Search

Purpose: We aim to determine the current treatment patterns and recommendations among physicians for cutaneous lymphomas and to identify the types of skin lymphomas for which existing radiation regimens need improvement., Materials/methods: A questionnaire from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was distributed to all members of the Cutaneous Lymphoma Tumour Group and radiation oncology scintific council. This online survey included 13 questions regarding treatment practices for patients with cutaneous lymphoma. The survey was conducted from August 21 to December 18, 2023. Frequency distributions and subgroup comparisons were calculated and analyzed., Results: We collected 51 completed questionnaires from investigators from 19 countries specializing in cutaneous lymphoma treatment. Radiation doses varied significantly (range, 4-60 Gy). Based on the histologic entity, up to one-third of the investigators delivered hypofractionated regimens (range, 14% - 35%). Reduced-dose radiotherapy was considered by 27% to 63% of investigators. Meanwhile, 18 (35%) investigators considered adapting the radiation dose to the response to immunochemotherapy when treating primary cutaneous diffuse large B-cell lymphomal-leg type. Regarding total skin electron beam therapy, 91% of centres delivered reduced-dose regimens, and 18% of investigators applied ultra-hypofractionated protocols., Conclusion: Radiotherapy of cutaneous lymphoma patients is highly heterogeneous among EORTC centres. Development of evidence-based recommendations for radiotherapy dose, fractionation, and technique for cutaneous lymphomas is required for optimization and standardization of treatment., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest none, (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The link between palliative care and oncology must continue to develop, taking into account advances in treatment.Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) for metastatic melanoma is associated with different types of response, making it difficult to assess the benefits to the patient. Some clinical trials suggest a survival advantage of ICI even in the absence of an objective radiographic response. The aim of this study is to assess the impact of continuing ICI after progression of the disease on the overall survival (OS) in a cohort of final-line metastatic melanoma patients. Clinical data from 120 patients with metastatic melanoma were collected via Melbase, a French multicentric biobank, prospectively enrolling unresectable melanoma. Two groups were defined: patients continuing final-line ICI at progression (treated) and patients stopping ICI at progression (controls). The primary end-point is the OS from progression. Propensity score weighting was used to correct for indication bias. From the 120 patients, 72 (60%) continued ICI. Median OS from progression was 4.2 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.6-6.27] in the treated group and median OS was 1.3 months (95% CI 0.95-1.74) in the control group (P < 0.0001). The calculated hazard ratio was 0.20 (0.13-0.33). Continued ICI was discovered to have an association with a higher rate of hospitalization at the end of life; more treatments received in the last 15 days of life and less utilization of specialist palliative care. This study discovered that patients with metastatic melanoma show a significant decrease in the instantaneous probability of mortality when they continue with finale-line ICI after progression., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

In the previously reported primary analyses of this phase 3 trial, 12 months of adjuvant pembrolizumab resulted in significantly longer recurrence-free survival (RFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) than placebo in patients with resected high risk stage III melanoma. Stability of these benefits when the median follow-up was 3.5 and 5 years was published. Here we report results with a longer follow-up., Methods: We randomized 1019 patients to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo, intravenously every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses. RFS in the overall population and in the subgroup of patients with melanoma positive for the PD-1 ligand (PD-L1) were co-primary endpoints. DMFS in these two populations was a secondary and progression/recurrence-free survival 2 (PRFS2) an exploratory endpoint., Results: The median follow-up was 6.9 years. In the overall intention-to-treat population, RFS was longer in the pembrolizumab group than in the placebo group (HR 0.63, 95 % CI 0.53 to 0.74). RFS at 7 years was 50 % (95 % CI 46 % to 55 %) in the pembrolizumab and 36 % (95 % CI 32 % to 41 %) in the placebo group. Positive effects were present both for loco-regional recurrences and distant metastases, and across substages IIIA-IIIB-IIIC, and PD-L1 positive and PD-L1 negative as well as for BRAF mutant and BRAF wild type populations. DMFS was longer in the pembrolizumab group than in the placebo group (HR 0.64, 95 % CI 0.54 to 0.76). DMFS at 7 years was 54 % (95 % CI 50 % to 59 %) in the pembrolizumab and 42 % (95 % CI 37 % to 46 %) in the placebo group. PRFS2 was longer in the pembrolizumab group than in the placebo group (HR 0.69, 95 % CI 0.57 to 0.84). PRFS2 at 7 years was 61 % (95 % CI 57 % to 66 %) in the pembrolizumab and 53 % (95 % CI 49 % to 57 %) in the placebo group., Conclusions: The 7-year analysis of adjuvant therapy with pembrolizumab demonstrated a sustained improvement in the long-term RFS, DMFS and PRFS2 compared with placebo in patients with resected stage III melanoma., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Alexander MM Eggermont is an Editor-in-Chief for European Journal of Cancer and was not involved in the editorial review or the decision to publish this article. Susana Puig is an Editor for European Journal of Cancer Skin Cancer and was not involved in the editorial review or the decision to publish this article. Dirk Schadendorf is an Editor-in-Chief European Journal of Cancer Skin Cancer and was not involved in the editorial review or the decision to publish this article. The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Alexander C.J. van Akkooi: advisory board/consultancy honoraria from 4SC AG, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Serono-Pfizer, MSD-Merck, Neracare, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, Sirius Medical, SkylineDX; research grants from Amgen, Merck Serono-Pfizer, SkylineDX. Paolo A. Ascierto: a consultant/advisory role for Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche-Genentech, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Merck Serono, Pierre-Fabre, Sun Pharma, Sanofi, Sandoz, Immunocore, Italfarmaco, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Regeneron, Pfizer, Nouscom, Lunaphore, Medicenna, Bio-Al Health, ValoTX, Replimmune, Bayer, Erasca, Philogen, Biontech, Anaveon; research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche-Genentech, Pfizer, Sanofi; travel support by Pfizer, Bio-Al Health, Replimmune, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Philogen. Victoria Atkinson: advisory board for and speeches fees from BMS, MSD, Novartis, Immunocore; travel support by Pierre Fabre. Christian U Blank: advisory role for BMS, MSD, Roche, Novartis, GSK, AZ, Pfizer, Lilly, GenMab, Pierre Fabre, Third Rock Ventures, Sandoz; research funding from BMS, Novartis, NanoString, 4SC; stock ownership of Flindr Therapeutics, Signature Oncology. Matteo Carlino: advisory boards or a consultant for Amgen, BMS, Eisai, Ideaya, MSD, Nektar, Novartis, Oncosec, Pierre-Fabre, Qbiotics, Regeneron, Roche, Merck, and Sanofi; honoraria from BMS, MSD, and Novartis. Stéphane Dalle: research grants to institution from MSD, BMS, Pierre Fabre; advisory board paid to institution by MSD and BMS; spouse employment Sanofi. Alexander MM Eggermont: honoraria for scientific advisory board or data monitoring committee activities from Agenus, Bioinvent, BioNTech, Boehringer Ingelheim, Brenus, CatalYm, Eurobio, GenOway, Imcheck, IO Biotech, Ipsen, IQVIA, ISA Pharmaceuticals, Merck KGA, Merck&Co/MSD, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, QBiotics, Regeneron, Replimune, Sairopa BV, ScanCell, Scorpion Pharmaceuticals, Secarna, Sellas, SkylineDX BV, TigaTX, Thermosome, Trained Immunotherapeutics Discovery. Stock: IO Biotech, Sairopa BV, SkylineDX. Anna Maria Di Giacomo: advisor/board member for Merck, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Incyte, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, SunPharma, Immunocore; honoraria from Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre, GlaxoSmithKline, SunPharma. Immunocore. Dmitri Grebennik: employee of Merck & Co. Jean-Jacques Grob: advisory boards for Novartis, BMS, MSD, Philogen, Pierre Fabr, Sanofi, Roche, Amgen. Ralf Gutzmer: honoraria for lectures and advice from BristolMyers Squibb, MerckSharpDohme, Novartis, Merck-Serono, Amgen, Almirall Hermal, Pierre-Fabre, Sun Pharma, Immunocore, 4SC, Delcath, Sanofi/Regeneron; support for participation in meetings from SUN Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim and PierreFabre; research support (to institution) from Sanofi/Regeneron, Merck Serono, Amgen, SUN Pharma, KyowaKirin, Almirall Hermal, Recordati. Andrew Haydon: advisory board member for BMS, MSD and Novartis. Rahima Jamal: honoraria for presentation and advisory board with Merck. PI in Merck-sponsored trials. Adnan Khattak: speaker honoraria, advisory board, and travel sponsorship from MSD. Michal Kicinski: research funding from MSD, BMS, Pierre Fabre, Immunocore, and JnJ. Clemens Kreplere: employee and shareholder of Merck & Co. James Larkin: relationships with the following companies: iOnctura, Apple Tree, Merck, BMS, MSD, Telix, Novartis, Philogen, Pfizer, Incyte, Eisai, Debipharm, GCO, TouchIME, Immatics, Insighter, Agence Unik, VJOncology, Royal College of General Practioners, Cambridge Healthcare Research, Royal College of Physicians, TouchExperts. Georgina V Long: consultant advisor for Agenus, Amgen, Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BioNTech, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Evaxion, GI Innovation, Hexal AG (Sandoz Company), Highlight Therapeutics S.L., IOBiotech, Immunocore, Innovent Biologics USA, MSD, Novartis, PHMR Ltd, Pierre Fabre, Regeneron, Scancell, SkylineDX B.V. Paul Lorigan: support for travel from MSD; research funding from Pierre Fabre and BMS; speakers bureau/consultancy for BMS and Pierre Fabre. Mario Mandala: advisory board and lectures for: MSD, BMS, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, Sun Pharma; research grant from Novartis. Susana Puig: speaker for Almirall, BMS, Cantabria, ISDIN, La Roche Posay, Leo Pharma, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Regeneron, Sanofi, Sunpharma; advisory board of Almirall, BMS, ISDIN, La Roche Posay, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Sun Pharma; involvement in research and trials of Abbvie, Almirall, Amgen, BMS, Biofrontera, Canfield, Cantabria, Fotofinder, GSK, ISDIN, La Roche Posay, Leo Pharma, MSD, MEDA, Novartis, Polychem, Roche, Sun Pharma; husband has relationship with Almirall, Amgen, BMS, Biofrontera, Canfield, Cantabria, Fotofinder, GSK, ISDIN, La Roche Posay, Leo, Mavig, Nevisence, Novartis, Polychem, Roche, Sun Pharma. Educational activities for Abbie, Lilly, and ISD; ownership of Athena Tech & Dermavision Solutions. Caroline Robert: consultant/advisory board of Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, BMS, MSD, Novaris, Merck, Roche, Pfizer, Sun Pharma, Ultimovacs, Regeneron, Egle, Philogen, Maat Pharma; consultant steering committee for Novartis, Regeneron, Pfizer, IO Biotech; consultant IDMC for Ultimovacs; speaker for Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, BMS, MSD, Novaris; travel by Pierre Fabre. Piotr Rutkowski: honoraria for lectures and advisory boards from MSD, BMS, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Genesis Pharma, Medison Pharma. Shahneen Sandhu: research funding from Novartis/AAA, AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Amgen, Genentech, Senwha, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Healthcare and Pfizer; participation on advisory boards for Merck Sharp and Dohme, AstraZeneca, Novartis, SkylineDx and Abbvie (fees for attending go to research funds at the institution); honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme and Janssen (all paid to the institution); chair of DSMB for 2 Novartis/AAA sponsored Phase III trials (no fee accepted for chair role). Dirk Schadendorf: a member of the advisory board, consultant or received speakers´ honoraria from: Astra Zeneca, BMS, CureVac, Daiichi Sankyo, Erasca, Haystack, Immatics, Immunocore, InFlarX, Lapcorp, Merck-Serono, MSD, Neracare, Novartis, Novogenix, PamGene, Philogen, Pierre Fabre, Pfizer, Regeneron, Replimune, Sanofi, Seagen, Sun Pharma, UltraVacs; research funding from BMS, Roche, MSD, Amgen & Novartis. Stefan Suciu: DSMB member of the NADINA study. Alfonsus JM van den Eertwegh: study grant from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Idera; travel expenses by Ipsen; advisory board of Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD Oncology, Ipsen, Pierre Fabre, Janssen Cilag BV. The remaining authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Purpose: In phase III CheckMate 238, adjuvant nivolumab significantly improved recurrence-free survival compared with ipilimumab in patients with resected stage IIIB-C/IV melanoma without a significant difference in overall survival (OS). Here, we investigate progression-free survival (PFS) and OS after postrecurrence systemic therapy., Patients and Methods: Patients 15 years or older with resected stage IIIB-C/IV melanoma were stratified by stage and tumor PD-L1 status and randomly assigned to receive nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses and then every 12 weeks for 1 year or until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Patients with recurrence in each group were assessed for PFS and OS from subsequent systemic therapy (SST) initiation per recurrence timing (≤12 months [early] v >12 months [late] from initial therapy)., Results: Recurrences occurred in 198 (44%) of 453 nivolumab-treated patients (122 early, 76 late) and 232 (51%) of 453 ipilimumab-treated patients (160 early, 72 late). Median PFS on next-line systemic therapy for nivolumab-treated patients recurring early versus late was 4.7 versus 12.4 months (24-month rates, 16% v 31%); median OS was 19.8 versus 42.8 months (24-month rates: 37% v 73%). In response to subsequent therapy, patients on nivolumab with late versus early recurrence were more likely to benefit from anti-PD-1 monotherapy. Nivolumab-treated patients with either an early or late recurrence benefitted from an ipilimumab-based therapy or targeted therapy, each with similar OS., Conclusion: Postrecurrence survival was longer for patients who recurred >12 months. Patients on nivolumab who recurred early benefitted from SST but had better survival with ipilimumab-based regimens or targeted therapy compared with anti-PD-1 monotherapy.

The endocannabinoid system plays an important role in the regulation of metabolism, growth and regeneration of peripheral tissues, including liver, adipose and muscle tissue. Studies in cells, rodents and humans showed that cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB 1 ) antagonist treatment is an effective strategy to improve features of metabolic health such as substrate metabolism, at least in models of metabolic dysregulation. However, acute signaling events that might induce these metabolic adaptations are not understood. It is not clear whether, and to which extent, a single treatment with a CB 1 antagonist induces acute effects in peripheral, metabolic tissues. Therefore, the present study compared the phosphorylation status of signaling pathways and metabolic markers in liver, adipose and muscle tissue of mice treated with the peripherally restricted CB 1 antagonist AM6545 and vehicle-treated mice. Protein kinase A phosphorylation was downregulated in white and brown adipose tissue, whereas the mitogen-activated protein kinase, phospho-extracellular signal-regulated kinase, was higher in liver, white adipose and muscle tissue of AM6545-treated mice. Additionally, Akt-mammalian target of rapamycin activation was higher in all tissues of AM6545-treated mice, whereas the phosphorylation status of metabolic markers remained unaffected. These data indicate that acute CB 1 antagonism is effective to induce phosphorylation events of signaling cascades and metabolic markers in metabolic tissues of healthy, lean mice within a 90-min time window. The observed adaptations to AM6545 treatment do not fully align with earlier in vitro and in vivo findings, which could be ascribed to differences in cell type, exposure intensity (dose and time), health status and species., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Citrobacter koseri (C. koseri) can lead to severe infections in the neonates, elderly and immunocompromised patients. We describe the first reported case of an axillary abscess due to C. koseri in a healthy adolescent, and review the clinical aspects and associated risk factors of this rare condition., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) 1325-MG/KEYNOTE-054 study, adjuvant pembrolizumab improved recurrence-free survival and distant-metastasis-free survival in patients with resected stage III melanoma. Earlier results showed no effect of pembrolizumab on health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Little is known about HRQOL after completion of treatment with pembrolizumab, an important research area concerning patients who are likely to become long-term survivors. This study reports long-term HRQOL results., Methods: This double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial compared adjuvant pembrolizumab with placebo in patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated stage IIIA, IIIB, or IIIC resected cutaneous melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 1 or 0, recruited from 123 academic centres and community hospitals in 23 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a minimisation technique stratified for stage and geographical region to receive 200 mg of intravenous pembrolizumab or placebo every 3 weeks for up to 18 doses. Investigators, patients, and those collecting or analysing data were masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint of the trial was recurrence-free survival (reported elsewhere). HRQOL was a prespecified exploratory endpoint, measured with the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30. All patients with a baseline HRQOL evaluation available who were alive 108 weeks from randomisation were included in this analysis of long-term HRQOL. Long-term HRQOL included assessments measured every 6 months between 108 weeks and 48 months after randomisation. The threshold of clinical relevance for all HRQOL scales used was an average change of 5 points. The trial is ongoing, recruitment is completed, and HRQOL data collection is finalised. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02362594, and EudraCT, 2014-004944-37., Findings: Between Aug 26, 2015, and Nov 14, 2016, 1019 patients were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab (n=514) or placebo (n=505). Completion of the HRQOL evaluation at baseline exceeded 90% (481 [94%] patients in the pembrolizumab group and 467 [92%] in the placebo group), and ranged between 60% and 90% for post-baseline timepoints. Among patients with a baseline HRQOL evaluation, 365 (39%) were female and 583 (61%) were male. The mean change from baseline to long-term HRQOL was -0·56 (95% CI -2·33 to 1·22) in the pembrolizumab group and 1·63 (-0·12 to 3·38) in the placebo group. The difference between the two groups was -2·19 (-4·65 to 0·27, p=0·081). Differences for all other scales were smaller than 5 and not statistically significant., Interpretation: Adjuvant pembrolizumab did not have a significant impact on long-term HRQOL compared with placebo in patients with resected stage III melanoma. These findings, together with earlier results on efficacy and HRQOL, support the use of pembrolizumab in this setting., Funding: Merck Sharp & Dohme., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests EB's spouse and daughter hold shares in Sandoz, Galenica, Alcon, Roche, and Novartis. MK reports study funding paid to the institution by Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD) since the initial planning of the work, and study funding paid to the institution from Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Immunocore, Johnson & Johnson, and Pierre Fabre in the past 36 months. MM reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, and Sun Pharma. GVL reports consulting fees from Agenus, Amgen, Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BioNTech, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Evaxion, Hexal AG (Sandoz Company), Highlight Therapeutics, IOBiotech, Immunocore, Innovent Biologics USA, MSD, Novartis, PHMR, Pierre Fabre, Regeneron, Scancell, and SkylineDX BV. VA reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from BMS, MSD, Novartis; support from BMS for attending meetings or travel; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for BMS, MSD, Novartis, and Immunocore; CUB reports personal fees from MSD, grants and personal fees from Novartis and BMS, personal fees from Roche, GSK, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Lilly, GenMAB, Pierre Fabre, and Third Rock ventures, grants from NanoString and 4SC, during the conduct of the study. CUB has patents pending (WO 2021/177822 A1 and WO 2023/022596 A1), and reports stock ownership: co-founder of Immagene BV and Signature Oncology. AH reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from BMS, MSD, and Novartis; payments for participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with BMS, MSD, and Novartis. SD reports research funding from BMS, MSD, and Pierre Fabre to the institution; payment or honoraria to the institution for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from BMS and MSD; support for attending meetings or travel from BMS and MSD; trim 24 patent pending; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board at BMS and MSD, with payments made to the institution; spouse being a Sanofi employee. AK reports consulting fees for an advisory role at Moderna and speaker honorarium from MSD. MSC reports honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from BMS, MSD and Novartis; having served on advisory boards for Amgen, BMS, Eisai, Ideaya, MSD, Nektar, Novartis, Oncosec, Pierre-Fabre, Qbiotics, Regeneron, Roche, Merck, and Sanofi. AM reports support of scientific and educational conference from Janssen. SS reports grants or contracts from Novartis/Advanced Accelerator Applications (AAA), AstraZeneca, MSD, Genentech, Senhwa, and Pfizer; funding goes to the institution to undertake investigator initiated clinical trial and translational research. SS reports participation on advisory boards for MSD, BMS, AstraZeneca—fees for attending go to research funds at the institution. SS is the chair of DSMB for two Novartis/AAA sponsored phase 3 trials—no fee accepted for chair role. SP reports payment or honoraria to her and her institution for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from BMS, MSD, and Novartis, and to her partner and her institution from Amgen and Phylogen; payments to her institution for participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with MSD; leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee, or advocacy group, paid or unpaid from GEM, EORTC melanoma group, and ASEICA. DS reports research grants to his institution from Amgen, Array/Pfizer, BMS, MSD, Novartis, and Roche; consulting fees paid personally from 4SC, Amgen, Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Haystack, Immunocore, InFlarX, Innovent, Labcorp, Merck Serono, MSD, Nektar, Neracare, Novartis OncoSec, Pfizer, Philogen, Pierre Fabre, Replimune, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi/Regeneron, and Sun Pharma; personal payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from BMS, MSD, Merck Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and SunPharma; personal support for attending meetings or travel from BMS, Merck Serono, MSD, Novartis, Sanofi, and Pierre Fabre; personal payments for participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board at 4SC, Amgen, Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Haystack, Immunocore, InFlarX, Merck Serono, MSD, Nektar, Neracare, Novartis, OncoSec, Pfizer, Philogen, Pierre Fabre, Replimune, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi/Regeneron, and Sun Pharma; leadership or fiduciary role, paid or unpaid, at Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group, German Cancer Society, Hiege Stiftung, Deutsche Hautkrebsstiftung, Nationale Versorgungskonferenz Hautkrebs eV, and European Melanoma Registry; drug supply (nivolumab, ipilimumab) from BMS. RJ reports research funding from Iovance Biotherapeutics; honoraria for advisory role or speaker presentation from Merck, BMS, Medison, Pfizer, and Novartis. PR reports consulting fees paid to himself from MBS, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Philogen, and Pfizer; honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureau, manuscript writing, or educational events paid to himself from BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, MSD, and AstraZeneca; speakers bureau Pfizer, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, MSD, and BMS paid to himself; support for attending meetings or travel from Orphan Europe and Pierre Fabre paid to himself; research funding to his institution from Novarits, Pfizer, Roche, and BMS. AJMvdE reports study grants from BMS and Idera; travel expenses from Ipsen; advisory board from BMS, MSD Oncology, Ipsen, Pierre Fabre, and Janssen Cilag BV. CC reports support for attending meetings or travel from Orphan Europe and Pierre Fabre. DG reports stock or stock options from Merck & Co. CK reports stock or stock options from Merck & Co and being an employee of Merck & Co. CR reports consulting fees (payments made to her) from BMS, Roche, Pierre Fabre, Novartis, Sanofi, Pfizer, MSD, Merck, Sunpharma, Ultimovacs, Regeneron, Egle, Philogen, Maat Pharma, and IO Biontech; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events (payments made to her) from Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, BMS, MSD, and Novartis; support for attending meetings or travel from Pierre Fabre; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board (payments made to her) with BMS, Roche, Pierre Fabre, Novartis, Sanofi, Pfizer, MSD, Merck, Sunpharma, Ultimovacs, Regeneron, Egle, Philogen, and Maat Pharma. AMME reports honoraria for scientific advisory board or independent data monitoring committee functions from Agenus, BioInvent, BioNTech, Boehringer Ingelheim, Brenus, CatalYm, Ellipses, EikonTX, Eurobio, Galecto, IO Biotech, IQVIQ, ISA Pharmaceuticals, Merck & Co, MSD, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Scorpion TX, Sairopa, Sellas, SkylineDX, TigaTx, and Trained Therapeutics Discovery; honoraria from Acetra, GenOway, GSK, Moderna, and Trained Immunity Tx; equity from IO Biotech, Sairopa, and SkylineDx; being the Editor in Chief of the European Journal of Cancer. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Background: Mycosis fungoides (MF) has usually an indolent course. However, some patients develop a more aggressive disease and few prognostic parameters have been identified. Isolated cases of pustular MF (pMF) suggest an unfavourable prognosis., Objectives: We aim to describe the clinico-pathological characteristics and prognostic value of pMF., Methods: We retrospectively collected data of all cases of MF with histological pustules diagnosed from 2009 to 2020. The outcomes and clinico-pathological characteristics of pMF at diagnosis (pMFD) were compared to those of a cohort of non-pustular MF (NpMF)., Results: 33 pMF (including 22 pMFD) and 86 NpMF cases were included. The median age at diagnosis of pMF was 61 years [IQR=50-75]. The median follow-up of pMFD was 32 months [IQR=14-49]. Clinically, 33% of pMF had pustules. Large-cell transformation (LCT) occurred in 17 cases. pMFD were at a significantly more advanced-stage and more showed LCT at diagnosis than NpMF (50% vs 7%, p<0.001 and 23% vs 0%, p<0.001, respectively). In multivariate Cox analysis, the presence of histological pustule at diagnostic was associated with shorter OS in all patients (HR=13.90, CI95%[2.43-79]; p=0.003), and in early-stage patients (HR=11.09, CI95%[1.56-78.82]; p=0.02). In multivariate Fine and Gray model analysis, pMFD was associated with a higher cumulative incidence of LCT (SHR=13.90, CI95% [2.43-79]; p=0.003) in all patients. Median OS after the occurrence of histological pustules during follow-up of all pMF patients was 37 months, with a five-year OS of 25% (CI95% [0.06-0.5])., Conclusion: pMF often follows an aggressive course, with a high risk of LCT and shorter survival, even for early-stage patients. Histological pustules at diagnostic of MF might represent an independent poor prognostic factor, to be confirmed by further studies. Because pustules are not always clinically identified, histological pustules should be mentioned in pathology reports of MF and prompt discussion of a closer follow-up., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Strenuous eccentric exercise (EE) induces microstructural muscle damage, which decreases muscle performance. Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) exerts analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects in clinical pain conditions and preclinical models of experimentally induced-inflammation. This might hold clues for improved recovery from EE. Therefore, the current study evaluates the effect of PEA supplementation on functional and molecular responses to a single EE bout., Methods: Eleven healthy male participants were included in a double-blind crossover study in which they received PEA (350 mg Levagen+) or placebo (maltodextrin) supplements, in a randomized order. In each experimental condition participants performed an acute bout of EE (24x10 eccentric contractions of the knee extensors on an isokinetic dynamometer). At baseline, 24 (D1), 48 (D2), 72 (D3) and 120 h (D5) following EE, maximal voluntary contraction and jump height were measured. Blood samples were collected at baseline and on D1-D5, and muscle biopsies were collected at baseline and on D2. Perceived muscle soreness, sleep quality and food intake were recorded daily., Results: Muscle strength and jump height decreased following EE (up to ~40 and ~ 17% respectively; Ptime < 0.05) in both conditions. This drop was accompanied by an increase in plasma creatine kinase and perceived muscle soreness (Ptime < 0.05). Furthermore, EE, but not PEA, increased the expression of the myogenic marker Pax7 and of the catabolic markers p-FoxO1-3a, p62 and LC3BII/I (Ptime < 0.05)., Conclusions: PEA supplementation does not improve muscle soreness, muscle strength and jump performance following a single EE bout. Additionally, PEA supplementation had no effect on local or systemic markers of muscle damage, catabolism or regeneration., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest and Funding Source: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be a potential conflict of interest. This study was supported by Research Foundation Flanders (PhD fellowship 11PRA24N to MS; postdoctoral fellowship 12Z8622N to SD)., (Copyright © 2024 by the American College of Sports Medicine.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor-related encephalitis (ICI-encephalitis) is not well characterised and diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers are lacking. We aimed to comprehensively characterise ICI-encephalitis and identify diagnostic biomarkers and outcome predictors., Methods: This retrospective observational study included all patients with ICI-encephalitis studied in the French Reference Centre on Paraneoplastic Neurological Syndromes (PNS) and Autoimmune Encephalitis (2015-2023). ICI encephalitis was considered definite in case of inflammatory findings at paraclinical tests and/or well-characterised neural antibodies. Predictors of immune-related adverse event (irAE) treatment response, defined as a Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0 grade < 3 at any time after therapeutic intervention, were assessed by logistic regression analysis, and predictors of mortality by Cox regression analysis. Neurofilament light chain (NfL) was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay., Findings: Sixty-seven patients with definite encephalitis were identified (median age, 69 years; 66% male). A focal syndrome was observed in 43/67 patients (64%; limbic encephalitis, cerebellar ataxia, and/or brainstem encephalitis), while 24/67 (36%) had meningoencephalitis, a non-focal syndrome with altered mental status (22/24 patients, 92%) and pleocytosis (24/24 patients, 100%). Patients with focal encephalitis more frequently had abnormal brain MRI (26/42, 62% versus 8/24, 33%, p = 0.025), PNS-related antibodies (36/43, 84% versus 1/24, 4%, p < 0.001), and neuroendocrine cancers (22/43, 51% versus 1/24, 4%; p < 0.001) than patients with meningoencephalitis. Focal encephalitis patients had a lower rate of irAE treatment response (7/39, 18%) and higher mortality (27/43, 63%) compared to meningoencephalitis patients (12/22, 77% and 5/24, 21%, respectively, p < 0.001 each). PNS-related antibodies were associated with less irAE treatment response, independently of age, sex, and baseline severity (adjusted OR 0.05; 95%CI [0.01; 0.19]; p < 0.001) as well as higher mortality, independently of age and cancer type (adjusted HR 5.07; 95% CI [2.12; 12.12]; p < 0.001). Serum NfL discriminated patients with definite ICI-encephalitis (n = 27) from cancer-matched controls (n = 16; optimal cut-off >273.5 pg/mL, sensitivity 81%, specificity 88%, AUC 0.87, 95% CI [0.76; 0.98]) and irAE treatment responders (n = 10) from non-responders (n = 17, optimal cut-off >645 pg/mL, sensitivity 90%, specificity 65%; AUC 0.75, 95% CI [0.55; 0.94])., Interpretation: ICI-encephalitis corresponds to a set of clinically-recognisable syndromes. Patients with focal encephalitis, PNS-related antibodies, and/or higher serum NfL have low irAE treatment response rates. Research is needed on the underlying immunopathogenesis to foster therapeutic innovations., Funding: Agence Nationale de la Recherche., Competing Interests: AF, MVG, BJ, and JH are supported by BETPSY, project as part of the second Investissements d'Avenir programme (ANR-18-RHUS-0012) supported by a public grant overseen by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR). AF received a grant to perform research abroad by the European Academy of Neurology. MVG is supported by Fundación Martín Escudero (non-profit Spanish foundation) to perform research abroad. JH receives royalties from licensing fees to Athena Diagnostics, Euroimmun, and ravo Diagnostika for a patent for the use of anti-CV2/CRMP5 as diagnostic tests. All other authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Preserving the function and survival of pancreatic beta-cells, in order to achieve long-term glycemic control and prevent complications, is an essential feature for an innovative drug to have clinical value in the treatment of diabetes. Innovative research is developing therapeutic strategies to prevent pathogenic mechanisms and protect beta-cells from the deleterious effects of inflammation and/or chronic hyperglycemia over time. A better understanding of receptors and signaling pathways, and of how they interact with each other in beta-cells, remains crucial and is a prerequisite for any strategy to develop therapeutic tools aimed at modulating beta-cell function and/or mass. Here, we present a comprehensive review of our knowledge on membrane and intracellular receptors and signaling pathways as targets of interest to protect beta-cells from dysfunction and apoptotic death, which opens or could open the way to the development of innovative therapies for diabetes.

Purpose: The management of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) requires multidisciplinary boards to handle complex cases. This study aimed to examine the evolving practices of the IMMUCARE board and to evaluate its impact on clinical practices., Materials and Methods: The IMMUCARE board gathers oncologists and organ specialists from the Cancerology Institute of the Lyon University Hospital since 2018. We conducted a retrospective analysis of its activity (participants' specialty, referred cases, and recommendations) from 2018 to 2021, coupled with a survey among the physicians who participated., Results: Across 68 board meetings, 245 cases from 195 patients were discussed. Each board had a median of six participants (IQR, 5-8). Participation rates varied across specialties and also over time (participation of nephrologists and rheumatologists significantly increased over time, whereas it decreased for endocrinologists). Most of the referred patients (89%) were treated at our center. Only 4% of referrals concerned eligibility for immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI), whereas the majority pertained to irAEs. The board recommended ICI interruption for 56% and steroids for 41% of them. Immunosuppressants were recommended in 17% of cases, with a notable increase over time. ICI reintroduction was debated in 50% of cases, and the board identified a definitive contraindication in 26% of them. The survey of 49 of 98 physicians showed that the board significantly affected immunosuppressant introduction and ICI rechallenge decisions. The board's educational and collaborative benefits were highlighted, but time constraints posed challenges., Conclusion: Our 4-year analysis of irAE management practices reveals changing patterns in the distribution of cases presented and in specialists' involvement. Dedicated multidisciplinary boards remain essential, particularly for intricate cases. Expanding access to these boards is crucial to ensure comprehensive care for all patients.

The need for reliable biomarkers to predict clinical benefit from anti-PD1 treatment in metastatic melanoma (MM) patients remains unmet. Several parameters have been considered in the tumor environment or the blood, but none has yet achieved sufficient accuracy for routine clinical practice. Whole blood samples from MM patients receiving second-line anti-PD1 treatment (NCT02626065), collected longitudinally, were analyzed by flow cytometry to assess the immune cell subsets absolute numbers, the expression of immune checkpoints or ligands on T cells and the functionality of innate immune cells and T cells. Clinical response was assessed according to Progression-Free Survival (PFS) status at one-year following initiation of anti-PD1 (responders: PFS > 1 year; non-responders: PFS ≤ 1 year). At baseline, several phenotypic and functional alterations in blood immune cells were observed in MM patients compared to healthy donors, but only the proportion of polyfunctional memory CD4+ T cells was associated with response to anti-PD1. Under treatment, a decreased frequency of HVEM on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells after 3 months of treatment identified responding patients, whereas its receptor BTLA was not modulated. Both reduced proportion of CD69-expressing CD4+ and CD8+ T cells and increased number of polyfunctional blood memory T cells after 3 months of treatment were associated with response to anti-PD1. Of upmost importance, the combination of changes of all these markers accurately discriminated between responding and non-responding patients. These results suggest that drugs targeting HVEM/BTLA pathway may be of interest to improve anti-PD1 efficacy., Competing Interests: SD received institutional research grants from MSD, BMS and Pierre Fabre companies., (© 2024 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.)

Background: Sézary syndrome is an extremely rare and fatal cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL). Mogamulizumab, an anti-CCR4 monoclonal antibody, has recently been associated with increased progression-free survival in a randomized clinical trial in CTCL. We aimed to evaluate OS and prognostic factors in Sézary syndrome, including treatment with mogamulizumab, in a real-life setting., Methods: Data from patients with Sézary (ISCL/EORTC stage IV) and pre-Sézary (stage IIIB) syndrome diagnosed from 2000 to 2020 were obtained from 24 centers in Europe. Age, disease stage, plasma lactate dehydrogenases levels, blood eosinophilia at diagnosis, large-cell transformation and treatment received were analyzed in a multivariable Cox proportional hazard ratio model. This study has been registered in ClinicalTrials (SURPASSe01 study: NCT05206045)., Findings: Three hundred and thirty-nine patients were included (58% men, median age at diagnosis of 70 years, Q1-Q3, 61-79): 33 pre-Sézary (9.7% of 339), 296 Sézary syndrome (87.3%), of whom 10 (2.9%) had large-cell transformation. One hundred and ten patients received mogamulizumab. Median follow-up was 58 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 53-68). OS was 46.5% (95% CI, 40.6%-53.3%) at 5 years. Multivariable analysis showed that age ≥ 80 versus <50 (HR: 4.9, 95% CI, 2.1-11.2, p = 0.001), and large-cell transformation (HR: 2.8, 95% CI, 1.6-5.1, p = 0.001) were independent and significant factors associated with reduced OS. Mogamulizumab treatment was significantly associated with decreased mortality (HR: 0.34, 95% CI, 0.15-0.80, p = 0.013)., Interpretation: Treatment with mogamulizumab was significantly and independently associated with decreased mortality in Sézary syndrome., Funding: French Society of Dermatology, Swiss National Science Foundation (IZLIZ3&#95;200253/1) and SKINTEGRITY.CH collaborative research program., Competing Interests: AdM declares nonfinancial support from Kyowa Kirin and Recordati Rare Diseases; fees from Takeda, Almirall and Recordati Rare Diseases, and research funding, outside the scope of this study, from Kyowa Kirin, Innate Pharma, Almirall and Takeda. MB declares consultant fees from Innate Pharma, Kyowa Kirin, Takeda, BMS, Sanofi, Quantum Genomics, and research funding from Kyowa Kirin and Takeda, outside the scope of this study. SM declares consultant fees outside the scope of this study, from Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, Novartis and Biocartis, and has received research funding from BMS, Novartis and Roche. NF declares having received nonfinancial support from Kyowa Kirin. PS received a research grant from Pierre Fabre, fees unrelated to this manuscript from Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Merck-Serono, Pfizer, Roche-Genentech, Pierre Fabre, and Novartis; received nonfinancial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD, Roche-Genentech, Pierre Fabre, and Novartis outside of the scope of this study. MBB declares consultant fees from Kyowa Kirin, Takeda and Recordati and research funding from Kyowa Kirin and Almirall outside the scope of this study. HMT declares consultant fees outside from the scope of this study from Innate Pharma, and has received research funding, outside the scope of this study, from Kyowa Kirin. SIHO consultant fees outside the scope of this study from Takeda and Recordati. GD declares consultant fees outside of the scope of this study from Kyowa Kirin and Recordati. EG declares consultant fees and/or grant support from Mallinckrodt, Helsinn, Takeda, Novartis and Kyowa Kirin unrelated to this work. FG declares consultant fees from Recordati and Kyowa Kirin, outside from the scope of this study. GQ declares consultant fees from Takeda, Recordati and Kyowa Kirin, outside the scope of this study. CM declares nonfinancial support from MSD, Pfizer, Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pierre Fabre, Leo Pharma, Sanofi Aventis, Jannsen Cilag outside of the scope of this study. SB declares having received nonfinancial support from Kyowa Kirin and Recordati. MBag declares consulting fees from Kyowa Kirin, Takeda, Recordati. HB declares consultant fees from Kyowa Kirin. EH declares consultant fees outside the scope of this study from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Sanofi, Jannsen Cilag, Blueprint Medicines, AbbVie and nonfinancial support from Kyowa Kirin, MSD, UCB Pharma, Novartis, Almirall, Pierre Fabre. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Background: Cutaneous adnexal carcinomas are a heterogeneous group of rare neoplasms. Surgical excision is the first-line treatment in localized stage. The use and effectiveness of radiotherapy have not been thoroughly evaluated in these neoplasms., Objectives: The present work analyses prognostic factors on outcomes in skin adnexal carcinomas, based on data from the CARADERM (CAncers RAres DERMatologiques) database., Methods: Data were collected retrospectively including demographic data, tumour types and therapeutic characteristics of all patients included in the CARADERM database, with at least one informative follow-up visit. Analyses were performed on three populations: patients with complete resection of the primary tumour (ADJ/primary population), patients achieving complete remission after complete resection of a recurrent tumour (ADJ/recurrent population) and patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic tumours (ADV/MET population). Overall and recurrence/progression-free survivals at 3-year were analysed using Cox regression models., Results: Radiotherapy did not affect overall survival (OS) in the ADJ/primary population. Adjusted recurrence-free survival (RFS) was significantly lower in the radiotherapy group in ADJ/primary group. Older patients had significantly poorer OS and RFS. Tumour size and immunosuppression were significantly associated with poorer RFS only. Radiotherapy had no effect on OS and RFS in the ADJ/recurrent population. Age was the only factor associated with a poorer OS. Radiotherapy was significantly associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS) in age-sex adjusted analysis in the ADV/MET population, without effect on OS., Conclusions: Our study shows that age, tumour size and immunosuppression are significantly associated with survival in localized adnexal carcinomas. Radiotherapy may improve PFS in the ADV/MET population but not in localized and recurrent carcinomas after complete excision., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.)

The prevalence of diabetes is increasing worldwide. Massive death of pancreatic beta-cells causes type 1 diabetes. Progressive loss of beta-cell function and mass characterizes type 2 diabetes. To date, none of the available antidiabetic drugs promotes the maintenance of a functional mass of endogenous beta-cells, revealing an unmet medical need. Dysfunction and apoptotic death of beta-cells occur, in particular, through the activation of intracellular protein kinases. In recent years, protein kinases have become highly studied targets of the pharmaceutical industry for drug development. A number of drugs that inhibit protein kinases have been approved for the treatment of cancers. The question of whether safe drugs that inhibit protein kinase activity can be developed and used to protect the function and survival of beta-cells in diabetes is still unresolved. This review presents arguments suggesting that several protein kinases in beta-cells may represent targets of interest for the development of drugs to treat diabetes.

The outcome of cancer and autoimmunity is often dictated by the effector functions of CD4+ conventional T cells (Tconv). Although activation of the NF-κB signaling pathway has long been implicated in Tconv biology, the cell-autonomous roles of the separate NF-κB transcription-factor subunits are unknown. Here, we dissected the contributions of the canonical NF-κB subunits RelA and c-Rel to Tconv function. RelA, rather than c-Rel, regulated Tconv activation and cytokine production at steady-state and was required for polarization toward the TH17 lineage in vitro. Accordingly, RelA-deficient mice were fully protected against neuroinflammation in a model of multiple sclerosis due to defective transition to a pathogenic TH17 gene-expression program. Conversely, Tconv-restricted ablation of c-Rel impaired their function in the microenvironment of transplanted tumors, resulting in enhanced cancer burden. Moreover, Tconv required c-Rel for the response to PD-1-blockade therapy. Our data reveal distinct roles for canonical NF-κB subunits in different disease contexts, paving the way for subunit-targeted immunotherapies., (© 2024 Lalle et al.)

Muscle degeneration is a common feature in cancer cachexia that cannot be reversed. Recent advances show that the endocannabinoid system, and more particularly cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB1), regulates muscle processes, including metabolism, anabolism and regenerative capacity. However, it is unclear whether muscle endocannabinoids, their receptors and enzymes are responsive to cachexia and exercise. Therefore, this study investigated whether cachexia and exercise affected muscle endocannabinoid signaling, and whether CB1 expression correlated with markers of muscle anabolism, catabolism and metabolism. Male BALB/c mice were injected with PBS (CON) or C26 colon carcinoma cells (C26) and had access to wheel running (VWR) or remained sedentary (n = 5-6/group). Mice were sacrificed 18 days upon PBS/tumor cell injection. Cachexic mice exhibited a lower muscle CB1 expression (-43 %; p < 0.001) and lower levels of the endocannabinoid anandamide (AEA; -22 %; p = 0.044), as well as a lower expression of the AEA-synthesizing enzyme NAPE-PLD (-37 %; p < 0.001), whereas the expression of the AEA degrading enzyme FAAH was higher (+160 %; p < 0.001). The 2-AG-degrading enzyme MAGL, was lower in cachexic muscle (-34 %; p = 0.007), but 2-AG and its synthetizing enzyme DAGLβ were not different between CON and C26. VWR increased muscle CB1 (+25 %; p = 0.005) and increased MAGL expression (+30 %; p = 0.035). CB1 expression correlated with muscle mass, markers of metabolism (e.g. p-AMPK, PGC1α) and of catabolism (e.g. p-FOXO, LC3b, Atg5). Our findings depict an emerging role of the endocannabinoid system in muscle physiology. Future studies should elaborate how this translates into potential therapies to combat cancer cachexia, and other degenerative conditions., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Cell plasticity sustains intra-tumor heterogeneity and treatment resistance in melanoma. Deciphering the transcriptional mechanisms governing reversible phenotypic transitions between proliferative/differentiated and invasive/stem-like states is required. Expression of the ZEB1 transcription factor is frequently activated in melanoma, where it fosters adaptive resistance to targeted therapies. Here, we performed a genome-wide characterization of ZEB1 transcriptional targets, by combining ChIP-sequencing and RNA-sequencing, upon phenotype switching in melanoma models. We identified and validated ZEB1 binding peaks in the promoter of key lineage-specific genes crucial for melanoma cell identity. Mechanistically, ZEB1 negatively regulates SOX10-MITF dependent proliferative/melanocytic programs and positively regulates AP-1 driven invasive and stem-like programs. Comparative analyses with breast carcinoma cells revealed lineage-specific ZEB1 binding, leading to the design of a more reliable melanoma-specific ZEB1 regulon. We then developed single-cell spatial multiplexed analyses to characterize melanoma cell states intra-tumoral heterogeneity in human melanoma samples. Combined with scRNA-Seq analyses, our findings confirmed increased ZEB1 expression in Neural-Crest-like cells and mesenchymal cells, underscoring its significance in vivo in both populations. Overall, our results define ZEB1 as a major transcriptional regulator of cell states transitions and provide a better understanding of lineage-specific transcriptional programs sustaining intra-tumor heterogeneity in melanoma., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) represent a breakthrough in oncology in terms of prognosis and safety. They now constitute a cornerstone in the management of metastatic melanoma. However, a new kind of adverse event called immune-related adverse events (irAE) has emerged. These irAE could be conceptually considered as an indicator of the antitumoral immune response, but the association between irAE and prognosis is still a matter of debate., Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between the overall survival (OS) and the prevalence of irAE in melanoma., Methods: MEDLINE/PubMed, WebofScience, ClinicalTrials, and WHOTrials databases were searched to identify phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCT) assessing ICI in melanoma and published up to April 2021. A weighted regression was performed to estimate this association according to standard method of surrogacy analysis., Results: A total of 14 RCT including 7646 patients (median age: 59.3 years) with melanoma were included. All types of ICI were represented (ipilimumab, tremelimumab, pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, as well as ipilimumab and nivolumab combination). irAE were frequent but rarely fatal. The combination of ICI caused more irAE than anti-PD1 (or PDL1) and anti-CTLA4 monotherapies. No relationship was found between the occurrence of irAE and OS (beta coefficient 0.078, R 2 3%, p = 0.52), nor between cutaneous irAE and OS (beta coefficient 0.080, R 2 6%, p = 0.33)., Conclusion: Although limited by the heterogeneity of ICI included in the regression and the low number of included RCT, the present study suggests an absence of association between irAE and prognosis in melanoma., (© 2023 The Authors. Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Société Française de Pharmacologie et de Thérapeutique.)

Background: Pain is common in patients with cancer. The World Health Organisation recommends paracetamol or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for mild pain and combined with other agents for moderate/severe pain. This study estimated associations of NSAIDs with recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and the incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in high-risk patients with resected melanoma in the EORTC 1325/KEYNOTE-054 phase III clinical trial., Patients and Methods: Patients with AJCC7 stage IIIA, IIIB or IIIC resected melanoma were randomized to receive 200 mg of adjuvant pembrolizumab (N = 514) or placebo (N = 505) 3-weekly for one year or until recurrence. As previously reported, pembrolizumab prolonged RFS and DMFS. NSAID use was defined as administration between 7 days pre-randomization and starting treatment. Multivariable Cox and Fine and Gray models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for associations of NSAIDs with RFS, DMFS and irAEs., Results: Of 1019 patients randomized, 59 and 44 patients in the pembrolizumab and placebo arms, respectively, used NSAIDs. NSAIDs were not associated with RFS (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.58-1.43) or DMFS in the pembrolizumab (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.65-1.66) or placebo arms (for RFS, HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.48-1.20; for DMFS, HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.49-1.31). NSAIDs were associated with the incidence of irAEs in the placebo arm (HR 3.06, 95% CI 1.45-6.45) but not in the pembrolizumab arm (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.58-1.53)., Conclusion: NSAIDs were not associated with efficacy outcomes nor the risk of irAEs in patients with resected high-risk stage III melanoma receiving adjuvant pembrolizumab., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Oliver John Kennedy. None declared. Nina Glassee. Grants or contracts from any entity: MSD. Michal Kicinski. Grants or contracts from any entity: Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Pierre Fabre. Christian Blank. Grants or contracts from any entity: BMS, Novartis, NanoString, 4SC. Consulting fees - consultant advisor for: BMS, MSD, Roche, Novartis, GSK, AZ, Pfizer, Lilly, GenMab, Pierre Fabre- Payments were made to my institution, Third Rock Venture - Payments were made to me. Stock or stock options: Immagene BV and Signature Oncology - Co-founder. Georgina V Long. Consultant advisor for Agenus, Amgen, Array Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Evaxion, Hexal AG (Sandoz Company), Highlight Therapeutics S.L., Innovent Biologics USA, MSD Australia, MSD, Novartis, OncoSec Australia, PHMR Ltd, Pierre Fabre, Provectus Australia, Qbiotics, Regeneron. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: BMS - Personal 1 h lecture of my own slides, Pierre Fabre, Personal 1 h lecture of my own slides. Victoria Atkinson. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre- Speakers bureaus fees. Support for attending meetings and/or travel: BMS, Travel support. Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: BMS, MSD, Nektar, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Q Biotics, Roche, Limbic - Advisory boards. Stéphane Dalle. Grants or contracts from any entity: BMS, MSD - My Institution. Support for attending meetings and/or travel: BMS, Pierre Fabre, MSD. Other financial or non-financial interests: Sanofi Pasteur - My wife is an employee of Sanofi Pasteur. Andrew M. Haydon. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus: BMS, MSD, Novartis. Participation to Advisory Board: BMS, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, MSD. Andrey Meshcheryakov. Grants or contracts from any entity: Sanofi, AstraZeneca, MSD - My institution, me. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Amgen, Bayer AG, BIOCAD, BMS, Eli Lilly, Merck, SERVIER, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Aventis - Honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus. Support for attending meetings and/or travel: BIOCAD, SERVIER, MSD, Sanofi-Aventis, Merck - Attending meetings and/or travel. Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: Amgen, Bayer AG, BIOCAD, BMS, Eli Lilly, Merck, Servier, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Eisai, AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Aventis - Advisory Board. Adnan Khattak. None declared. Matteo S. Carlino. Participation on Advisory Board for Amgen, BMS, Eisai, Ideaya, MSD, Nektar, Novartis, Oncosec, Pierre-Fabre, Qbiotics, Regeneron, Roche. Consulting fees: BMS, MSD, Novartis. Shahneen Sandhu. Grants or contracts from any entity: Advanced Accelerators Applications (a Novartis company), Amgen, MSD, Senwha, Genentech, AstraZeneca - Funding to the institution. Participation on an Advisory Board: AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, Advanced Accelerators Applications (a Novartis company). - Funding to the institution. James Larkin. Grants or contracts from any entity: Achilles, BMS, MSD, Nektar, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Immunocore, Aveo, Pharmacyclics. Institutional research support: BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Achilles Therapeutics, Roche, Nektar Therapeutics, Covance, Immunocore, Pharmacyclics, Aveo. Consulting fees from iOnctura, Apple Tree, Merck, BMS, Eisai, Debipharm, Incyte. Honorariums from Eisai, Novartis, Incyte, Merck, touchIME, touchEXPERTS, Pfizer, Royal College of Physicians, Cambridge Healthcare Research, Royal College of General Practitioners, VJOncology, Agence Unik, BMS. Speaker fee from Pierre Fabre, BMS, Ipsen, Roche, EUSA Pharma, Novartis, Aptitude, AstraZeneca, GSK, Eisai, Calithera, Ultimovacs, Seagen, Merck, eCancer, Inselgruppe, Pfizer, Goldman Sachs, MSD. Susana Puig. Grants or contracts from any entity: Almirall, ISDIN, La Roche Posay - To My Institution. Consulting fees: ISDIN, Almirall, La Roche Posay, MSD, Sanofi, Sun Pharma, Pfizer, Roche, Regeneron. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: ISDIN, La Roche Posay, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, Roche, Regeneron, BMS, Sun Pharma. Support for attending meetings and/or travel: Almirall. Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: Roche, Sanofi, Sun Pharma, Almirall, ISDIN, Pfizer, Novartis. Paolo A. Ascierto. Grants or contracts from any entity: BMS, Roche-Genentech, Pfizer/Array, Sanofi. Consulting fees: BMS, Roche-Genentech, MSD, Novartis, Merck Serono, Pierre-Fabre, Sun Pharma, Sanofi, Idera, Sandoz, 4SC, Italfarmaco, Nektar, Pfizer/Array, Lunaphore, Medicenna, Bio-Al Health, ValoTx, Replimmune, Bayer. Support for attending meetings and/or travel: Pfizer, Bio-Al Health, Replimmune. Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: BMS, Roche-Genentech, MSD, Novartis, AstraZeneca, Immunocore, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eisai, Regeneron, Daiichi Sankyo, Oncosec, Nouscom, Seagen, iTeos. Piotr Rutkowski. Consulting fees: Amgen, Blueprint Medicine, BMS, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Philogen, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi - Advisory Role - Personal fees. Payment or honoraria for lectures: BMS, Merck, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi Pasteur. Dirk Schadendorf. Grants or contracts from any entity: Amgen, Array BioPharma, Novartis. Consulting fees: 4SC, Angenus, Astra Zeneca, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, EMD Serano, Roche, Genentech, InFlarX, Merck, Nektar, Novartis, Pfizer, Philogen, Pierre Fabre, Regeneron, Sandoz, Sanofi, UltimoVacs. Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board: Immunocore. Honoraria for lectures: Amgen, Novartis. Support for attending meetings and/or travel: Amgen, Novartis. Marye Boers-Sonderen. None declared. Anna Maria di Giacomo. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: BMS, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi. Support for attending meetings and/or travel: BMS, Pierre Fabre. Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: BMS, MSD, Nektar, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, GSK, Novartis. Alfonsus J.M. van den Eertwegh. Grants or contracts from any entity: Roche, Sanofi, Bristol Myers Squibb, Idera. Consulting fees: BMS. Support for attending meetings and/or travel: MSD Oncology, Roche, Pfizer, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre. Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: BMS, MSD Oncology, Amgen, Roche, Novartis, Sanofi, Pfizer, Ipsen, Merck, Pierre Fabre. Jean-Jacques Grob. Payment for participation to an advisory board: Amgen, BMS, Hoffmann-La Roche. Consulting fees: MSD, Novartis, Philogen, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi Pasteur. Ralf Gutzmer. Grants or contracts from any entity: Pfizer, Novartis, Johnson & Johnson, Amgen, Merck Serono, Sun Pharma Industries, Sanofi. Consulting fees: BMS, MSD, Roche, Genentech, Novartis, Merck Serono, Almirall, Amgen, Sun Pharma Industries, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Bayer AG, Immunocore. Support for attending meetings and/or travel: Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Merck Serono, Pierre Fabre, Sun Pharma Industries. Rahima Jamal. Grants or contracts from any entity: MSD, BMS, Iovance Biotherapeutics. Consulting fees: BMS. Alexander C.J. van Akkooi. Grants or contracts from any entity: Amgen, Merck, Pfizer. Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board: Amgen, BMS, Novartis, MSD, Merck, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Provectus, Sanofi, Sirius Medical, 4SC. Sara Gandini. None declared. Emanuel Buhrer. None declared. Stefan Suciu. Grants or contracts from any entity: MSD. Caroline Robert. Consulting fees: AstraZeneca, BMS, MSD, Merck, Roche, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi. Co-founder: Ribonexus. Alexander Eggermont. Consulting fees: Agenus, BioInvent, BMS, Brenus, CatalYm, Ellipses, Galecto, IO Biotech, IQVIA, ISA Pharmaceuticals, Merck, MSD, Pierre Fabre, Sairopa, Sellas, SkylineDX, TigeTx, Trained Immunity TX. Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board: BioNTech, GSK, and Pfizer. Lectures: BMS, MSD. Leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid: European Academy Cancer Sciences, German Cancer Aid. Stock or stock options: IO Biotech, SkylineDx and SaiRoPA. Mario Mandala. Participation to Advisory Board: BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre Pharmaceuticals. Paul Lorigan. Grants or contracts from any entity: BMS, Pierre Fabre. Consulting fees: Amgen, BMS, MSD, Nektar, Novartis, Pierre Fabre. Payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events: Amgen, BMS, Merck, MSD, Nektar, NeraCare GmbH, Novartis, Oncology Education, Pierre Fabre, Roche. Support for attending meetings and/or travel: BMS, MSD. Sara Valpione. Receipient of an Institutional Amgen Research Grant., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

The intrinsic biomechanical properties of cancer cells remain poorly understood. To decipher whether cell stiffness modulation could increase melanoma cells' invasive capacity, we performed both in vitro and in vivo experiments exploring cell stiffness by atomic force microscopy (AFM). We correlated stiffness properties with cell morphology adaptation and the molecular mechanisms underlying epithelial-to-mesenchymal (EMT)-like phenotype switching. We found that melanoma cell stiffness reduction was systematically associated with the acquisition of invasive properties in cutaneous melanoma cell lines, human skin reconstructs, and Medaka fish developing spontaneous MAP-kinase-induced melanomas. We observed a systematic correlation of stiffness modulation with cell morphological changes towards mesenchymal characteristic gains. We accordingly found that inducing melanoma EMT switching by overexpressing the ZEB1 transcription factor, a major regulator of melanoma cell plasticity, was sufficient to decrease cell stiffness and transcriptionally induce tetraspanin-8-mediated dermal invasion. Moreover, ZEB1 expression correlated with Tspan8 expression in patient melanoma lesions. Our data suggest that intrinsic cell stiffness could be a highly relevant marker for human cutaneous melanoma development.

Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest Dr Stratigos reports advisory board or steering committee roles for Janssen, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Roche, and Sanofi; and research support from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, LEO Pharma, Pfizer, Genesis Pharma, and Novartis. Dr Sekulic reports advisory roles for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc and Roche. Dr Peris reports advisory board roles for AbbVie, LEO Pharma, Janssen, Almirall, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Sun Pharma, and Sanofi, outside the submitted work. Dr Bechter reports advisory board roles for Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pierre Fabre, and Ultimovacs. Dr Prey reports no conflict of interest. Dr Lewis reports grants and personal fees from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and is now an employee of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr Basset-Seguin is a consultant and investigator for Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Sanofi, and Sun Pharma. Dr Chang reports advisory roles for Castle, Feldan, Merck, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc; and research funding from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Merck, Novartis, and Galderma. Dr Dalle reports research grants and travel fees from Bristol Myers Squibb and Merck Sharp & Dohme; and reports that their spouse is an employee of Sanofi with stock options. Dr Fernández Orland declares no conflict of interest. Dr Licitra reports institutional grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Debiopharm International SA, Eisai, Novartis, and Roche; institutional grants from Celgene International, Exelixis, Hoffmann-La Roche, IRX Therapeutics, Medpace, Merck Serono, and Pfizer; and personal fees from Sobi, Ipsen, Incyte Biosciences Italy SRL, Doxa Pharma, Amgen, Nanobiotics SA, GSK, AccMed, Medical Science Foundation G. Lorenzini, Associazione Sinapsi, Think 2 IT, Aiom Servizi, Prime Oncology, WMA Congress Education, Fasi, DueCi Promotion SRL, MI&T, Net Congress & Education, PRMA Consulting, Kura Oncology, Health & Life SRL, and Immuno-Oncology Hub. Dr Robert reports grants, personal fees, and advisory board roles for Bristol Myers Squibb, Pierre Fabre, Novartis, Amgen, Merck, Roche, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Sanofi, Biothera, and Ultimovacs. Dr Ulrich reports advisory board and speaker roles for Roche, Sanofi, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and Sun Pharma. Dr Hauschild reports institutional funding and personal fees from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck & Co, Philogen, Pierre Fabre, Provectus, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, and Novartis; and consultancy fees from OncoSec, Almirall Hermal, and Sun Pharma. Dr Migden reports advisory roles for and travel fees from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and Sun Pharmaceuticals; an advisory role for Rakuten Medical; and research funding from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and PellePharm. Dr Dummer reports intermittent, project-focused consultant and advisory roles for Novartis, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche, Amgen, Takeda, Pierre Fabre, Sun Pharma, Sanofi, Catalym, Second Genome, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Alligator, MaxiVAX SA, and touchIME outside the submitted work. Drs Yoo, Inocencio, Chen, Seebach, Lowy, and Fury are employees and shareholders of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Mr Okoye is also an employee and shareholder of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr Bassukas reports non-financial support from Leo Pharma and Novartis, and institutional grants from Leo Pharma. Dr Loquai reports personal fees from Roche, Sun Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Kyowa Kirin, Almirall Hermal, and BioNTech. Dr De Giorgi reports no conflict of interest. Dr Eroglu reports advisory board fees from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Novartis, Pfizer, Genentech, Eisai, OncoSec, and Natera; and research grants from Novartis, Pfizer, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Gutzmer reports documentation fees to their institution from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc; personal fees and non-financial support from Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche Pharma, Merck Serono, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi, and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc; grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Novartis; grants and personal fees from Pfizer; grants from Johnson & Johnson; and personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Almirall Hermal, Sun Pharma, 4SC, and Immunocore. Dr Ulrich reports grants and personal fees from Sanofi, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; and personal fees from Roche, medac, and Sun Pharma. Dr Puig reports personal fees and non-financial support from Sanofi, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc, and Pfizer; grants from Avene; non-financial support from MAVIG, FotoFinder, 3Gen, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, and Merck Sharp & Dohme; grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from ISDIN, La Roche-Posay, and Roche; grants and personal fees from Sun Pharma, Leo Pharma, and Almirall; and personal fees from Ojer Pharma and Pierre Fabre. Dr LaFontaine reports employment at Sanofi and holds shares or stock in the company.

Cannabidiol (CBD) is a naturally occurring non-psychoactive cannabinoid found in Cannabis sativa , commonly known as cannabis or hemp. Although currently available CBD products do not meet the safety standards of most food safety authorities to be approved as a dietary supplement or food additive, CBD has been gaining widespread attention in recent years due to its various potential health benefits. While primarily known for its therapeutic effects in managing epileptic seizures, psychosis, anxiety, (neuropathic) pain, and inflammation, CBD's influence on brain function has also piqued the interest of researchers and individuals seeking to enhance cognitive performance. The primary objective of this review is to gather, synthesize, and consolidate scientifically proven evidence on the impact of CBD on brain function and its therapeutic significance in treating neurological and mental disorders. First, basic background information on CBD, including its biomolecular properties and mechanisms of action is presented. Next, evidence for CBD effects in the human brain is provided followed by a discussion on the potential implications of CBD as a neurotherapeutic agent. The potential effectiveness of CBD in reducing chronic pain is considered but also in reducing the symptoms of various brain disorders such as epilepsy, Alzheimer's, Huntington's and Parkinson's disease. Additionally, the implications of using CBD to manage psychiatric conditions such as psychosis, anxiety and fear, depression, and substance use disorders are explored. An overview of the beneficial effects of CBD on aspects of human behavior, such as sleep, motor control, cognition and memory, is then provided. As CBD products remain largely unregulated, it is crucial to address the ethical concerns associated with their use, including product quality, consistency, and safety. Therefore, this review discusses the need for responsible research and regulation of CBD to ensure its safety and efficacy as a therapeutic agent for brain disorders or to stimulate behavioral and cognitive abilities of healthy individuals., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (Copyright © 2024 Schouten, Dalle, Mantini and Koppo.)