Search

Purpose: In the phase III CheckMate 238 study, adjuvant nivolumab significantly improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) and distant metastasis-free survival versus ipilimumab in patients with resected stage IIIB–C or stage IV melanoma, with benefit sustained at 4 years. We report updated 5-year efficacy and biomarker findings. Patients and Methods: Patients with resected stage IIIB–C/IV melanoma were stratified by stage and baseline programmed death cell ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses and then every 12 weeks, both intravenously for 1 year until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was RFS. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 62 months, RFS with nivolumab remained superior to ipilimumab (HR = 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–0.86; 5-year rates of 50% vs. 39%). Five-year distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) rates were 58% with nivolumab versus 51% with ipilimumab. Five-year overall survival (OS) rates were 76% with nivolumab and 72% with ipilimumab (75% data maturity: 228 of 302 planned events). Higher levels of tumor mutational burden (TMB), tumor PD-L1, intratumoral CD8+ T cells and IFNγ-associated gene expression signature, and lower levels of peripheral serum C-reactive protein were associated with improved RFS and OS with both nivolumab and ipilimumab, albeit with limited clinically meaningful predictive value. Conclusions: Nivolumab is a proven adjuvant treatment for resected melanoma at high risk of recurrence, with sustained, long-term improvement in RFS and DMFS compared with ipilimumab and high OS rates. Identification of additional biomarkers is needed to better predict treatment outcome.

DATA SUPPLEMENT Adjuvant Nivolumab Versus Ipilimumab in Resected Stage III/IV Melanoma: 5-Year Efficacy and Biomarker Results From CheckMate 238

Purpose:In the phase III CheckMate 238 study, adjuvant nivolumab significantly improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) and distant metastasis-free survival versus ipilimumab in patients with resected stage IIIB–C or stage IV melanoma, with benefit sustained at 4 years. We report updated 5-year efficacy and biomarker findings.Patients and Methods:Patients with resected stage IIIB–C/IV melanoma were stratified by stage and baseline programmed death cell ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses and then every 12 weeks, both intravenously for 1 year until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary endpoint was RFS.Results:At a minimum follow-up of 62 months, RFS with nivolumab remained superior to ipilimumab (HR = 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.60–0.86; 5-year rates of 50% vs. 39%). Five-year distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) rates were 58% with nivolumab versus 51% with ipilimumab. Five-year overall survival (OS) rates were 76% with nivolumab and 72% with ipilimumab (75% data maturity: 228 of 302 planned events). Higher levels of tumor mutational burden (TMB), tumor PD-L1, intratumoral CD8+ T cells and IFNγ-associated gene expression signature, and lower levels of peripheral serum C-reactive protein were associated with improved RFS and OS with both nivolumab and ipilimumab, albeit with limited clinically meaningful predictive value.Conclusions:Nivolumab is a proven adjuvant treatment for resected melanoma at high risk of recurrence, with sustained, long-term improvement in RFS and DMFS compared with ipilimumab and high OS rates. Identification of additional biomarkers is needed to better predict treatment outcome.

Supplemental Table 1. Adverse events observed and adjudicated as possibly, probably or definitely related to therapy (n = 19).

Purpose: Although durable responses can be achieved with tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as imatinib in melanomas harboring KIT mutations, the efficacy of alternative inhibitors after progression to imatinib and the activity of these agents on brain metastases are unknown.Experimental Design: We conducted a phase II study of nilotinib 400 mg twice a day in two cohorts of patients with melanomas harboring KIT mutations or amplification: (A) those refractory or intolerant to a prior KIT inhibitor; and (B) those with brain metastases. The primary endpoint was 4-month disease control rate. Secondary endpoints included response rate, time-to-progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). A Simon two-stage and a single-stage design was planned to assess for the primary endpoint in cohorts A and B, respectively.Results: Twenty patients were enrolled and 19 treated (11 in cohort A; 8 in cohort B). Three patients on cohort A [27%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 8%–56%] and 1 on cohort B (12.5%; 90% CI, 0.6%–47%) achieved the primary endpoint. Two partial responses were observed in cohort A (18.2%; 90% CI, 3%–47%); none were observed in cohort B. The median TTP and OS was 3.3 (90% CI, 2.1–3.9 months) and 9.1 months (90% CI, 4.3–14.2 months), respectively, in all treated patients.Conclusions: Nilotinib may achieve disease control in patients with melanoma harboring KIT alterations and whose disease progressed after imatinib therapy. The efficacy of this agent in KIT-altered melanoma with brain metastasis is limited. Clin Cancer Res; 21(10); 2289–96. ©2015 AACR.

Purpose No standard of care therapy exists for patients with metastatic uveal melanoma who are not HLA-A2:01 positive. The phase 1b, open-label CLEVER study (NCT03408587) evaluated V937 in combination with ipilimumab in patients with uveal melanoma. Methods Adults with advanced uveal melanoma and liver metastases received up to 8 cycles of intravenous V937 (1 × 109 TCID50 per infusion; infusions on days 1, 3, 5, and 8 [cycle 1], then every 3 weeks [Q3W] thereafter [cycles 2–8]) and 4 cycles of intravenous ipilimumab 3 mg/kg Q3W (beginning at cycle 1 day 8). The primary endpoint was safety. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) per immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (irRECIST). Results Eleven patients were enrolled (median age, 65.0 years) and received a median of 6 injections of V937 and 3.5 infusions of ipilimumab. The best overall response was stable disease in 3 patients and progressive disease in 8 patients. All patients exhibited progression per irRECIST, with a 9% irPFS rate at week 26. Ten patients had treatment-related AEs, the most frequent of which were diarrhea (55%), fatigue (45%), and myalgia (36%). Two grade 3 AEs (diarrhea, n = 2) were considered related to ipilimumab; neither was related to V937. Conclusion Although the combination of V937 with ipilimumab had a manageable safety profile, meaningful clinical benefit was not observed in patients with uveal melanoma and liver metastases. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03408587 (January 24, 2018).

Background Black patients are diagnosed with melanoma at a later stage, as compared with their white counterparts. It is unknown if Medicaid expansion might ameliorate this disparity. Methods Using data from the 2016 National Cancer Database, we conducted a retrospective cohort study. The primary objective was to evaluate whether being diagnosed with melanoma at a Medicaid Expansion State (MES) and black race are associated with a late diagnosis of melanoma. Main exposure: Being diagnosed in a MES. Secondary exposure: Race. Main outcome: Odds of Stage IV vs Stages 0-III at diagnosis. Univariate, multivariate logistic regression, and propensity score analyses were conducted to evaluate the potential associations. Sub-group analysis was conducted according to age Results A total of 216,604 patients were included, 40-90 years of age, [Formula: see text] 64 years [SD 12.47]. In univariate analysis, patients diagnosed in MES were 15% less likely (95% CI, 0.81-0.88) to be diagnosed with Stage IV melanoma. Black race (vs white) had 3.04 increased odds (95% CI, 2.56-3.60) of late diagnosis. In multivariate analysis, adjusting for socio-economic confounders, patients Conclusions This study suggests that patients are less likely to be diagnosed with Stage IV melanoma in MES. This beneficial effect is more pronounced among Black minorities.

ImportanceGlioblastoma is the most lethal primary brain cancer. Clinical outcomes for glioblastoma remain poor, and new treatments are needed.ObjectiveTo investigate whether adding autologous tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccine (DCVax-L) to standard of care (SOC) extends survival among patients with glioblastoma.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis phase 3, prospective, externally controlled nonrandomized trial compared overall survival (OS) in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (nGBM) and recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) treated with DCVax-L plus SOC vs contemporaneous matched external control patients treated with SOC. This international, multicenter trial was conducted at 94 sites in 4 countries from August 2007 to November 2015. Data analysis was conducted from October 2020 to September 2021.InterventionsThe active treatment was DCVax-L plus SOC temozolomide. The nGBM external control patients received SOC temozolomide and placebo; the rGBM external controls received approved rGBM therapies.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary and secondary end points compared overall survival (OS) in nGBM and rGBM, respectively, with contemporaneous matched external control populations from the control groups of other formal randomized clinical trials.ResultsA total of 331 patients were enrolled in the trial, with 232 randomized to the DCVax-L group and 99 to the placebo group. Median OS (mOS) for the 232 patients with nGBM receiving DCVax-L was 19.3 (95% CI, 17.5-21.3) months from randomization (22.4 months from surgery) vs 16.5 (95% CI, 16.0-17.5) months from randomization in control patients (HR = 0.80; 98% CI, 0.00-0.94; P = .002). Survival at 48 months from randomization was 15.7% vs 9.9%, and at 60 months, it was 13.0% vs 5.7%. For 64 patients with rGBM receiving DCVax-L, mOS was 13.2 (95% CI, 9.7-16.8) months from relapse vs 7.8 (95% CI, 7.2-8.2) months among control patients (HR, 0.58; 98% CI, 0.00-0.76; P P = .03).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this study, adding DCVax-L to SOC resulted in clinically meaningful and statistically significant extension of survival for patients with both nGBM and rGBM compared with contemporaneous, matched external controls who received SOC alone.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00045968

PURPOSE Combination of antiprogrammed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) plus anti–cytotoxic T-cell lymphocyte-4 (anti-CTLA-4) immunotherapy shows greater response rates (RRs) than anti-PD-1 antibody alone in melanoma, but RR after initial anti-PD-1 and programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) antibody progression awaits robust investigation. Anti-CTLA-4 antibody alone after anti-PD-1/L1 antibody progression has a historical RR of 13%. We report the results of the first prospective clinical trial evaluating ipilimumab 1 mg/kg plus pembrolizumab following progression on anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. METHODS Patients with advanced melanoma who had progressed on anti-PD-1/L1 antibody as immediate prior therapy (including non–anti-CTLA-4 antibody combinations) were eligible. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by pembrolizumab monotherapy. The primary end point was RR by irRECIST. After 35 patients, the trial met the primary end point and was expanded to enroll a total of 70 patients to better estimate the RR. RESULTS Prior treatments included 60 on anti-PD-1 antibody alone and 10 on anti-PD-1/L1 antibody–based combinations. Thirteen patients had progressed in the adjuvant setting. The median length of prior treatment with anti-PD-1/L1 antibody was 4.8 months. Response assessments included five complete and 15 partial responses, making the irRECIST RR 29% among the entire trial population. The median progression-free survival was 5.0 months, and the median overall survival was 24.7 months. The median duration of response was 16.6 months. There was no difference in median time on prior anti-PD1/L1 or time to PD1 + CTLA4 initiation between responders and nonresponders. Grade 3-4 drug-related adverse events occurred in 27% of patients. Responses occurred in PD-L1–negative, non-T-cell–inflamed, and intermediate tumor phenotypes. CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this is the first prospective study in melanoma of pembrolizumab plus low-dose ipilimumab after anti-PD-1/L1 immunotherapy failure, demonstrating significant antitumor activity and tolerability.

PURPOSEEffective treatment options are limited for patients with advanced (metastatic or unresectable) melanoma who progress after immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies. Adoptive cell therapy using tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes has demonstrated efficacy in advanced melanoma. Lifileucel is an autologous, centrally manufactured tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte product.METHODSWe conducted a phase II open-label, single-arm, multicenter study in patients with advanced melanoma who had been previously treated with checkpoint inhibitor(s) and BRAF ± MEK targeted agents. Lifileucel was produced from harvested tumor specimens in central Good Manufacturing Practice facilities using a streamlined 22-day process. Patients received a nonmyeloablative lymphodepletion regimen, a single infusion of lifileucel, and up to six doses of high-dose interleukin-2. The primary end point was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST, version 1.1.RESULTSSixty-six patients received a mean of 3.3 prior therapies (anti–programmed death 1 [PD-1] or programmed death ligand 1 [PD-L1]: 100%; anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein-4: 80%; BRAF ± MEK inhibitor: 23%). The ORR was 36% (95% CI, 25 to 49), with two complete responses and 22 partial responses. Disease control rate was 80% (95% CI, 69 to 89). Median duration of response was not reached after 18.7-month median study follow-up (range, 0.2-34.1 months). In the primary refractory to anti–PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy subset, the ORR and disease control rate were 41% (95% CI, 26 to 57) and 81% (95% CI, 66 to 91), respectively. Safety profile was consistent with known adverse events associated with nonmyeloablative lymphodepletion and interleukin-2.CONCLUSIONLifileucel demonstrated durable responses and addresses a major unmet need in patients with metastatic melanoma with limited treatment options after approved therapy, including the primary refractory to anti–PD-1 or PD-L1 therapy subset.

Immune check point inhibitor(s) have become a main stay of treatment for melanoma regardless of its mutational status. However, not all patients respond to treatment. In fact, only 40-60% respond to treatment. Currently, only PD-L1/PD-1 expression and mutational burden can predict response to treatment. Published data have shown that exosomal PD-L1 is an important factor contributing to response/failure to checkpoint inhibitor treatment. Exosome is known to carry several types of cargoes and is one of the important delivery systems in the body. We have begun to examine the role of exosomal PD-L1, PD-1 in predicting response, and as well as how to overcome drug resistance. We initiated an institutional study in metastatic melanoma patients who underwent immunotherapy treatment (anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA 4 drugs). Blood samples were obtained at baseline and at subsequent treatment. Both serum and plasma exosomes were isolated. Eighteen patients were entered in the study. We have found that 1) Patients with PD-L1 negative tumor can have high exosomal PD-L1 expression, 2) all patients had exosomal PD-L1, and 3) all patients with decreased exosomal PD-L1 expression after treatment showed antitumor response [partial response (PR) or complete response (CR)]. In contrast, patients who had consistently high exosomal PD-L1 expression post-treatment showed no response, and this can be seen after the third cycle of treatment. Patients who achieved CR showed low exosomal PD-L1 and no exosomal PD-1 post-treatment. Importantly, we have also found that exosomes carry antiapoptotic protein and proapoptotic protein, as well as ATG family protein, which is related to autophagy. Whether these proteins also play a role in determining the cell fate in the metastatic sites is not known and will need future investigation. Interestingly, the two patients who showed no response also had high p-AKT. Since traditional anti PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 drugs do not have effect on exosomal PD-L1 and PD-1, we formed a collaboration with Dr. Stephane Roche at Florida Atlantic University, who has designed novel peptides by exploiting the innate plasticity of the PD-1 receptor (pembrolizumab H3 loop mimics). Thus far, we have screened many compounds and have selected 2 compounds for further testing. Together, we have also designed new PD-L1 peptides that can inhibit both PD-L1 and PI3K/AKT pathways simultaneously. Hence one can overcome checkpoint inhibitor resistance due to exosomal PD-L1/PD-1. Supported by grant from Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center and R21GM132754. Citation Format: Pablo Eduardo Puente, Dan Nguyen, Niramol Savaraj, Chunjing Wu, Medhi Wangpaichitr, Stephane Roche, Guangkuan Zhao, Alexis Richaud, Jose Lutzky, Leonel Hernandez Aya, Mecker Moller, Jessica Crystal, Neha Goel, Lynn Feun. Can exosomal cargoes predict checkpoint inhibitor response in melanoma, and can we overcome drug resistance. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 4114.

BackgroundPhase 1/2 dose-escalation and expansion study evaluating varlilumab, a fully human agonist anti-CD27 mAb, with nivolumab in anti-PD-1/L1 naïve, refractory solid tumors.MethodsPhase 1 evaluated the safety of varlilumab (0.1–10 mg/kg) with nivolumab (3 mg/kg) administered once every 2 weeks. Phase 2 evaluated varlilumab regimens (3 mg/kg once every 2 weeks, 3 mg/kg once every 12 weeks, and 0.3 mg/kg once every 4 weeks) with nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks in tumor-specific cohorts. Primary objective was safety; key clinical endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival rate at 12 months (OS12) (glioblastoma (GBM) only). Exploratory objectives included determination of effects on peripheral blood and intratumoral immune signatures.Results175 patients were enrolled (36 in phase 1 and 139 in phase 2). Phase 1 dose-escalation proceeded to the highest varlilumab dose level without determining a maximum tolerated dose. In phase 2, ORR were ovarian 12.5%, squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck 12.5%, colorectal cancer 5%, and renal cell carcinoma 0%; GBM OS12 was 40.9%. Increased tumor PD-L1 and intratumoral T cell infiltration were observed in ovarian cancer patients, with increases of ≥5% associated with better progression-free survival. The most common treatment related adverse events were fatigue (18%), pruritus (16%), and rash (15%).ConclusionVarlilumab and nivolumab were well tolerated, without significant toxicity beyond that expected for each agent alone. Clinical activity was observed in patients that are typically refractory to anti-PD-1 therapy, however, overall was not greater than expected for nivolumab monotherapy. Treatment was associated with proinflammatory changes in the tumor microenvironment, particularly in ovarian cancer where the changes were associated with better clinical outcomes.Trial registration numberNCT02335918.

BackgroundBasal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common malignancy worldwide, yet the management of patients with advanced or metastatic disease is challenging, with limited treatment options. Recently, programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1) inhibition has demonstrated activity in BCC after prior Hedgehog inhibitor treatment.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, retrospective analysis of BCC patients treated with PD-1 inhibitor therapy. We examined the efficacy and safety of PD-1 therapy, as well as clinical and pathological variables in association with outcomes. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and duration of response (DOR) were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methodology. Toxicity was graded per Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V.5.0.ResultsA total of 29 patients with BCC who were treated with PD-1 inhibition were included for analysis, including 20 (69.0%) with locally advanced and 9 (31.0%) with metastatic disease. The objective response rate was 31.0%, with five partial responses (17.2%), and four complete responses (13.8%). Nine patients had stable disease (31.0%), with a disease control rate of 62.1%. The median DOR was not reached. Median PFS was 12.2 months (95% CI 0.0 to 27.4). Median OS was 32.4 months (95% CI 18.1 to 46.7). Two patients (6.9%) developed grade 3 or higher toxicity, while four patients (13.8%) discontinued PD-1 inhibition because of toxicity. Higher platelets (p=0.022) and any grade toxicity (p=0.024) were significantly associated with disease control rate.ConclusionsThe clinical efficacy of PD-1 inhibition among patients with advanced or metastatic BCC in this real-world cohort were comparable to published trial data. Further investigation of PD-1 inhibition is needed to define its optimal role for patients with this disease.

BackgroundThe prognosis for advanced and metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) remains poor for many patients with the disease despite approval of the anti-PD1 antibodies cemiplimab and pembrolizumab.1 2 RP1 is an oncolytic virus (HSV-1) that expresses a fusogenic glycoprotein (GALV-GP R-) and granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF). In preclinical studies, RP1 induced immunogenic tumor cell death and provided potent systemic anti-tumor activity, which is further improved by combining anti-PD-1 therapy.3 Preliminary results from IGNYTE, a phase I/II clinical study of RP1 in combination with nivolumab showed a high rate of deep and durable responses in patients (pts) with CSCC.4 The objective of this trial is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cemiplimab + RP1 versus cemiplimab alone in advanced CSCC.MethodsThis global, multicenter, randomized phase 2 study is enrolling pts with metastatic or unresectable, locally advanced CSCC who are not candidates for/refuse surgery and/or radiotherapy. Key eligibility criteria include no prior treatment with anti-PD1/PD-L1 antibodies or oncolytic viruses. The clinical trial will enroll approximately 180 pts from centers in the EU, Australia, Canada and USA. Pts will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio favoring the RP1 + cemiplimab arm. Pts will receive 350 mg of cemiplimab intravenously (IV) Q3W for up to 108 weeks. In the RP1 + cemiplimab arm, RP1 will be injected intratumorally at a starting RP1 dose of 1 × 10^6 plaque forming units (PFU)/mL alone, followed by up to 7 doses of RP1 at 1 × 10^7 PFU/mL Q3W together with cemiplimab. Pts in the combination arm may receive up to 8 additional RP1 doses. No crossover will be allowed. Pts will be stratified by disease status and prior systemic therapy. Tumor assessments will be performed every 9 weeks. Primary endpoints are overall response rate and complete response rate by blinded independent review. Secondary endpoints include safety, progression free survival, duration of response and overall survival. Exploratory endpoints include viral shedding and biodistribution, and immune biomarker analyses. This trial is currently enrolling pts.Trial RegistrationNCT04050436ReferencesMigden MR, Rischin D, Schmults CD, Guminski A, Hauschild A, Lewis KD, Chung CH, Hernandez-Aya L, Lim AM, Chang ALS, Rabinowits G, Thai AA, Dunn LA, Hughes BGM, Khushalani NI, Modi B, Schadendorf D, Gao B, Seebach F, Li S, Li J, Mathias M, Booth J, Mohan K, Stankevich E, Babiker HM, Brana I, Gil-Martin M, Homsi J, Johnson ML, Moreno V, Niu J, Owonikoko TK, Papadopoulos KP, Yancopoulos GD, Lowy I, Fury MG. PD-1 blockade with cemiplimab in advanced cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2018;379(4):341–351.Grob JJ, Gonzalez R, Basset-Seguin N, Vornicova O, Schachter J, Joshi A, Meyer N, Grange F, Piulats JM, Bauman JR, Zhang P, Gumuscu B, Swaby RF, Hughes BGM. Pembrolizumab monotherapy for recurrent or metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: a single-arm phase II trial (KEYNOTE-629). J Clin Oncol 2020;38(25):2916–2925.Thomas S, Kuncheria L, Roulstone V, Kyula JN, Mansfield D, Bommareddy PK, Smith H, Kaufman HL, Harrington KJ, Coffin RS. Development of a new fusion-enhanced oncolytic immunotherapy platform based on herpes simplex virus type 1. J Immunother Cancer 2019;7(1):214.Middleton M, Aroldi F, Sacco J, Milhem M, Curti B, VanderWalde A, Baum S, Samson A, Pavlick A, Chesney J, Niu J, Rhodes T, Bowles T, Conry R, Olsson-Brown A, Earl Laux D, Kaufman H, Bommareddy P, Deterding A, Samakoglu S, Coffin R, Harrington K. 422 An open-label, multicenter, phase 1/2 clinical trial of RP1, an enhanced potency oncolytic HSV, combined with nivolumab: updated results from the skin cancer cohorts. J Immunother Cancer 2020; 8 (3).Ethics ApprovalThe study was approved by institutional review board or the local ethics committee at each site. Informed consent was obtained from patients before participating into the trial.

BACKGROUND Standard of care (SOC) and patient survival in glioblastoma have changed little in the past 17 years. We evaluated in a phase 3 trial whether adding an autologous tumor lysate-loaded dendritic cell vaccine (murcidencel) to SOC extends survival. Patients and METHODS Newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients were randomized 2:1 to either murcidencel or placebo. Under a crossover design, all patients could receive murcidencel following tumor recurrence. All parties remained blinded regarding treatments before recurrence. Patients thus received murcidencel at new diagnosis (nGBM) or at recurrence (rGBM) following crossover from placebo. The primary and secondary endpoints compare overall survival (OS) with contemporaneous, matched external controls. Four sets of analyses were conducted to ensure rigorous matching of the controls, reduce biases, and confirm the robustness of the results. RESULTS 331 patients were enrolled. With the crossover, 89% received murcidencel. Median OS (mOS) for nGBM patients (n = 232) was 19.3 months from randomization (22.4 months from surgery) with murcidencel vs. 16.5 months from randomization in the controls (HR = 0.80, p = 0.002). Survival at 48 months from randomization was 15.7% vs. 9.9%, and at 60 months was 13% vs. 5.7%. For rGBM (n = 64), mOS was 13.2 months from relapse vs. 7.8 months in the controls (HR = 0.58, p < 0.001). Survival at 24 months post-recurrence was 20.7% vs. 9.6%, and at 30 months post-recurrence was 11.1% vs 5.1%. In nGBM patients with methylated MGMT (n = 90), mOS was 30.2 months from randomization (33 months from surgery) with murcidencel vs. 21.3 months from randomization in the controls (HR = 0.74, p = 0.027). The treatment was well tolerated, with only 5 serious adverse events deemed at least possibly related to the vaccine. CONCLUSION Clinically meaningful and statistically significant survival extension was seen in both nGBM and rGBM patients treated with murcidencel and SOC compared with contemporaneous, matched external controls who received SOC alone.

PURPOSEWe evaluated the activity of intratumoral Coxsackievirus A21 (V937) in 57 patients with unresectable stage IIIC or IV melanoma.PATIENTS AND METHODSIn this multicenter, open-label, phase II study, patients received up to a total V937 dose of 3 × 108TCID50(50% tissue culture infectious dose) in a maximum 4.0-mL volume by intratumoral injection. Ten sets of V937 injections were administered between days 1 and 127 ( NCT01227551 ). Patients who had stable disease or were responding could continue treatment in an extension study ( NCT01636882 ). Response and progression status were based on contrast-enhanced computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or caliper measurement and were categorized using immune-related Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (irRECIST). Other evaluations included monitoring of adverse events and serum levels of V937 and anti-V937 antibody titers. The primary efficacy end point was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate per irRECIST.RESULTSThe primary efficacy end point, 6-month PFS rate per irRECIST, was 38.6% (95% CI, 26.0 to 52.4). Durable response rate (partial or complete response for ≥ 6 months) was 21.1% per irRECIST. Best overall response rate (complete plus partial response) was 38.6% (unconfirmed) and 28.1% (confirmed) per irRECIST. Regression of melanoma was observed in noninjected lesions. Based on Kaplan-Meier estimation, 12-month PFS was 32.9% (95% CI, 19.5 to 46.9) per irRECIST and 12-month overall survival was 75.4% (95% CI, 62.1 to 84.7). No treatment-related grade ≥ 3 adverse events occurred. Viral RNA was detected in serum within 30 minutes of administration. Neutralizing antibody titers increased to > 1:16 in all patients after day 22, without effect on clinical or immunologic response.CONCLUSIONV937 was well tolerated and warrants further investigation for treatment of patients with unresectable melanoma. Studies of combination approaches with V937 and immune checkpoint inhibitors are ongoing.

BackgroundSeveral therapeutic options are now available in the adjuvant melanoma setting, mandating an understanding of their benefit‒risk profiles in order to make informed treatment decisions. Herein we characterize adjuvant nivolumab select (immune-related) treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) and evaluate possible associations between safety and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in the phase III CheckMate 238 trial.MethodsPatients with resected stage IIIB–C or IV melanoma received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (n=452) or ipilimumab 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses and then every 12 weeks (n=453) for up to 1 year or until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. First-occurrence and all-occurrence select TRAEs were analyzed within discrete time intervals: from 0 to 3 months of treatment, from >3–12 months of treatment, and from the last dose (regardless of early or per-protocol treatment discontinuation) to 100 days after the last dose. Possible associations between select TRAEs and RFS were investigated post randomization in 3-month landmark analyses and in Cox model analyses (including a time-varying covariate of select TRAE), within and between treatment groups.ResultsFrom the first nivolumab dose to 100 days after the last dose, first-occurrence select TRAEs were reported in 67.7% (306/452) of patients. First-occurrence select TRAEs were reported most frequently from 0 to 3 months (48.0%), during which the most common were pruritus (15.5%) and diarrhea (15.3%). Most select TRAEs resolved within 6 months. There was no clear association between the occurrence (or not) of select TRAEs and RFS by landmark analysis or by Cox model analysis within treatment arms or comparing nivolumab to the ipilimumab comparator arm.ConclusionResults of this safety analysis of nivolumab in adjuvant melanoma were consistent with its established safety profile. In the discrete time intervals evaluated, most first-occurrence TRAEs occurred early during treatment and resolved. No association between RFS and select TRAEs was evident.Trial registration numberNCT02388906.

Black patients are diagnosed with melanoma at a later stage, as compared with their white counterparts. It is unknown if Medicaid expansion might ameliorate this disparity.Using data from the 2016 National Cancer Database, we conducted a retrospective cohort study. The primary objective was to evaluate whether being diagnosed with melanoma at a Medicaid Expansion State (MES) and black race are associated with a late diagnosis of melanoma. Main exposure: Being diagnosed in a MES. Secondary exposure: Race. Main outcome: Odds of Stage IV vs Stages 0-III at diagnosis. Univariate, multivariate logistic regression, and propensity score analyses were conducted to evaluate the potential associations. Sub-group analysis was conducted according to age 65 or ≥ 65 years.A total of 216,604 patients were included, 40-90 years of age, [Formula: see text] 64 years [SD 12.47]. In univariate analysis, patients diagnosed in MES were 15% less likely (95% CI, 0.81-0.88) to be diagnosed with Stage IV melanoma. Black race (vs white) had 3.04 increased odds (95% CI, 2.56-3.60) of late diagnosis. In multivariate analysis, adjusting for socio-economic confounders, patients 65 years of age were 13% less likely (95% CI, 0.82-0.92) to be diagnosed with Stage IV melanoma. By propensity score analysis, the strength of the associations remained. Black race (vs white) was associated with higher odds (95% CI, 1.91-3.08) of being diagnosed with Stage IV disease. For black patients 65 years, being diagnosed in a state without Medicaid expansion had 2.55 higher odds (95% CI, 1.93-3.38) of being diagnosed with Stage IV melanoma, which decreased to 2.11 odds (95% CI, 1.34-3.33) in MES. The interaction between race and MES was statistically significant (P = 0.008).This study suggests that patients are less likely to be diagnosed with Stage IV melanoma in MES. This beneficial effect is more pronounced among Black minorities.

Background Sixty percent of patients with stage IV melanoma may develop brain metastases, which result in significantly increased morbidity and a poor overall prognosis. Phase 3 studies of melanoma usually exclude patients with untreated brain metastases; therefore, clinical data for intracranial responses to treatments are limited. Methods A multicenter, retrospective case series investigation of consecutive BRAF‐mutant patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) treated with a combination of BRAF inhibitor encorafenib and MEK inhibitor binimetinib was conducted to evaluate the antitumor response. Assessments included the intracranial, extracranial, and global objective response rates (according to the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1); the clinical benefit rate; the time to response; the duration of response; and safety. Results A total of 24 patients with stage IV BRAF‐mutant MBMs treated with encorafenib plus binimetinib in 3 centers in the United States were included. Patients had received a median of 2.5 prior lines of treatment, and 88% had prior treatment with BRAF/MEK inhibitors. The intracranial objective response rate was 33%, and the clinical benefit rate was 63%. The median time to a response was 6 weeks, and the median duration of response was 22 weeks. Among the 21 patients with MBMs and prior BRAF/MEK inhibitor treatment, the intracranial objective response rate was 24%, and the clinical benefit rate was 57%. Similar outcomes were observed for extracranial and global responses. The safety profile for encorafenib plus binimetinib was similar to that observed in patients with melanoma without brain metastases. Conclusions Combination therapy with encorafenib plus binimetinib elicited intracranial activity in patients with BRAF‐mutant MBMs, including patients previously treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Further prospective studies are warranted and ongoing., All clinical trials to date with encorafenib and binimetinib (US Food and Drug Administration–approved in June 2018 for BRAF‐mutated metastatic melanoma) have excluded untreated melanoma brain metastases. This case series provides the first clinical evidence of intracranial activity of the combination of encorafenib plus binimetinib in patients with BRAF‐mutant melanoma with active brain metastases. Intracranial clinical activity is observed for the first time in patients previously treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors, a population that has not been previously investigated.

Uveal melanoma is a rare malignancy that often metastasizes, leading to a 15-year survival rate of 50%. Renewed interest in the understanding of the molecular makeup, biology and clinical characteristics of uveal melanoma has resulted in a flurry of new approaches including targeted therapy, epigenetic modulation and immunotherapy. Because we are now able to select the group of patients most likely to develop metastatic disease, adjuvant therapy has become of paramount importance in the quest to impact outcomes in this disease. Here we review historical and recent relevant data in the adjuvant therapy of uveal melanoma.

Background: Acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM) is a rare melanoma subtype found on the palms, soles and nailbeds. Outcomes are poor for patients with advanced ALM, and novel treatment approaches are needed. Here, we seek to explore the global genomic and transcriptomic landscape of ALM. Methods: A total of 699 primary CM (non-ALM cutaneous melanoma) and 18 primary ALM samples underwent next generation sequencing of DNA (592 Gene Panel, NextSeq, or WES, NovaSeq), and whole transcriptome sequencing (NovaSeq, WTS). Wilcoxon, Fisher’s exact test were used to determine statistical significance (displayed as p value without and q value with multi comparison correction). xCell, HLA subtyping, neoantigen load (HBA: high binding affinity; IBA: intermediate binding affinity; LBA: low binding affinity), Interferon gamma score (IFNγ), MAPK pathway activity score (MPAS), and Innate anti-PD-1 Resistance score (IPRES) were calculated by mRNA expression. Global differentially regulated genes were assessed via limma R package (C: log fold change). Results: The most common alterations in ALM included NRAS (22.2%), NF1 (20.0%), BRAF (11.1%) and CDKN2A (11.1%) mutations, and EMSY (22.2%), ELL (11.1%), MAML2 (11.1%), MRE11(11.1%) and PIK3R2 (11.1%) amplifications. ALM had lower TMB (1.5 v 9 Mut/Mb, q Conclusion: ALM has distinct immunologic features, including upregulation of HLA-G, as well as lower MAPK activation in ALM, compared to CM, highlighting the need for novel therapeutic approaches in the treatment of this rare subtype. Citation Format: Gino K. In, Jun Yin, Phillip Walker, Justin Moser, Joanne Xiu, Kelsey Poorman, Geoffery T. Gibney, Matthew Oberley, Thuy Phung, Leonel F. Hernandez-Aya, Jose Lutzky, Wolfgang Michael Korn, Michael B. Atkins. Comprehensive genomic and transcriptomic profiling of acral lentiginous melanoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 6130.

Background: Activation in RAS pathway has been associated with cancer development. Three RAS family members, including NRAS, KRAS and HRAS are frequently mutated across various cancer types, where NRAS mutations are present in 15-20% of melanomas. NRAS-mutant melanomas (NRASm) have been extensively characterized. However, molecular and clinical implications of HRAS mutations (HRASm) in melanoma are less well understood. Methods: A total of 6329 melanoma samples were subjected to comprehensive molecular profiling at Caris Life Sciences. Analyses included next generation sequencing of DNA (592 Gene Panel, NextSeq; whole exome sequencing, NovaSEQ), RNA (NovaSeq, whole transcriptome sequencing, WTS) and IHC. MPAS scores to evaluate MAPK pathway activation, IFN scores, QuantiSeq, neoantigen load (high, intermediate, low binding affinity: HBA, IBA and LBA) and GSEA were calculated from mRNA expression data. Wilcoxon, Fisher’s exact were used to determined statistical significance (p value without and q value with multi comparison correction; FDR for GSEA). The reference cohort was the entire melanoma cohort (MC). Results: HRASm were identified in 69 (1.09%) of melanoma samples (hotspots mutations: G13, 40%; Q61, 34%; G12, 18% and others, 9%). HRASm and NRASm had different genomic landscapes: HRASm were significantly associated with a higher mutation rate of NF1 (43.2% vs 27.7%, p Conclusions: The genomic landscape of HRASm are significantly different from that of NRASm, implying their distinct roles in tumorigenesis. HRASm also demonstrated higher MAPK activation, suggesting that they could potentially benefit from agents targeting on this pathway. In addition, HRASm displayed more immunogenic features, associated with down-regulation of angiogenesis pathway, revealing a potential higher susceptibility of HRASm to immunotherapy. Citation Format: Leonel F. Hernandez-Aya, Estelamari Rodriguez, Aparna Nallagangula, Jun Yin, Phillip Walker, Joanne Xiu, Justin Moser, Gino K. In, David Spetzler, Geoffery T. Gibney, Matthew Oberley, Thuy Phung, Michael Atkins, Dave S. Hoon, Wolfgang Michael Korn, Jose Lutzky, Gilberto Lopes. Molecular and immunologic characterization of HRAS mutations in a cohort of 6,329 patients with cutaneous melanoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 5625.

TPS9595 Background: There is a need for novel immunotherapies to address the patient population that never or no longer responds to immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI). VV1 is an oncolytic vesicular stomatitis virus engineered to express human interferon beta (IFNβ) to enhance cellular anti-tumor immune responses and tumor selectivity. Phase 1 studies demonstrated VV1 anti-tumor activity in several malignancies with or without a CPI. We are exploring ways to optimize VV1 efficacy in combination with cemiplimab, an anti-PD1 antibody approved for lung, basal and squamous cell skin cancers. Recent clinical data support a 5-fold higher dose of VV1 than was previously explored, and pre-clinical data show synergy between the oncolytic and an anti-CTLA4 antibody, in addition to cemiplimab, supporting exploration of a triplet. What was originally a five-arm study of intravenous (IV) VV1 in combination with IV cemiplimab has been amended to focus on 2 means of optimizing efficacy: use of a higher dose of VV1 and triplet combination in proof-of-concept populations. Methods: We are now enrolling pts with advanced melanoma (after progression on anti-PD1) and plan to include 1st-line NSCLC pts with PD-L1 expression ≥50%. The study is first exploring the preliminary anti-tumor activity, safety, and immunogenic activity of the combination of IV VV1 at a dose of 1.0 x 1011 TCID50 once on D1 followed by IV cemiplimab Q3W starting on D8, or the same regimen with an additional intratumoral injection of VV1 1.0 x 109 TCID50 once on D1 for pts with accessible lesions. Pts receive IV cemiplimab Q3W until confirmed disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Once at least 6 pts have been treated with acceptable safety across the 2 melanoma doublet cohorts using this higher dose of VV1, a 3rd melanoma cohort will open to add a single dose of ipilimumab 50 mg on D1 (all IV triplet). Once 6 melanoma pts have received the triplet safely, the 1st-line NSCLC cohort will open. All cohort decisions are guided by a Data Review Committee. Cohorts will be expanded based on a Simon 2-stage design using a type I error rate of 0.05 and power of 85%. Null ORR is 10% with a target of 35% for 2nd line melanoma and null ORR is 40% in 1st line NSCLC with a target of 70%. Each melanoma cohort will require a response in ≥2 of 10 pts in the 1st stage to add 11 more in the 2nd stage, while NSCLC will first need 5/9 evaluable pts to respond, then an additional 13 to complete the design. Response is assessed at week 7 then Q9W per RECIST v1.1. The study includes serial biopsies in ≥3/10 pts in Stage 1 of each of the IV melanoma cohorts (doublet and triplet therapy), all pts in Stage 2 of these IV melanoma cohorts, and all pts in both Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the IV/IT melanoma cohort, to permit a thorough investigation of the impact of the 3 immunotherapies under investigation. The study is currently ongoing in the USA. Clinical trial information: NCT04291105.

TPS9593 Background: RP1 is an oncolytic virus (HSV-1) that expresses a fusogenic glycoprotein (GALV-GP R-) and granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF). In preclinical studies, RP1 induced immunogenic tumor cell death and provided potent systemic anti-tumor activity, which is further improved by combining anti-PD-1 therapy. The prognosis for advanced and metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) remains poor for many patients despite the adoption of cemiplimab and pembrolizumab as a standard treatment. Preliminary results from IGNYTE, a phase I/II clinical study of RP1 in combination with nivolumab showed a high rate of deep and durable responses in patients (pts) with CSCC. This study is evaluating the efficacy and safety of cemiplimab ± RP1 versus cemiplimab alone in advanced CSCC. Methods: This global, multicenter, randomized phase 2 study is enrolling pts with metastatic or unresectable, locally advanced CSCC who are not candidates for/refuse surgery and/or radiation therapy. Key eligibility criteria include no prior treatment with anti-PD1/PD-L1 antibodies or oncolytic viruses. The clinical trial is enrolling approximately 180 pts from centers in the EU, Australia, Canada, and USA. Pts are randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive combination therapy or monotherapy respectively. Pts receive 350 mg of cemiplimab intravenously (IV) Q3W for up to 108 weeks. In the RP1 + cemiplimab arm, RP1 is injected intratumorally at a starting RP1 dose of 1 × 106 plaque-forming units (PFU)/mL alone, followed by up to 7 doses of RP1 at 1 × 107 PFU/mL Q3W together with the same dose of cemiplimab. Pts in the combination arm may receive up to 8 additional RP1 doses if protocol specific criteria are met. No crossover is allowed. Pts are stratified by disease status (nodal or distant metastatic or locally advanced CSCC) and prior systemic therapy. Tumor assessments are performed every 9 weeks. The dual independent primary endpoints are overall response rate and complete response rate, both by a blinded independent review. Secondary endpoints include safety, progression-free survival, duration of response, and overall survival. Exploratory endpoints include quality of life, and immune biomarker analyses. This trial is currently enrolling pts. Clinical trial information: NCT04050436.

Combining PD-L1 blockade with inhibition of oncogenic mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling may result in long-lasting responses in patients with advanced melanoma. This phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation and -expansion study (NCT02027961) investigated safety, tolerability and preliminary efficacy of durvalumab (anti–PD-L1) combined with dabrafenib (BRAF inhibitor) and trametinib (MEK inhibitor) for patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma (cohort A, n = 26), or durvalumab and trametinib given concomitantly (cohort B, n = 20) or sequentially (cohort C, n = 22) for patients with BRAF-wild type melanoma. Adverse events and treatment discontinuation rates were more common than previously reported for these agents given as monotherapy. Objective responses were observed in 69.2% (cohort A), 20.0% (cohort B) and 31.8% (cohort C) of patients, with evidence of improved tumor immune infiltration and durable responses in a subset of patients with available biopsy samples. In conclusion, combined MAPK inhibition and anti–PD-L1 therapy may provide treatment options for patients with advanced melanoma., Immune checkpoints inhibitors or MAPK inhibitors are currently used as standard of care therapies for patients with advanced melanoma. Here the authors report a phase 1 clinical trial testing the anti-PD-L1 antibody durvalumab in combination with the BRAF inhibitor dafrafenib and the MEK inhibitor trametinib in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma.

Background Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is considered an immunogenic tumor based on the high tumor mutational burden (TMB), increased incidence in immunocompromised patients, and responsiveness to imiquimod, a toll-like receptor agonist therapy. However, anti-PD-1 immunotherapy response rates in patients with advanced BCC appear less than that seen with other advanced cutaneous malignancies. Molecular profiles of BCC tumors were analyzed to determine immune phenotypes and resistance mechanisms in comparison to other anti-PD-1 therapy responsive cutaneous malignancies. Methods Next generation sequencing on DNA (NGS; NextSeq and Novaseq), PD-L1 immunohistochemistry (SP-142 and 28–8 antibody clones, cutoff >5% tumor staining) and mRNA gene expression level (Whole Transcriptome Sequencing, NovaSeq) data from BCC (N=69), melanoma (N=914), and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) tumors (N=165) at Caris Life Sciences (Phoenix, AZ) were analyzed. Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was calculated by counting all non-synonymous missense mutations that had not been previously described as germline alterations. Microenvironment cell population counter1 was used to estimate cell population abundance in the TME. Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was performed on transcriptomes.2 Statistical significance was set at P value or false discovery rate (FDR) Results Of the 69 BCC tumors with NGS data, the most frequent mutations were in PTCH1 (82%), P53 (73%) and ARID1A (42%); additional relevant mutations included SMO (18%), JAK1 (9%), PI3KCA (6%), APC (4%), and CTNNB1 (3%). TMB was significantly greater in BCC compared to melanoma (median 30.5 vs 12 mut/Mb, P Conclusions While BCC tumors demonstrated a high TMB, a markedly lower level of adaptive anti-tumor immunity in comparison to other cutaneous malignancies was observed. T-cell exclusion mechanisms mediated through CAFs and desmoplasia, with upregulation of TGF-beta and angiogenic signaling, may play a role. Further investigation into abrogation of these mechanisms is warranted to develop improved anti-PD-1 based therapies for BCC. References Becht E, Giraldo NA, Lacroix L, Buttard B, Elarouci N, Petitprez F, Selves J, Laurent-Puig P, Sautes-Fridman C, Fridman WH, de Reynies A. Estimating the population abundance of tissue-infiltrating immune and stromal cell populations using gene expression. Genome Biol 2016; 17(1):218. Subramanian A, Tamayo P, Mootha VK, Mukherjee S, Ebert BL, Gillette MA, Paulovich A, Pomeroy SL, Golub TR, Lander ES, Mesirov JP. Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102(43):15545–50.

IMPORTANCE: The optimal sequencing of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy for BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma is not well established. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of BRAF wild-type (WT) or BRAF V600E/K-mutant status and BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) with or without MEK inhibitor (MEKi) therapy with response to pembrolizumab. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study is a post hoc subgroup analysis of pooled data from 3 multinational, multisite studies: KEYNOTE-001 (data cutoff September 1, 2017), KEYNOTE-002 (data cutoff May 30, 2018), and KEYNOTE-006 (data cutoff December 4, 2017). Patients included in this analysis were adults with advanced melanoma and known BRAF V600E/K tumor status who had received pembrolizumab. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received pembrolizumab in dosages of 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks, 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: End points were objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1, and overall survival (OS). Objective response rates, 4-year PFS, and OS rates were compared in the following patient subgroups: BRAF WT vs BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma and BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma with vs without previous treatment with BRAFi with or without MEKi therapy. RESULTS: The overall study population (N = 1558) included 944 men (60.6%) and 614 women (39.4%). The mean (SD) age was 60.0 years (14.0). The ORR was 38.3% (596/1558), 4-year PFS rate was 22.0%, and 4-year OS rate was 36.9%. For patients with BRAF WT (n = 1124) and BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma (n = 434), ORR was 39.8% (n = 447) and 34.3% (n = 149), 4-year PFS rate was 22.9% and 19.8%, and 4-year OS rate was 37.5% and 35.1%, respectively. Patients with BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma who had (n = 271) vs had not (n = 163) previously received BRAFi with or without MEKi therapy had baseline characteristics with worse prognosis; ORR was 28.4% (n = 77) and 44.2% (n = 72), 4-year PFS rate was 15.2% and 27.8%, and 4-year OS rate was 26.9% and 49.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Results of this subgroup analysis support the use of pembrolizumab for treatment of advanced melanoma regardless of BRAF V600E/K mutation status or receipt of prior BRAFi with or without MEKi therapy.

Background Treatment options are limited for patients with advanced melanoma who have progressed on checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies such as BRAF/MEK inhibitors (if BRAF-V600E mutated). Adoptive cell therapy utilizing tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) has shown antitumor efficacy with durable responses in heavily pretreated melanoma patients. Safety and efficacy of lifileucel, a centrally manufactured cryopreserved autologous TIL therapy assessed by both investigator and an independent review committee (IRC), are presented. Methods C-144-01 is a global Phase 2 open-label, multicenter study of the safety and efficacy of lifileucel in patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma. We report on Cohort 2 (N = 66) patients with Stage IIIC/IV unresectable melanoma who received lifileucel. Tumors resected at local institutions were processed in central GMP facilities for TIL production in a 22-day process. Final TIL infusion product was cryopreserved and shipped to sites. Patients received one week of cyclophosphamide/fludarabine preconditioning lymphodepletion, a single lifileucel infusion, followed by up to 6 doses of IL-2. All responses were assessed by RECIST 1.1. Results 66 patients had the following baseline characteristics: 3.3 mean prior therapies (anti-PD1 100%; anti-CTLA-4 80%; BRAF/MEK inhibitor 23%), relatively high tumor burden (106 mm mean target lesion sum of diameters), 44% with liver and/or brain lesions, median LDH 244 U/L. Objective Response Rate (ORR) by investigator was 36.4% (2 CR, 22 PR, 1 previously confirmed PR is now changed to SD) and Disease Control Rate (DCR) of 80.3%. At a median follow up of 9.7 months, median Duration of Response (DOR) has not been reached. The adverse event profile was generally consistent with the underlying advanced disease and the profile of the lymphodepletion and IL-2 regimens. The ORR per IRC was 34.8% (2 CR, 21 PR) and DCR was 72.7%. At a median follow up of 6.9 months, the median IRC DOR has not been reached. Overall concordance rate of investigator and IRC read of response was 89.4%. The concordance compares favorably with literature reports in a metastatic disease.1 Conclusions Lifileucel treatment resulted in a 36.4% ORR in heavily pretreated metastatic melanoma patients with high baseline disease burden who had received prior anti-PD1 and BRAF/MEK inhibitors, if tumor BRAF mutated. The high concordance of 89.4% between investigator and IRC confirms the original assessment of lifileucel efficacy in metastatic melanoma.2 Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the patients and their families for participation in the study. The authors would also like to acknowledge the support and dedication of all investigators and site team members from all participating clinical trial institutions. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials. gov Identifier: NCT02360579 Ethics Approval Ethics Approval This trial was approved by Western Institutional Review Board - IRB Tracking Number: 20160198. References Ghiorghiu DC, et al. Comparison of central and site review of RECIST data in an open randomised phase II trial in advanced melanoma. 10.1594.ecr 2009/C-075. Sarnaik A, et al. Safety and efficacy of cryopreserved autologous tumor infiltrating lymphocyte therapy (LN-144, lifileucel) in advanced metastatic melanoma patients who progressed on multiple prior therapies including anti-PD-1. J Clin Oncol 2019;37:2518–2518.

Background Cancer immunotherapy has been firmly established as a standard of care for patients with advanced and metastatic melanoma. Therapeutic outcomes in clinical trials have resulted in the approval of 11 new drugs and/or combination regimens for patients with melanoma. However, prospective data to support evidence-based clinical decisions with respect to the optimal schedule and sequencing of immunotherapy and targeted agents, how best to manage emerging toxicities and when to stop treatment are not yet available. Methods To address this knowledge gap, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) Melanoma Task Force developed a process for consensus recommendations for physicians treating patients with melanoma integrating evidence-based data, where available, with best expert consensus opinion. The initial consensus statement was published in 2013, and version 2.0 of this report is an update based on a recent meeting of the Task Force and extensive subsequent discussions on new agents, contemporary peer-reviewed literature and emerging clinical data. The Academy of Medicine (formerly Institute of Medicine) clinical practice guidelines were used as a basis for consensus development with an updated literature search for important studies published between 1992 and 2017 and supplemented, as appropriate, by recommendations from Task Force participants. Results The Task Force considered patients with stage II-IV melanoma and here provide consensus recommendations for how they would incorporate the many immunotherapy options into clinical pathways for patients with cutaneous melanoma. Conclusion These clinical guidleines provide physicians and healthcare providers with consensus recommendations for managing melanoma patients electing treatment with tumor immunotherapy. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s40425-018-0362-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundSolid organ transplantation (SOT) has emerged as an important lifesaving procedure for patients with a wide range of end-organ diseases characterized by dysfunction or specific organ function failure. SOT rejection is a major complication requiring patients (pts) to undergo lifelong immunosuppression to prevent allograft rejection.1Skin cancers (SCs) including cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) are common post transplant malignancies.2 SC in SOT pts is generally managed with surgical resection, radiation therapy and chemotherapy or targeted therapy. Use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in SOT recipients has improved outcomes but are associated with the high risk of allograft rejection.3–5 Thus, there is a high unmet need for a safe and effective treatment that also protects pts from allograft rejection. RP1 is an oncolytic virus (HSV-1) that expresses a fusogenic glycoprotein (GALV-GP R-) and granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF). In preclinical studies, RP1 induced immunogenic tumor cell death and provided potent systemic anti-tumor activity6 and clinical data in combination with nivolumab has demonstrated a high rate of deep and durable response in patients with advanced SCs.7 The objective of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of single agent RP1 in kidney and liver transplant recipients with SCs, with focus on CSCC. After determining the safety and tolerability in the initial cohort with kidney and liver transplants the study may also enroll heart and lung transplant recipients.MethodsThis study will enroll up to 65 evaluable allograft transplantation pts with locally advanced or metastatic SCs. Key inclusion criteria are pts with confirmed recurrent, locally advanced or metastatic CSCC and up to 10 pts with non-CSCC SC, stable allograft function and ECOG performance status of ≤1. Pts with prior systemic anti-cancer treatment are allowed. Key exclusion criteria are prior treatment with an oncolytic therapy, active herpetic infections or prior complications of HSV-1 infection and a history of organ graft rejection within 12 months. Pts will receive an initial dose of 1 x 10^6 plaque-forming units (PFU) of RP1. Two weeks later they will receive 1 x 10^7 PFU of RP1 and continue every two weeks until pre-specified study endpoints are met. RP1 will be administered by intra-tumoral injection including through imaging guidance as clinically appropriate. The primary objective of the trial is to assess efficacy determined by ORR and safety of single agent RP1. Additional secondary endpoints include DOR, CR, DCR, PFS and OS.Trial RegistrationNCT04349436ReferencesFrohn C, Fricke L, Puchta JC, Kirchner H. The effect of HLA-C matching on acute renal transplant rejection. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2001;16(2):355–60.Madeleine MM, Patel NS, Plasmeijer EI, Engels EA, Bouwes Bavinck JN, Toland AE, Green AC; the Keratinocyte Carcinoma Consortium (KeraCon) Immunosuppression Working Group. Epidemiology of keratinocyte carcinomas after organ transplantation. Br J Dermatol 2017;177(5):1208–1216.Spain L, Higgins R, Gopalakrishnan K, Turajlic S, Gore M, Larkin J. Acute renal allograft rejection after immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for metastatic melanoma. Ann Oncol 2016;27(6):1135–1137.Herz S, Höfer T, Papapanagiotou M, Leyh JC, Meyenburg S, Schadendorf D, Ugurel S, Roesch A, Livingstone E, Schilling B, Franklin C. Checkpoint inhibitors in chronic kidney failure and an organ transplant recipient. Eur J Cancer 2016;67:66-72.Kittai AS, Oldham H, Cetnar J, Taylor M. Immune checkpoint inhibitors in organ transplant ptss. J Immunother 2017;40(7):277–281.Thomas S, Kuncheria L, Roulstone V, Kyula JN, Mansfield D, Bommareddy PK, Smith H, Kaufman HL, Harrington KJ, Coffin RS. Development of a new fusion-enhanced oncolytic immunotherapy platform based on herpes simplex virus type 1. J Immunother Cancer 2019 10;7(1):214.Middleton M, Aroldi F, Sacco J, Milhem M, Curti B, Vanderwalde A, Baum S, Samson A, Pavlick A, Chesney J, Niu J, Rhodes T, Bowles T, Conry R, Olsson-Brown A, Earl-Laux D, Kaufman H, Bommareddy P, Deterding A, Samakoglu S, Coffin R, Harrington K. 422 An open-label, multicenter, phase 1/2 clinical trial of RP1, an enhanced potency oncolytic HSV, combined with nivolumab: updated results from the skin cancer cohorts. J Immunother Cancer 2020;8(3): doi: 10.1136/jitc-2020-SITC2020.0422Ethics ApprovalThe study was approved by institutional review board or the local ethics committee at each participating site. Informed consent was obtained from patients before participating in the trial.

BackgroundMost patients with advanced melanomas relapse after checkpoint blockade therapy. Thus, immunotherapies are needed that can be applied safely early, in the adjuvant setting. Seviprotimut-L is a vaccine containing human melanoma antigens, plus alum. To assess the efficacy of seviprotimut-L, the Melanoma Antigen Vaccine Immunotherapy Study (MAVIS) was initiated as a three-part multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial. Results from part B1 are reported here.MethodsPatients with AJCC V.7 stage IIB-III cutaneous melanoma after resection were randomized 2:1, with stage stratification (IIB/C, IIIA, IIIB/C), to seviprotimut-L 40 mcg or placebo. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) was the primary endpoint. For an hypothesized HR of 0.625, one-sided alpha of 0.10, and power 80%, target enrollment was 325 patients.ResultsFor randomized patients (n=347), arms were well-balanced, and treatment-emergent adverse events were similar for seviprotimut-L and placebo. For the primary intent-to-treat endpoint of RFS, the estimated HR was 0.881 (95% CI: 0.629 to 1.233), with stratified logrank p=0.46. However, estimated HRs were not uniform over the stage randomized strata, with HRs (95% CIs) for stages IIB/IIC, IIIA, IIIB/IIIC of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.37 to 1.19), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.35 to 1.50), and 1.19 (95% CI: 0.72 to 1.97), respectively. In the stage IIB/IIC stratum, the effect on RFS was greatest for patients ConclusionsSeviprotimut-L is very well tolerated. Exploratory efficacy model estimation supports further study in stage IIB/IIC patients, especially younger patients and those with ulcerated melanomas.Trial registration numberNCT01546571.