culminated at the Society of Melanoma Research 2015 International Congress in November. Each of the four groups has outlined their thoughts as per the current status, challenges, and opportunities in the four respective areas. The current state and immediate and long-term needs of the melanoma field, from basic research to clinical management, are presented in the following report.

MELANOMA BRIDGE 2015 KEYNOTE SPEAKER PRESENTATIONS Molecular and immuno-advances K1 Immunologic and metabolic consequences of PI3K/AKT/mTOR activation in melanoma Vashisht G. Y. Nanda, Weiyi Peng, Patrick Hwu, Michael A. Davies K2 Non-mutational adaptive changes in melanoma cells exposed to BRAF and MEK inhibitors help the establishment of drug resistance Gennaro Ciliberto, Luigi Fattore, Debora Malpicci, Luigi Aurisicchio, Paolo Antonio Ascierto, Carlo M. Croce, Rita Mancini K3 Tumor-intrinsic beta-catenin signaling mediates tumor-immune avoidance Stefani Spranger, Thomas F. Gajewski K4 Intracellular tumor antigens as a source of targets of antibody-based immunotherapy of melanoma Yangyang Wang, Soldano Ferrone Combination therapies K5 Harnessing radiotherapy to improve responses to immunotherapy in cancer Claire Vanpouille-Box, Erik Wennerberg, Karsten A. Pilones, Silvia C. Formenti, Sandra Demaria K6 Creating a T cell-inflamed tumor microenvironment overcomes resistance to checkpoint blockade Haidong Tang, Yang Wang, Yang-Xin Fu K7 Biomarkers for treatment decisions? Reinhard Dummer K8 Combining oncolytic therapies in the era of checkpoint inhibitors Igor Puzanov K9 Immune checkpoint blockade for melanoma: should we combine or sequence ipilimumab and PD-1 antibody therapy? Michael A. Postow News in immunotherapy K10 An update on adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy for melanom Ahmad Tarhini K11 Targeting multiple inhibitory receptors in melanoma Joe-Marc Chauvin, Ornella Pagliano, Julien Fourcade, Zhaojun Sun, Hong Wang, Cindy Sanders, John M. Kirkwood, Tseng-hui Timothy Chen, Mark Maurer, Alan J. Korman, Hassane M. Zarour K12 Improving adoptive immune therapy using genetically engineered T cells David F. Stroncek Tumor microenvironment and biomarkers K13 Myeloid cells and tumor exosomes: a crosstalk for assessing immunosuppression? Veronica Huber, Licia Rivoltini K14 Update on the SITC biomarker taskforce: progress and challenges Magdalena Thurin World-wide immunosc

BACKGROUND: Recent phase III clinical trials have established the superiority of the anti-PD-1 antibodies pembrolizumab and nivolumab over the anti-CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced melanoma. Ipilimumab will be considered for second-line treatment after the failure of anti-PD-1 therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively identified a cohort of 40 patients with metastatic melanoma who received single-agent anti-PD-1 therapy with pembrolizumab or nivolumab and were treated on progression with ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg kg(-1) for a maximum of four doses. RESULTS: Ten percent of patients achieved an objective response to ipilimumab, and an additional 8% experienced prolonged (>6 months) stable disease. Thirty-five percent of patients developed grade 3-5 immune-related toxicity associated with ipilimumab therapy. The most common high-grade immune-related toxicity was diarrhoea. Three patients (7%) developed grade 3-5 pneumonitis leading to death in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: Ipilimumab therapy can induce responses in patients who fail the anti-PD-1 therapy with response rates comparable to previous reports. There appears to be an increased frequency of high-grade immune-related adverse events including pneumonitis that warrants close surveillance.

BRAF mutations occur commonly in metastatic melanomas and inhibition of mutant BRAF and the downstream kinase MEK results in rapid tumor regression and prolonged survival in patients. Combined therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibition improves response rate, progression free survival and overall survival compared with single agent BRAF inhibition, and reduces the skin toxicity that is seen with BRAF inhibitor monotherapy. However, this combination is associated with an increase in other toxicities, particularly drug-related pyrexia, which affects approximately 50% of patients treated with dabrafenib and trametinib (CombiDT). We provide guidance on managing adverse events likely to arise during treatment with combination BRAF and MEK inhibition with CombiDT: pyrexia, skin conditions, fatigue; and discuss management of CombiDT during surgery and radiotherapy. By improving tolerability and in particular preventing unnecessary treatment cessations or reduction in drug exposure, best outcomes can be achieved for patients undergoing CombiDT therapy.

High basal or induced expression of the tripartite motif protein, TRIM16, leads to reduce cell growth and migration of neuroblastoma and skin squamous cell carcinoma cells. However, the role of TRIM16 in melanoma is currently unknown. TRIM16 protein levels were markedly reduced in human melanoma cell lines, compared with normal human epidermal melanocytes due to both DNA methylation and reduced protein stability. TRIM16 knockdown strongly increased cell migration in normal human epidermal melanocytes, while TRIM16 overexpression reduced cell migration and proliferation of melanoma cells in an interferon beta 1 (IFNβ1)-dependent manner. Chromatin immunoprecipitation assays revealed TRIM16 directly bound the IFNβ1 gene promoter. Low level TRIM16 expression in 91 melanoma patient samples, strongly correlated with lymph node metastasis, and, predicted poor patient prognosis in a separate cohort of 170 melanoma patients with lymph node metastasis. The BRAF inhibitor, vemurafenib, increased TRIM16 protein levels in melanoma cells in vitro, and induced growth arrest in BRAF-mutant melanoma cells in a TRIM16-dependent manner. High levels of TRIM16 in melanoma tissues from patients treated with Vemurafenib correlated with clinical response. Our data, for the first time, demonstrates TRIM16 is a marker of cell migration and metastasis, and a novel treatment target in melanoma.

Deregulated glucose metabolism fulfills the energetic and biosynthetic requirements for tumor growth driven by oncogenes. Because inhibition of oncogenic BRAF causes profound reductions in glucose uptake and a strong clinical benefit in BRAF-mutant melanoma, we examined the role of energy metabolism in responses to BRAF inhibition. We observed pronounced and consistent decreases in glycolytic activity in BRAF-mutant melanoma cells. Moreover, we identified a network of BRAF-regulated transcription factors that control glycolysis in melanoma cells. Remarkably, this network of transcription factors, including hypoxia-inducible factor-1α, MYC, and MONDOA (MLXIP), drives glycolysis downstream of BRAF(V600), is critical for responses to BRAF inhibition, and is modulated by BRAF inhibition in clinical melanoma specimens. Furthermore, we show that concurrent inhibition of BRAF and glycolysis induces cell death in BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi)-resistant melanoma cells. Thus, we provide a proof-of-principle for treatment of melanoma with combinations of BRAFis and glycolysis inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic significance of BRAF and NRAS mutations in metastatic melanoma patients remains uncertain, with several studies reporting conflicting results, often biased by the inclusion of patients treated with BRAF and MEK (MAPK) inhibitors. We therefore interrogated a historical cohort of patients free of the confounding influence of MAPK inhibitor therapy. METHODS: Patients with available archival tissue first diagnosed with metastatic melanoma between 2002 and 2006 were analysed. Mutational analysis was performed using the OncoCarta Panel. Patient characteristics, treatment outcome and survival were correlated with BRAF/NRAS mutation status. RESULTS: In 193 patients, 92 (48%) melanomas were BRAF-mutant, 39 (20%) were NRAS-mutant and 62 (32%) were wild-type for BRAF/NRAS mutations (wt). There was no difference in response to chemotherapy based on mutation status (35-37%). The distant disease-free interval (DDFI) was significantly shorter in patients with wt melanoma (27.9 months vs 35.1 for BRAF and 49.1 for NRAS) although this was not significant in multivariate analysis. Survival from stage IV melanoma diagnosis was not significantly different based on mutation status. The DDFI was significantly shorter in patients with BRAF(V600K/R) versus BRAF(V600E) melanoma in univariate and multivariate analyses. CONCLUSIONS: BRAF and NRAS mutation status does not influence survival in metastatic melanoma.