Search

Contains fulltext : 292870.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Few clinical trials address efficacy of adjuvant systemic treatment in patients with in-transit melanoma (ITM). This study describes adjuvant systemic therapy of ITM patients beyond clinical trials. In this study, we included stage III adjuvant-treated melanoma patients registered in the nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry between July 2018 and December 2020. Patients were divided into three groups: nodal disease only, ITM only and ITM and nodal disease. Recurrence patterns, recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) at 12-months were analyzed. In our study population of 1037 patients, 66.8% had nodal disease only, 16.7% had ITM only and 16.2% had ITM with nodal disease. RFS at 12-months was comparable in the nodal only and ITM only group (72.2% vs70.1%, P = .97) but lower in ITM and nodal disease patients (57.8%; P = .01, P

Since the introduction of BRAF(/MEK) inhibition and immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI), the prognosis of advanced melanoma has greatly improved. Melanoma is known for its remarkably long time to first distant recurrence (TFDR), which can be decades in some patients and is partly attributed to immune-surveillance. We investigated the relationship between TFDR and patient outcomes after systemic treatment for advanced melanoma. We selected patients undergoing first-line systemic therapy for advanced melanoma from the nationwide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. The association between TFDR and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed by Cox proportional hazard regression models. The TFDR was modeled categorically, linearly, and flexibly using restricted cubic splines. Patients received anti-PD-1-based treatment (n = 1844) or BRAF(/MEK) inhibition (n = 1618). For ICI-treated patients with a TFDR 5 years (P = .014). Patients treated with BRAF(/MEK) inhibition with a longer TFDR also had a significantly longer median OS (8.6 months for TFDR 5 years, P = .004). The hazard of dying rapidly decreased with increasing TFDR until approximately 5 years (HR 0.87), after which the hazard of dying further decreased with increasing TFDR, but less strongly (HR 0.82 for a TFDR of 10 years and HR 0.79 for a TFDR of 15 years). Results were similar when stratifying for type of treatment. Advanced melanoma patients with longer TFDR have a prolonged PFS and OS, irrespective of being treated with first-line ICI or targeted therapy.

Background The use of so-called “red flags” may be beneficial in identifying patients with metastatic spinal disease. This study examined the utility and efficacy of these red flags in the referral chain of patients surgically treated for spinal metastases. Methods The referral chains from the onset of symptoms until surgical treatment for all patients receiving surgery for spinal metastases between March 2009 and December 2020 were reconstructed. The documentation of red flags, as defined by the Dutch National Guideline on Metastatic Spinal Disease, was assessed for each healthcare provider involved. Results A total of 389 patients were included in the study. On average, 33.3% of red flags were documented as present, 3.6% were documented as absent, and 63.1% were undocumented. A higher rate of red flags documented as present was associated with a longer time to diagnosis, but a shorter time to definitive treatment by a spine surgeon. Moreover, red flags were documented as present more often in patients who developed neurological symptoms at any point during the referral chain than those who remained neurologically intact. Conclusions The association of red flags with developing neurological deficits highlights their significance in clinical assessment. However, the presence of red flags was not found to decrease delays prior to referral to a spine surgeon, indicating that their relevance is currently not sufficiently recognized by healthcare providers. Raising awareness of symptoms indicative of spinal metastases may expedite timely (surgical) treatment and thus improve treatment outcome.

Recent studies described the safety and clinical utility of combined anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (anti-PD1) checkpoint inhibition with radiotherapy. However, long-term follow-up data are lacking. Abscopal effects have been hypothesized, though clinical proof is still scarce.We analyzed the efficacy and toxicity of combined (stereotactic) radiotherapy and anti-PD1 in consecutive oligoprogressive melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who were irradiated for 1 to 3 progressive metastases during anti-PD-1 in our institute between January 2017 and January 2019 and verified one-dimensional RECIST measurements by volumetric assessments.Out of 361 patients, 11 melanoma and 5 NSCLC patients were included in this series. Radiotherapy was applied after a median of 11 months (range=1-30 months) from the start of anti-PD1 treatment. No increased risk of adverse events for the combined treatments was observed. With a median follow-up of 4.9 years since the start of anti-PD1, 69% of patients were alive. Six of 16 patients had stable disease after a median follow-up of 4.1 years after radiotherapy. Abscopal effects were suspected in three out of 16 patients. However, if volumetric assessment was used, two of these patients already had tumor shrinkage prior to radiotherapy, not detected by one-dimensional measurements.Stereotactic radiotherapy for oligoprogressive disease during PD1-inhibition can induce long-term disease control. Although abscopal effects were suspected in three patients, they were not confirmed with volumetric assessment in two patients. The discrepancy found between one-dimensional and volumetric response assessment argues for including volumetric assessment in further studies.

Contains fulltext : 293454.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) The efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with advanced melanoma that develop brain metastases (BM) remains unpredictable. In this study, we aimed to identify prognostic factors in patients with melanoma BM who are treated with ICIs. Data from advanced melanoma patients with BM treated with ICIs in any line between 2013 and 2020 were obtained from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Patients were included from the time of the treatment of BM with ICIs. Survival tree analysis was performed with clinicopathological parameters as potential classifiers and overall survival (OS) as the response variable. In total, 1278 patients were included. Most patients were treated with ipilimumab-nivolumab combination therapy (45%). The survival tree analysis resulted in 31 subgroups. The median OS ranged from 2.7 months to 35.7 months. The strongest clinical parameter associated with survival in advanced melanoma patients with BM was the serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level. Patients with elevated LDH levels and symptomatic BM had the worst prognosis. The clinicopathological classifiers identified in this study can contribute to optimizing clinical studies and can aid doctors in giving an indication of the patients' survival based on their baseline and disease characteristics.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have changed perspectives for patients with cancer, but come with severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs). To prevent fatality or chronicity, these irAEs are often promptly treated with high-dose immunosuppressants. Until recently, evidence on the effects of irAE management on ICI efficacy has been sparse. As a result, algorithms for irAE management are mostly expert-opinion based and barely consider possible detrimental effects of immunosuppressants on ICI efficacy. However, recent growing evidence suggests that vigorous immunosuppressive management of irAEs comes with unfavourable effects on ICI efficacy and survival. With expansion of the indications of ICIs, evidence-based treatment of irAEs without hampering tumour control becomes more and more important. In this review, we discuss novel evidence from pre-clinical and clinical studies on the effects of different irAE management regimens including corticosteroids, TNF inhibition and tocilizumab on cancer control and survival. We provide recommendations for pre-clinical research, cohort studies and clinical trials that can help clinicians in tailored irAE management, minimising patients’ burden while maintaining ICI efficacy.

Contains fulltext : 287666.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) There is no consensus on the optimal treatment duration of anti-PD-1 for advanced melanoma. The aim of our study was to gain insight into the outcomes of anti-PD-1 discontinuation, the association of treatment duration with progression and anti-PD-1 re-treatment in relapsing patients. Analyses were performed on advanced melanoma patients in the Netherlands who discontinued first-line anti-PD-1 monotherapy in the absence of progressive disease (n = 324). Survival was estimated after anti-PD-1 discontinuation and with a Cox model the association of treatment duration with progression was assessed. At the time of anti-PD-1 discontinuation, 90 (28%) patients had a complete response (CR), 190 (59%) a partial response (PR) and 44 (14%) stable disease (SD). Median treatment duration for patients with CR, PR and SD was 11.2, 11.5 and 7.2 months, respectively. The 24-month progression-free survival and overall survival probabilities for patients with a CR, PR and SD were, respectively, 64% and 88%, 53% and 82%, 31% and 64%. Survival outcomes of patients with a PR and CR were similar when anti-PD-1 discontinuation was not due to adverse events. Having a PR at anti-PD-1 discontinuation and longer time to first response were associated with progression [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.81 (95% confidence interval, CI = 1.11-2.97) and HR = 1.10 (95% CI = 1.02-1.19; per month increase)]. In 17 of the 27 anti-PD-1 re-treated patients (63%), a response was observed. Advanced melanoma patients can have durable remissions after (elective) anti-PD-1 discontinuation.

Neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab induces high pathologic response rates (pRRs) in clinical stage III nodal melanoma, and pathologic response is strongly associated with prolonged relapse-free survival (RFS). The PRADO extension cohort of the OpACIN-neo trial ( NCT02977052 ) addressed the feasibility and effect on clinical outcome of using pathologic response after neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab as a criterion for further treatment personalization. In total, 99 patients with clinical stage IIIb-d nodal melanoma were included and treated with 6 weeks of neoadjuvant ipilimumab 1 mg kg-1 and nivolumab 3 mg kg-1. In patients achieving major pathologic response (MPR, ≤10% viable tumor) in their index lymph node (ILN, the largest lymph node metastasis at baseline), therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND) and adjuvant therapy were omitted. Patients with pathologic partial response (pPR; >10 to ≤50% viable tumor) underwent TLND only, whereas patients with pathologic non-response (pNR; >50% viable tumor) underwent TLND and adjuvant systemic therapy ± synchronous radiotherapy. Primary objectives were confirmation of pRR (ILN, at week 6) of the winner neoadjuvant combination scheme identified in OpACIN-neo; to investigate whether TLND can be safely omitted in patients achieving MPR; and to investigate whether RFS at 24 months can be improved for patients achieving pNR. ILN resection and ILN-response-tailored treatment were feasible. The pRR was 72%, including 61% MPR. Grade 3-4 toxicity within the first 12 weeks was observed in 22 (22%) patients. TLND was omitted in 59 of 60 patients with MPR, resulting in significantly lower surgical morbidity and better quality of life. The 24-month relapse-free survival and distant metastasis-free survival rates were 93% and 98% in patients with MPR, 64% and 64% in patients with pPR, and 71% and 76% in patients with pNR, respectively. These findings provide a strong rationale for randomized clinical trials testing response-directed treatment personalization after neoadjuvant ipilimumab and nivolumab.

The COVID‐19 pandemic had a severe impact on medical care. Our study aims to investigate the impact of COVID‐19 on advanced melanoma care in the Netherlands. We selected patients diagnosed with irresectable stage IIIc and IV melanoma during the first and second COVID‐19 wave and compared them with patients diagnosed within the same time frame in 2018 and 2019. Patients were divided into three geographical regions. We investigated baseline characteristics, time from diagnosis until start of systemic therapy and postponement of anti‐PD‐1 courses. During both waves, fewer patients were diagnosed compared to the control groups. During the first wave, time between diagnosis and start of treatment was significantly longer in the southern region compared to other regions (33 vs 9 and 15 days, P‐value, What's new? Little is known about the effects of COVID‐19 on advanced melanoma care. In this study, the authors examined several quality indicators of care. They observed a worsening in baseline characteristics, longer time between diagnosis and start of treatment and more postponed anti‐PD‐1 antibody courses with differences between the northern, middle and southern regions. Future studies are necessary to assess the long‐term consequences of our observed changes in advanced melanoma care.

Item does not contain fulltext 01 januari 2023

Simple Summary BRAF/MEK therapy and anti-PD-1 therapy have shown better recurrence-free survival of stage III melanoma in patients with BRAF V600 mutations in clinical trials. However, little is known about how these therapies compare to each other in everyday practice. The aim of our study was to describe the toxicity and survival of patients treated with BRAF/MEK therapy and anti-PD-1 therapy in daily practice. We demonstrated that grade >= 3 toxicity occurred in 11.5% of patients and was the most common cause of early treatment discontinuation (71.1%). We also show that at 12 months, patients treated with BRAF/MEK therapy have less progression than those treated with anti-PD-1 therapy. However, this is no longer the case at 18 months. Adjuvant BRAF/MEK- and anti-PD-1 inhibition have significantly improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) compared to placebo in resected stage III BRAF-mutant melanoma. However, data beyond the clinical trial setting are limited. This study describes the toxicity and survival of patients treated with adjuvant BRAF/MEK inhibitors and compares outcomes to adjuvant anti-PD-1. For this study, stage III BRAF V600 mutant cutaneous melanoma patients treated with adjuvant BRAF/MEK-inhibition or anti-PD-1 were identified from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. BRAF/MEK- and anti-PD-1-treated patients were matched based on propensity scores, and RFS at 12 and 18 months were estimated. Between 1 July 2018 and 31 December 2021, 717 patients were identified. Of these, 114 patients with complete records were treated with BRAF/MEK therapy and 532 with anti-PD-1. Comorbidities (p = 0.04) and geographical region (p < 0.01) were associated with treatment choice. In 45.6% of BRAF/MEK-treated patients, treatment was prematurely discontinued. Grade >= 3 toxicity occurred in 11.5% of patients and was the most common cause of early discontinuation (71.1%). At 12 and 18 months, RFS in BRAF/MEK-treated patients was 85% and 70%, compared to 68% and 68% in matched anti-PD-1-treated patients (p = 0.03). In conclusion, comorbidities and geographical region determine the choice of adjuvant treatment in patients with resected stage III BRAF-mutant melanoma. With the currently limited follow-up, BRAF/MEK-treated patients have better RFS at 12 months than matched anti-PD-1-treated patients, but this difference is no longer observed at 18 months. Therefore, longer follow-up data are necessary to estimate long-term effectiveness.

Treatment with targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors has significantly improved survival of patients with advanced melanoma. Unfortunately, a large proportion of patients are either primary non-responders or will eventually develop secondary resistance. In 2017, Nosrati and colleagues published a prediction scale in the British Journal of Cancer, which included five clinical parameters that were associated with lower response to anti-PD-1 treatment; female sex (1 point), age 1]. This study used a derivation cohort of 228 patients treated in California, and a validation cohort of 87 patients treated in Switzerland. The primary outcome measure was best tumour response to treatment evaluated using computed tomography at 12 and 16 weeks after the first administration of anti-PD-1 monotherapy, and every 12 weeks thereafter. The aim of this correspondence is to validate the prediction scale, published by Nosrati and colleagues.

Purpose The introduction of immunotherapy and targeted therapy has drastically improved the life expectancy of patients with advanced cancer. Despite improved survival, obtaining long-term response can be highly distressing and comes with uncertainties that affect several life domains. The aim of this study is to gain a deeper understanding of long-term responders’ lived experiences with obtaining long-term response to immunotherapy or targeted therapy. Methods We conducted an exploratory qualitative study using thematic data analysis. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 17 patients with advanced melanoma or lung cancer who had a confirmed response to or long-term stable disease while on immunotherapy or targeted therapy. Results Long-term responders are living in a twilight zone, where they neither feel like a patient, nor feel healthy. This impacts their self-image, interactions with their social environment, and feelings of uncertainty. Due to their uncertain life perspective, long-term responders are going back and forth between hope and despair, while they are longing for their ‘old’ life, several barriers, such as protective behavior of the social environment, force them to adjust to a life with cancer. Conclusion Long-term responders are facing many challenges, such as searching for a renewed identity, dealing with ongoing uncertainty, and having to adapt to a new normal. This emphasizes the importance of providing this new patient group with tailored information and support. Implications for Cancer Survivors Healthcare professionals can support patients by normalizing their feelings and providing space for varying emotions. Using patient-tailored scan frequencies could help temper fear of progression.

ImportanceManagement of checkpoint inhibitor–induced immune-related adverse events (irAEs) is primarily based on expert opinion. Recent studies have suggested detrimental effects of anti–tumor necrosis factor on checkpoint-inhibitor efficacy.ObjectiveTo determine the association of toxic effect management with progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) in patients with advanced melanoma treated with first-line ipilimumab-nivolumab combination therapy.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis population-based, multicenter cohort study included patients with advanced melanoma experiencing grade 3 and higher irAEs after treatment with first-line ipilimumab and nivolumab between 2015 and 2021. Data were collected from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Median follow-up was 23.6 months.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe PFS, OS, and MSS were analyzed according to toxic effect management regimen. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to assess factors associated with PFS and OS.ResultsOf 771 patients treated with ipilimumab and nivolumab, 350 patients (median [IQR] age, 60.0 [51.0-68.0] years; 206 [58.9%] male) were treated with immunosuppression for severe irAEs. Of these patients, 235 received steroids alone, and 115 received steroids with second-line immunosuppressants. Colitis and hepatitis were the most frequently reported types of toxic effects. Except for type of toxic effect, no statistically significant differences existed at baseline. Median PFS was statistically significantly longer for patients treated with steroids alone compared with patients treated with steroids plus second-line immunosuppressants (11.3 [95% CI, 9.6-19.6] months vs 5.4 [95% CI, 4.5-12.4] months; P = .01). Median OS was also statistically significantly longer for the group receiving steroids alone compared with those receiving steroids plus second-line immunosuppressants (46.1 months [95% CI, 39.0 months-not reached (NR)] vs 22.5 months [95% CI, 36.5 months-NR]; P = .04). Median MSS was also better in the group receiving steroids alone compared with the group receiving steroids plus second-line immunosuppressants (NR [95% CI, 46.1 months-NR] vs 28.8 months [95% CI, 20.5 months-NR]; P = .006). After adjustment for potential confounders, patients treated with steroids plus second-line immunosuppressants showed a trend toward a higher risk of progression (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.00-1.97]; P = .05) and had a higher risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.03-2.30]; P = .04) compared with those receiving steroids alone.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, second-line immunosuppression for irAEs was associated with impaired PFS, OS, and MSS in patients with advanced melanoma treated with first-line ipilimumab and nivolumab. These findings stress the importance of assessing the effects of differential irAE management strategies, not only in patients with melanoma but also other tumor types.

Introduction: In patients with metastatic melanoma, progression of a single tumour lesion (solitary progression) after response to immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) is increasingly treated with local therapy. We evaluated the role of local therapy for solitary progression in melanoma.Patients and methods: Patients with metastatic melanoma treated with ICI between 2010 and 2019 with solitary progression as first progressive event were included from 17 centres in 9 countries. Follow-up and survival are reported from ICI initiation.Results: We identified 294 patients with solitary progression after stable disease in 15%, partial response in 55% and complete response in 30%. The median follow-up was 43 months; the median time to solitary progression was 13 months, and the median time to subsequent progression after treatment of solitary progression (TTSP) was 33 months. The estimated 3-year overall survival (OS) was 79%; median OS was not reached. Treatment consisted of systemic therapy (18%), local therapy (36%), both combined (42%) or active surveillance (4%). In 44% of patients treated for solitary progression, no subsequent progression occurred. For solitary progression during ICI (n = 143), the median TTSP was 29 months. Both TTSP and OS were similar for local therapy, ICI continuation and both combined. For solitary progression post ICI (n = 151), the median TTSP was 35 months. TTSP was higher for ICI recommencement plus local therapy than local therapy or ICI recommencement alone (p = 0.006), without OS differences.Conclusion: Almost half of patients with melanoma treated for solitary progression after initial response to ICI had no subsequent progression. This study suggests that local therapy can benefit patients and is associated with favourable long-term outcomes. & ordf;2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Background Nipple fluid aspiration (NFA) is a technique to acquire nipple aspirate fluid (NAF), which is considered a rich source of breast-specific biomarkers. Originating directly from the mammary ducts, this liquid biopsy can offer insight into the process of carcinogenesis at its earliest stage and therefore could be of added value to the current imaging-based breast cancer screening tools. With that in mind, it is necessary to know how well NFA is tolerated. Aim To evaluate the participants’ tolerability of NFA compared to breast imaging screening methods and blood draws. Materials and methods Three cohorts of women underwent NFA: healthy women (n = 190), women diagnosed with breast cancer (n = 137) and women at high risk of developing breast cancer (n = 48). A 0–10 discomfort score of NFA, mammography, breast MRI and blood draws, was filled in at the study visits, which took place once or annually. Results The median discomfort rate of NFA was 1, which was significantly lower than the median discomfort of mammography and breast MRI (5 and 3, respectively, p p Conclusion This study shows that NFA was well tolerated by healthy women, women diagnosed with breast cancer and high-risk women. This makes NFA a feasible method to pursue as a potential future breast cancer early detection tool, based on resident biomarkers. Trial registration NL41845.041.12, NL57343.041.16 and NL11690.041.06 in trialregister.nl.

Contains fulltext : 232046.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: Anti-PD-1 antibodies and BRAF/MEK inhibitors are the two main groups of systemic therapy in the treatment of BRAF(V600)-mutant advanced melanoma. Until now, data are inconclusive on which therapy to use as first-line treatment. The aim of this study was to use propensity score matching to compare first-line anti-PD-1 monotherapy vs. BRAF/MEK inhibitors in advanced BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma patients. METHODS: We selected patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2017 with advanced melanoma and a known BRAF(V600)-mutation treated with first-line BRAF/MEK inhibitors or anti-PD-1 antibodies, registered in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Patients were matched based on their propensity scores using the nearest neighbour and the optimal matching method. RESULTS: Between 2014 and 2017, a total of 330 and 254 advanced melanoma patients received BRAF/MEK inhibitors and anti-PD-1 monotherapy as first-line systemic therapy. In the matched cohort, patients receiving anti-PD-1 antibodies as a first-line treatment had a higher median and 2-year overall survival compared to patients treated with first-line BRAF/MEK inhibitors, 42.3 months (95% CI: 37.3-NE) vs. 19.8 months (95% CI: 16.7-24.3) and 65.4% (95% CI: 58.1-73.6) vs. 41.7% (95% CI: 34.2-51.0). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that in the matched BRAF(V600)-mutant advanced melanoma patients, anti-PD-1 monotherapy is the preferred first-line treatment in patients with relatively favourable patient and tumour characteristics.

Melanoma of unknown primary (MUP) is considered different from melanoma of known primary (MKP), and it is unclear whether these patients benefit equally from novel therapies. In the current study, characteristics and overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced and metastatic MUP and MKP were compared in the era of novel therapy. Patients were selected from the prospective nation-wide Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR). The following criteria were applied: diagnosis of stage IIIc unresectable or IV cutaneous MKP (cMKP) or MUP between July 2012 and July 2017 and treatment with immune checkpoint inhibition and/or targeted therapy. OS was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. The stratified multivariable Cox regression model was used for adjusted analysis. A total of 2706 patients were eligible including 2321 (85.8%) patients with cMKP and 385 (14.2%) with MUP. In comparative analysis, MUP patients more often presented with advanced and metastatic disease at primary diagnosis with poorer performance status, higher LDH, and central nervous system metastases. In crude analysis, median OS of cMKP or MUP patients was 12 months (interquartile range [IQR] 5 – 44) and 14 months (IQR 5 – not reached), respectively (P = 0.278). In adjusted analysis, OS in MUP patients was superior (hazard rate 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.58–0.85; P

Aim of the study Patients with cancer might have an increased risk for severe outcome of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To identify risk factors associated with a worse outcome of COVID-19, a nationwide registry was developed for patients with cancer and COVID-19. Methods This observational cohort study has been designed as a quality of care registry and is executed by the Dutch Oncology COVID-19 Consortium (DOCC), a nationwide collaboration of oncology physicians in the Netherlands. A questionnaire has been developed to collect pseudonymised patient data on patients’ characteristics, cancer diagnosis, and treatment. All patients with COVID-19 and a cancer diagnosis or treatment in the past 5 years are eligible. Results Between March 27th and May 4th, 442 patients were registered. For this first analysis, 351 patients were included of whom 114 patients died. In multivariable analyses, age ≥65 years (p, Highlights • Patients with cancer might have an increased risk for severe outcome of COVID-19. • This nationwide study investigated risk factors for fatal outcome of COVID-19. • Among 442 registered patients with cancer, 32.3% of patients died of COVID-19. • Haematological malignancy and lung cancer increased the risk of fatal outcome. • These results can guide treatment and vaccination decisions in patients with cancer.

A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-021-01312-1

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can cause immune-related adverse events (irAEs) that range from mild to life-threatening. Age itself does not seem to be a predictor for the occurrence of irAEs. It is unknown whether frailty plays a role in the occurrence of irAEs. Therefore, the authors assessed whether irAEs and their sequelae occur more often in frail patients than in fit patients according to the Geriatric 8 (G8) assessment. Methods: Patients with melanoma aged 70 years and older who were about to start ICI therapy and were screened with the G8 assessment were enrolled in this prospective, observational study. Patients were classified by the G8 as either fit or frail. The primary outcome was the occurrence of grade >= 3 irAEs. Results: In total, 92 patients were included for statistical analyses, 26 (29%) of whom were classified as frail. Grade >= 3 irAEs occurred in 20% of patients. There was no significant difference in the occurrence of grade >= 3 irAEs between fit and frail patients (17% vs 27%; P = .26). Frail patients were admitted to the hospital because of irAEs significantly more often than fit patients (29% vs 54%; P = .02) and showed a trend toward increased length of hospitalization (5 vs 8 days; P = .06) and more frequent use of immunosuppressants or ICI discontinuation for irAEs (36% vs 58%; P = .06). Conclusions: Although frailty appears to be unrelated to the occurrence of severe irAEs, it is an indicator of irAE-related adverse sequelae, such as hospital admission. Screening for frailty can be of added value in the shared decision-making process for older patients who qualify for ICI treatment.

Purpose A major challenge in metastatic spinal disease is timely identification of patients. Left untreated, spinal metastases may lead to gross mechanical instability and/or neurological deficits, often requiring extensive invasive surgical treatment. The aim of this cohort study was to assess the correlation between delayed treatment of patients with spinal metastases and functional performance, quality of life and survival. Methods All patients surgically treated for metastatic spinal disease at a tertiary care facility were included for analysis. Patients who underwent elective surgery were considered as timely treated, whereas patients requiring emergency surgery were considered to be treated in a delayed fashion. EQ-5D scores, KPS scores and mortality rates were compared between the two groups. Results A total of 317 patients (215 timely treated, 102 delayed) had survivorship data available and 202 patients (147 timely treated, 55 delayed) had clinical data available. Multivariate analyses showed delayed treatment was associated with lower EQ-5D and KPS scores and higher mortality rates, independent of confounders such as baseline EQ-5D/KPS scores, neurological status, tumor prognosis and patient age. Conclusions The results from the present study show delayed treatment of patients with symptomatic spinal metastases has both direct and indirect adverse consequences for functional performance status, quality of life and survival. Optimization of referral pattern may accelerate the time to surgical treatment, potentially leading to better quality of life and survival.

Introduction Hyperprogression, characterized by a rapid acceleration in tumor growth, is a novel pattern of progression recently described in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. This study aims to assess the incidence of hyperprogression in patients with advanced melanoma treated with checkpoint inhibitors. Methods Clinical and radiological findings of all advanced melanoma patients who started checkpoint inhibitors between January 2013 and March 2019 in a tertiary academic center in the Netherlands were analyzed. Change in tumor burden was calculated by assessing volumetric tumor growth using the criteria as defined by immune Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Hyperprogression was defined as a time to treatment failure less than 2 months with doubling of tumor burden and a twofold increase in tumor growth rate during treatment. Possible hyperprogression was defined as the presence of the first two criteria in the absence of a pre-baseline scan. Results Out of 206 treatment episodes in 168 patients, 75 were evaluable for hyperprogression and 87 for possible hyperprogression. Hyperprogression was observed in one patient (1.3%) and possible hyperprogression was observed in one patient (1.1%). Conclusion Hyperprogression is rare in melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Our data question if hyperprogression really is a biological entity in metastatic melanoma.

Background: Mucosal melanoma (MM) is rare and has a poor prognosis. Since 2011, new effective treatments are available for advanced melanoma. It is unclear whether patients with mucosal melanoma equally benefit from these new treatments compared with patients with cutaneous melanoma (CM).Methods: Patients with advanced MM and CM diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 were included from a nationwide population-based registry the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Overall survival (OS) was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method (also for a propensity score-matched cohort). A Cox model was used to analyse the association of possible prognostic factors with OS.Results: In total, 120 patients with MM and 2960 patients with CM were included. Median OS was 8.7 months and 14.5 months, respectively. Patients with MM were older (median age 70 versus 65 years) and more often female (60% versus 41%), compared with CM. In total, 77% and 2% of the MM patients were treated with first-line immunotherapy and targeted therapy, respectively, compared with 49% and 33% of the CM patients. In contrast to CM, OS for MM did not improve for patients diagnosed in 2015-2017, compared with 2013-2014. ECOG performance score >= 1 (HR = 1.99 [1.26-3.15; p = 0.003]) and elevated LDH level (HR = 1.63 [0.96-2.76]; p = 0.069) in MM were associated with worse survival.Conclusions: Within the era of immune and targeted therapies, prognosis for patients with advanced MM has not improved as much as for CM. Collaboration is necessary to enlarge sample size for research to improve immunotherapeutic strategies and identify targetable mutations. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Background The Utrecht Symptom Diary (USD) is a Dutch and adapted version of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, a patient‐reported outcome measurement (PROM) tool to asses and monitor symptoms in cancer patients. This study analyses the validity and responsiveness of the USD and the cutoff points to determine the clinical significance of a symptom score. Methods Observational longitudinal cohort study including adult in‐ and outpatients treated in an academic hospital in the Netherlands who completed at least one USD as part of routine care (2012‐2019). The distress thermometer and problem checklist (DT&PC) was used as a reference PROM. Content, construct and criterion validity, responsiveness, and cutoff points are shown with prevalences, area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, Chi‐squared test, Wilcoxon signed‐rank test, and positive and negative predictive values, respectively. Results A total of 3913 patients completed 22 400 USDs. Content validity was confirmed for all added USD items with prevalences of ≥22%. All USD items also present on the DT&PC demonstrated a good criterion validity (ROC >0.8). Construct validity was confirmed for the USD as a whole and for the items dry mouth, dysphagia and well‐being (P, The USD is a valid 12‐item PROM for the most prevalent symptoms in cancer patients, which has content, criterion, and construct validity and detects clinically important changes over time, in both curative and palliative phase.

Contains fulltext : 225250.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) Cutaneous melanoma is a common type of cancer in Adolescents and Young Adults (AYAs, 15-39 years of age). However, AYAs are underrepresented in clinical trials investigating new therapies and the outcomes from these therapies for AYAs are therefore unclear. Using prospectively collected nation-wide data from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR), we compared baseline characteristics, mutational profiles, treatment strategies, grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs), responses and outcomes in AYAs (n = 210) and older adults (n = 3775) who were diagnosed with advanced melanoma between July 2013 and July 2018. Compared to older adults, AYAs were more frequently female (51% versus 40%, p = 0.001), and had a better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG 0 in 54% versus 45%, p = 0.004). BRAF and NRAS mutations were age dependent, with more BRAF V600 mutations in AYAs (68% versus 46%) and more NRAS mutations in older adults (13% versus 21%), p < 0.001. This finding translated in distinct first-line treatment patterns, where AYAs received more initial targeted therapy. Overall, grade 3-4 AE percentages following first-line systemic treatment were similar for AYAs and older adults; anti-PD-1 (7% versus 14%, p = 0.25), anti-CTLA-4 (16% versus 33%, p = 0.12), anti-PD-1 + anti-CTLA-4 (67% versus 56%, p = 0.34) and BRAF/MEK-inhibition (14% versus 23%, p = 0.06). Following anti-CTLA-4 treatment, no AYAs experienced a grade 3-4 colitis, while 17% of the older adults did (p = 0.046). There was no difference in response to treatment between AYAs and older adults. The longer overall survival observed in AYAs (hazard ratio (HR) 0.7; 95% CI 0.6-0.8) was explained by the increased cumulative incidence of non-melanoma related deaths in older adults (sub-distribution HR 2.8; 95% CI 1.5-4.9), calculated by competing risk analysis. The results of our national cohort study show that baseline characteristics and mutational profiles differ between AYAs and older adults with advanced melanoma, leading to different treatment choices made in daily practice. Once treatment is initiated, AYAs and older adults show similar tumor responses and melanoma-specific survival.

Immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) can induce durable responses in patients with advanced malignancies. Three cases of hematological neoplasia following ICI for solid tumors have been reported to date. We present five patients treated at our tertiary referral center between 2017 and 2021 who developed chronic myeloid leukemia (two patients), acute myeloid leukemia, myelodysplastic syndrome and chronic eosinophilic leukemia during or after anti-PD-1-based treatment. Molecular analyses were performed on pre-ICI samples to identify baseline variants in myeloid genes. We hypothesize that PD-1 blockade might accelerate progression to overt myeloid malignancies and discuss potential underlying mechanisms.

Background The objective of this study was to evaluate trends in survival and health care costs in metastatic melanoma in the era of targeted and immunotherapeutic drugs. Materials and methods Data on survival and health care resource use were retrieved from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to estimate overall survival. Health care costs and budget impact were computed by applying unit costs to individual patient resource use. All outcomes were stratified by year of diagnosis. Results Baseline characteristics were balanced across cohort years. The percentage of patients receiving systemic treatment increased from 73% in 2013 to 90% in 2018. Patients received on average 1.85 [standard deviation (SD): 1.14] lines of treatment and 41% of patients received at least two lines of treatment. Median survival increased from 11.8 months in 2013 [95% confidence interval (CI): 10.7-13.7 months] to 21.1 months in 2018 (95% CI: 18.2 months-not reached). Total mean costs were €100 330 (SD: €103 699); systemic treatments accounted for 84% of the total costs. Costs for patients who received systemic treatment [€118 905 (SD: €104 166)] remained reasonably stable over the years even after the introduction of additional (combination of) novel drugs. From mid-2013 to 2018, the total budget impact for all patients was €452.79 million. Conclusion Our study shows a gain in survival in the era of novel targeted and immunotherapeutic drugs. These novel drugs came, however, along with substantial health care costs. Further insights into the cost-effectiveness of the novel drugs are crucial for ensuring value for money in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma., Highlights • The median survival of patients with metastatic melanoma increased from 11.8 months in 2013 to 21.1 months in 2018. • The gain in survival came along with substantial health care costs; health care costs were on average €100 300 per patient. • Costs were much higher for patients with systemic treatment (€118 905) than for patients without systemic treatment (€8316). • Costs for patients who received systemic treatment remained stable even after the introduction of additional novel drugs. • Insights into the cost-effectiveness of the novel drugs are crucial for ensuring value for money in metastatic melanoma.

Simple Summary Nipple aspirate fluid (NAF) is a promising source of markers for detection of breast cancer. NAF can be acquired via the nipple by aspiration using a suction device, which is well tolerated by women. Future possible applications of biomarkers for breast cancer derived from NAF could be (1) as a detection tool to identify the initiation of the cancer development process, (2) as an additional tool next to imaging (mammography and breast magnetic resonance imaging) or (3) as a replacement tool for when imaging is not advisable for women, such as during pregnancy and breastfeeding. With this paper, we present a narrative review and perspectives of NAF research at a glance. Abstract Nipple aspirate fluid (NAF) is an intraductal mammary fluid that, because of its close proximity to and origin from the tissue from which breast cancer originates, is a promising source of biomarkers for early breast cancer detection. NAF can be non-invasively acquired via the nipple by aspiration using a suction device; using oxytocin nasal spray helps increase yield and tolerability. The aspiration procedure is generally experienced as more tolerable than the currently used breast imaging techniques mammography and breast magnetic resonance imaging. Future applications of NAF-derived biomarkers include their use as a tool in the detection of breast carcinogenesis at its earliest stage (before a tumor mass can be seen by imaging), or as a supporting diagnostic tool for imaging, such as when imaging is less reliable (to rule out false positives from imaging) or when imaging is not advisable (such as during pregnancy and breastfeeding). Ongoing clinical studies using NAF samples will likely shed light on NAF’s content and clinical potential. Here, we present a narrative review and perspectives of NAF research at a glance.

Simple Summary: The survival of advanced melanoma patients has improved significantly over the last decade due to the introduction of new systemic therapies. It is unknown whether survival outcomes of advanced melanoma patients differ between melanoma centers in the Netherlands. This research aimed to assess center variation in treatments and 2-year survival probabilities of advanced melanoma patients diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 in the Netherlands. Significant center variation in 2-year survival probabilities of patients diagnosed in 2014-2015 was observed after correcting for case-mix and treatment with new systemic therapies. The different use of new systemic therapies partially explained the observed variation. From 2016 onwards, no significant difference in 2-year survival was observed between centers. This study shows the added value of quality monitoring with a national registry that enables the study of variation between centers.Background: To assure a high quality of care for patients treated in Dutch melanoma centers, hospital variation in treatment patterns and outcomes is evaluated in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. The aim of this study was to assess center variation in treatments and 2-year survival probabilities of patients diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 in the Netherlands. Methods: We selected patients diagnosed between 2013 and 2017 with unresectable IIIC or stage IV melanoma, registered in the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. Centers' performance on 2-year survival was evaluated using Empirical Bayes estimates calculated in a random effects model. Treatment patterns of the centers with the lowest and highest estimates for 2-year survival were compared. Results: For patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2015, significant center variation in 2-year survival probabilities was observed even after correcting for case-mix and treatment with new systemic therapies. The different use of new systemic therapies partially explained the observed variation. From 2016 onwards, no significant difference in 2-year survival was observed between centers. Conclusion: Our data suggest that between 2014 and 2015, after correcting for patient case-mix, significant variation in 2-year survival probabilities between Dutch melanoma centers existed. The use of new systemic therapies could partially explain this variation. In 2013 and between 2016 and 2017, no significant variation between centers existed.

Background: The incidence of metastatic melanoma is increasing in all ages. Multiple trials with targeted drugs and immune checkpoint inhibitors showed improved survival in metastatic melanoma. However, patients aged >_75 years are often under-represented in clinical trials, therefore raising questions on safety and efficacy of treatment. Patients and methods: We analyzed a real-world cohort of 3054 patients with metastatic melanoma stratified for age (_ 75 years), and BRAF status, providing data on treatment strategies, toxicity, and survival. Kaplan Meier curves and Cox Proportional Hazard Models were used to present overall survival (OS) and Melanoma Specific Survival (MSS). Results: Overall, 52.2% of patients were _75 years. BRAF mutated tumors were found less often in patients >_75 years: 34.5% versus 65% in patients _75 years received systemic therapy less frequently compared to their younger counterparts independent of the BRAF status. When receiving treatment, no statistical significant difference in grade 3 or 4 toxicity was observed. Three year Overall Survival rate was 13.7% (9.1-19.3) in patients >_75 years versus 26.7% (23.1-30.4) in patients _75 years are less frequently treated, but when treated there is no statistical significant increase in toxicity and only a borderline statistical significant difference in Melanoma Specific Survival was seen, compared to younger patients. (c) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

In locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, consolidation therapy with durvalumab (an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody) has proven to significantly increase both progression free and overall survival after chemoradiotherapy. Here, we describe a case of acute pneumonitis during durvalumab administration for locally advanced NSCLC, causing persistent symptomatology and steroid treatment to date. To our knowledge, acute-onset pneumonitis during infusion of a PD-L1 inhibitor has not been described previously. This case illustrates that ICI-induced pneumonitis can occur anytime during treatment, especially after chemoradiation.

PURPOSE BRAF/MEK inhibition is a standard of care for patients with BRAF V600E/K–mutated metastatic melanoma. For patients with less frequent BRAF mutations, however, efficacy data are limited. METHODS In the current study, 103 patients with metastatic melanoma with rare, activating non-V600E/K BRAF mutations that were treated with either a BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi), MEK inhibitor (MEKi), or the combination were included. BRAF mutation, patient and disease characteristics, response, and survival data were analyzed. RESULTS Fifty-eight patient tumors (56%) harbored a non-E/K V600 mutation, 38 (37%) a non-V600 mutation, and seven had both V600E and a rare BRAF mutation (7%). The most frequent mutations were V600R (43%; 44 of 103), L597P/Q/R/S (15%; 15 of 103), and K601E (11%; 11 of 103). Most patients had stage IV disease and 42% had elevated lactate dehydrogenase at BRAFi/MEKi initiation. Most patients received combined BRAFi/MEKi (58%) or BRAFi monotherapy (37%). Of the 58 patients with V600 mutations, overall response rate to BRAFi monotherapy and combination BRAFi/MEKi was 27% (six of 22) and 56% (20 of 36), respectively, whereas median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.7 months and 8.0 months, respectively ( P = .002). Of the 38 patients with non-V600 mutations, overall response rate was 0% (zero of 15) to BRAFi, 40% (two of five) to MEKi, and 28% (five of 18) to combination treatment, with a median PFS of 1.8 months versus 3.7 months versus 3.3 months, respectively. Multivariable analyses revealed superior survival (PFS and overall survival) with combination over monotherapy in rare V600 and non-V600 mutated melanoma. CONCLUSION Patients with rare BRAF mutations can respond to targeted therapy, however, efficacy seems to be lower compared with V600E mutated melanoma. Combination BRAFi/MEKi seems to be the best regimen for both V600 and non-V600 mutations. Yet interpretation should be done with care because of the heterogeneity of patients with small sample sizes for some of the reported mutations.

Contains fulltext : 244554.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access)

e21502 Background: The COVID-19 pandemic COVID had a severe impact on medical care in The Netherlands. So far, few studies have investigated the influence of COVID-19 on advanced melanoma care nationwide. This study aims to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on the systemic treatment of unresectable stage III and IV advanced melanoma patients in the Netherlands. Methods: Data were obtained from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry (DMTR), a population-based nationwide registry of all stage III and IV melanoma patients amenable for systemic treatment. We compared two patient groups dependent on the date of the first diagnosis of metastasis: during the first COVID-19 wave (March 15th 2020 until May 22nd 2020), and a control group during the same period one year earlier. Furthermore, we divided patients into three geographical regions within the Netherlands (north, middle and south). These regions were based on the maximum number of hospital admissions for COVID-19 patients during the first wave, using data from the National Intensive Care Evaluation (NICE). COVID-19 incidence was highest in the southern part of The Netherlands. We investigated baseline characteristics, type of systemic therapy, time from diagnosis of the irresectable stage III or IV melanoma until the start of systemic therapy, postponement of anti-PD-1 courses in patients actively being treated during the predefined time periods and progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Results: During the first COVID-19 wave, 104 patients were diagnosed with advanced melanoma versus 166 patients during the control period in 2019. No significant differences were found in patient and tumor characteristics, type of systemic therapies or in the time from diagnosis until the start of systemic therapy, between the different periods. However, during the first wave, the time between diagnosis until the start of treatment was significantly longer in the southern regions as compared to the northern and middle regions (33 vs 9 and 15 days, p-value < 0.05). Anti-PD-1 antibody treatment courses were postponed in 79 patients (15.5%) during the first wave versus four patients (1.1%) in the control period. Significantly more patients had a postponed course in the south during the first wave compared to the middle and northern regions (30.2% vs 2.7% vs 16.7%, p-value < 0.001). With limited follow-up, thus far no significant differences in PFS and OS were found. Conclusions: Advanced melanoma care in the Netherlands was severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. In the south, where COVID-19 incidence was highest in the first wave, the start of systemic treatment for advanced melanoma was more often delayed, and treatment courses were more frequently postponed. Longer follow-up is needed to establish whether this has had an impact on patient outcome.

e21523 Background: Little is known about the outcome of adjuvant therapy in melanoma patients beyond the clinical trial setting. The Dutch Melanoma treatment Registry (DMTR) is a population-based registry, set up in July 2013 to monitor the safety and quality of melanoma care. Since 2019, adjuvant treated melanoma patients have also been registered in the DMTR, following approval and reimbursement of adjuvant treatment in the Netherlands in December 2018. Methods: Analyses were performed on melanoma patients treated with adjuvant anti-PD1 therapy included in the DMTR between 01-07-2018 and 31-12-2019. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze patient-, and treatment characteristics, and death as well as relapse rates. Results: Six hundred and fifty-seven patients treated with adjuvant systemic therapy were included in the DMTR. The majority (94%) of these patients was treated with anti-PD1. Twenty percent of the anti-PD1-treated patients developed grade ≥3 toxicity. Of the 279 patients with a minimum follow-up of one year after start of anti-PD1, 170 (61%) prematurely discontinued therapy. Relapse and death occurred in respectively, 38% and 12% of patients within one year of follow-up. Relapse was significantly more frequent in older patients, with high Breslow thickness and ulcerated melanomas. Conclusions: These data show more frequent premature discontinuation of adjuvant anti-PD1 in daily clinical practice than reported in the registration trials. Moreover, incidence of severe toxicity, relapse and death during adjuvant treatment appears higher in the real-world setting.

9544 Background: Checkpoint inhibitors have strongly improved survival of patients with metastatic melanoma. Trials suggest no differences in outcomes between older and younger patients, but only relatively young patients with a good performance status were included in these trials. The aim of this study was to describe treatment patterns and outcomes of older adults with metastatic melanoma, and to identify predictors of outcome. Methods: We included all patients aged ≥65 years with metastatic melanoma between 2013 and 2020 from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment registry (DMTR), in which detailed information on patients, treatments and outcomes is available. We assessed predictors of grade ≥3 toxicity and 6-months response using logistic regression models, and melanoma-specific and overall survival using Cox regression models. Additionally, we described reasons for hospital admissions and treatment discontinuation. Results: A total of 2216 patients were included. Grade ≥3 toxicity did not increase with age, comorbidity or WHO performance status, in patients treated with monotherapy (anti-PD1 or ipilimumab) or combination treatment. However, patients aged ≥75 were admitted more frequently and discontinued treatment due to toxicity more often. Six months-response rates were similar to previous randomized trials (40.3% and 43.6% in patients aged 65-75 and ≥75 respectively for anti-PD1 treatment) and were not affected by age or comorbidity. Melanoma-specific survival was not affected by age or comorbidity, but age, comorbidity and WHO performance status were associated with overall survival in multivariate analyses. Conclusions: Toxicity, response and melanoma-specific survival were not associated with age or comorbidity status. Treatment with immunotherapy should therefore not be omitted solely based on age or comorbidity. However, the impact of grade I-II toxicity in older patients deserves further study as older patients discontinue treatment more frequently and receive less treatment cycles.[Table: see text]

e21527 Background: Recent data in Japanese patients suggest poor outcomes for anti-PD1 in acral melanoma (AM), with no data available on combination treatment. The objective of this study was to analyze the efficacy of anti-PD1 monotherapy and anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA4 combination therapy in these patients. Methods: Our study population consisted of patients registered in the nationwide prospective Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry between 2014 and 2020. We calculated objective response rate (ORR) in all unresectable stage III and IV AM and nonacral cutaneous melanoma (NAM) patients treated with anti-PD1, and combination anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA4. Progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated for first-line treated patients. A Cox proportional hazard analysis was performed to adjust for potential confounders. Results: Nighty-five AM patients received at least one dose of anti-PD1 monotherapy, of whom 58 (61%) as first-line treatment. ORR was 28% (complete response 11%; partial response 18%). Median PFS and OS in patients with first-line treatment were 5.5 months (95% CI 3.5-8.4) and 14 months (95% CI 9.3-25.0). In patients with NAM (n = 1259) ORR was 48% (complete response 18%; partial response 31%). Six-hundred and eighty-eight (55%) patients received anti-PD1 as first-line treatment. Median PFS was 11.7 months (95% CI 9.1-14.9) and median OS was 24 months (95% CI 20.0-29.3) in these patients. Older age, higher ECOG scores, elevated LDH levels, liver metastasis and brain metastasis were significantly associated with lower OS. After adjustment for covariates, acral subtype remained associated with shorter PFS (Hazard Ratio 1.76, 95% CI 1.25-2.48) and OS (Hazard Ratio 1.70, 95% CI 1.17-2.45). Twenty-four AM patients received at least one dose of anti-PD1 plus anti-CTLA4, of which 15 as first-line treatment. ORR was 25% (complete response 4%; partial response 20%). AM patients treated with first-line combination therapy had a median PFS of 3.8 months (95% CI 2.8-NR) and median OS of 7.63 months (95% CI 6.12-NR). ORR in NAM patients treated with combination therapy (n = 599) was 41% (complete response 8%; partial response 33%). Forty-six percent of these patients were treated in the first-line, with a median PFS of 9.7 months (95% CI 6.6-17.1) and median OS of 21.3 months (95% CI 14.6-36.5). Elevated LDH levels and the presence of BRAF mutation were significantly associated with lower OS. No significant association was found between acral subtype and PFS, or OS after adjustment for covariates. Conclusions: This study shows limited efficacy of anti-PD1 for advanced AM, with clinically relevant lower response rates compared to nonacral melanoma types. Although caution is needed because of relatively small numbers and the observational nature of our study, our data confirm limited efficacy of checkpoint inhibition in AM.

9558 Background: The ability to analyze tumor mutation profiles has altered the oncology treatment landscape over the past decades. However, little is known about the effect of specific gene mutations on the response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with advanced melanoma. Methods: All unresectable stage IIIc and IV patients with BRAF V600, NRAS mutations and BRAF and NRAS wild-type patients treated with anti-PD-1 or ipilimumab-nivolumab between 2012 and 2020 were included from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry, a nationwide population-based registry. Outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). A Cox model was used to analyze the association of possible prognostic factors with PFS and OS. Results: In total 1358 first-line patients treated with anti-PD-1 and 524 treated with ipilimumab-nivolumab were included. Median follow-up was 25.6 months for anti-PD-1 treated patients and 16.3 months for ipilimumab-nivolumab treated patients. The highest ORR, in first-line, to anti-PD-1 was in patients who were BRAF and NRAS wildtype (50.2%), compared to BRAF V600 (43.8%) and NRAS mutated patients (49.8%). ORR to ipilimumab-nivolumab was highest in NRAS mutated patients (44.9%), while ORR was 39.5% for BRAF mutated patients and 40.3% for wild-type patients. Median PFS in the anti-PD-1 treatment regimen was significantly higher (p = 0.049) for double wild-type patients (16.7 months) patients than for BRAF mutated patients (9.9 months) and NRAS mutated patients (11.3 months). PFS was not significantly different (p = 0.11) in the ipilimumab-nivolumab treatment cohort, with a median PFS of 6.5 months for the wild-type group, 10.8 months for the BRAF group, and 9.1 months for the NRAS group. In the anti-PD-1 treated patients, median OS was significantly higher (p < 0.001) for BRAF mutated patients (32.8 months) compared to NRAS (21.0 months) and wild-type patients (23.0 months). For ipilimumab-nivolumab treated patients, median OS was also significantly higher (p < 0.001) for BRAF mutated patients (36.5 months) than for NRAS mutated patients (11.8 months) and wild-type patients (16.1 months). After adjustment for potential confounders, the presence of a BRAF mutation remained associated with lower PFS in the anti-PD-1 treatment cohort and better OS in both treatment cohorts. Higher age, higher ECOG score, elevated LDH levels, liver metastases and brain metastases were associated with worse survival. Conclusions: PFS in first-line PD-1 was significantly higher for double wild-type patients than for BRAF mutant and NRAS mutant patients. PFS in ipilimumab-nivolumab treated patients did not significantly differ between BRAF mutant, NRAS mutant and double wild-type patients. OS was significantly higher for BRAF mutant patients in both treatment strata, which is probably the result of the subsequent BRAF/MEK-inhibition treatment option in this group.