BACKGROUND Immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies have dramatically improved outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma, but approximately half these patients will not have a durable... Show moreBACKGROUND Immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies have dramatically improved outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma, but approximately half these patients will not have a durable benefit. Phase 1-2 trials of adoptive cell therapy with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) have shown promising responses, but data from phase 3 trials are lacking to determine the role of TILs in treating advanced melanoma. METHODS In this phase 3, multicenter, open-label trial, we randomly assigned patients with unresectable stage IIIC or IV melanoma in a 1:1 ratio to receive TIL or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 therapy (ipilimumab at 3 mg per kilogram of body weight). Infusion of at least 5x10(9) TILs was preceded by nonmyeloablative, lymphodepleting chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide plus fludarabine) and followed by high-dose interleukin-2. The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS A total of 168 patients (86% with disease refractory to anti-programmed death 1 treatment) were assigned to receive TILs (84 patients) or ipilimumab (84 patients). In the intention-to-treat population, median progression-free survival was 7.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2 to 13.1) in the TIL group and 3.1 months (95% CI, 3.0 to 4.3) in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.72; P < 0.001); 49% (95% CI, 38 to 60) and 21% (95% CI, 13 to 32) of the patients, respectively, had an objective response. Median overall survival was 25.8 months (95% CI, 18.2 to not reached) in the TIL group and 18.9 months (95% CI, 13.8 to 32.6) in the ipilimumab group. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in all patients who received TILs and in 57% of those who received ipilimumab; in the TIL group, these events were mainly chemotherapy-related myelosuppression. CONCLUSIONS In patients with advanced melanoma, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received TIL therapy than among those who received ipilimumab. Show less
Rohaan, M.W.; Stahlie, E.H.A.; Franke, V.; Zijlker, L.P.; Wilgenhof, S.; Noort, V. van der; ... ; Haanen, J.B.A.G. 2022
Objective: To evaluate the potency of short-term neoadjuvant cytoreductive therapy with dabrafenib plus trametinib (BRAF and MEK inhibitor) to allow for radical surgical resection in patients with... Show moreObjective: To evaluate the potency of short-term neoadjuvant cytoreductive therapy with dabrafenib plus trametinib (BRAF and MEK inhibitor) to allow for radical surgical resection in patients with unresectable locally advanced melanoma. Summary Background Data: Approximately 5% of stage III melanoma patients presents with unresectable locally advanced disease, making standard of care with resection followed by adjuvant systemic therapy impossible. Although neoadjuvant targeted therapy has shown promising results in resectable stage III melanoma, its potency to enable surgical resection in patients with primarily unresectable locally advanced stage III melanoma is still unclear. Methods: In this prospective, single-arm, phase II trial, patients with unresectable BRAF-mutated locally advanced stage IIIC or oligometastatic stage IV melanoma were included. After 8 weeks of treatment with dabrafenib and trametinib, evaluation by positron emission tomography/computed tomography and physical examination were used to assess sufficient downsizing of the tumor to enable resection. The primary objective was the percentage of patients who achieved a radical (R0) resection. Results: Between August 2014 and March 2019, 21 patients (20/21 stage IIIC American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual 7th edition) were included. Planned inclusion of 25 patients was not reached due to slow accrual and changing treatment landscape. Despite this, the predefined endpoint was successfully met. In 18/21 (86%) patients a resection was performed, of which 17 were R0 resections. At a median follow-up of 50 months (interquartile range 37.7-57.1 months), median recurrence-free survival was 9.9 months (95% confidence interval 7.52-not reached) in patients undergoing surgery. Conclusions: This prospective, single-arm, open-label phase II trial, shows neoadjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib as a potent cytoreductive treatment, allowing radical resection of metastases in 17/21 (81%) patients with prior unresectable locally advanced melanoma. Show less
Background: Anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) antibodies (PD1) prolong recurrence-free survival in high-risk resected melanoma; however, approximately 25%-30% of patients recur within 1... Show moreBackground: Anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) antibodies (PD1) prolong recurrence-free survival in high-risk resected melanoma; however, approximately 25%-30% of patients recur within 1 year. This study describes the pattern of recurrence, management and outcomes of patients who recur with adjuvant PD1 therapy.Patients and methods: Consecutive patients from 16 centres who recurred having received adjuvant PD1 therapy for resected stage III/IV melanoma were studied. Recurrence characteristics, management and outcomes were examined; patients with mucosal melanoma were analysed separately.Results: Melanoma recurrence occurred in 147 (17%) of ∼850 patients treated with adjuvant PD1. In those with cutaneous melanoma (n = 136), median time to recurrence was 4.6 months (range 0.3-35.7); 104 (76%) recurred during (ON) adjuvant PD1 after a median 3.2 months and 32 (24%) following (OFF) treatment cessation after a median 12.5 months, including in 21 (15%) who ceased early for toxicity. Fifty-nine (43%) recurred with locoregional disease only and 77 (57%) with distant disease. Of those who recurred locally, 22/59 (37%) subsequently recurred distantly. Eighty-nine (65%) patients received systemic therapy after recurrence. Of those who recurred ON adjuvant PD1, none (0/6) responded to PD1 alone; 8/33 assessable patients (24%) responded to ipilimumab (alone or in combination with PD1) and 18/23 (78%) responded to BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Of those who recurred OFF adjuvant PD1, two out of five (40%) responded to PD1 monotherapy, two out of five (40%) responded to ipilimumab-based therapy and 9/10 (90%) responded to BRAF/MEK inhibitors.Conclusions: Most patients who recur early despite adjuvant PD1 develop distant metastases. In those who recur ON adjuvant PD1, there is minimal activity of further PD1 monotherapy, but ipilimumab (alone or in combination with PD1) and BRAF/MEK inhibitors have clinical utility. Retreatment with PD1 may have activity in select patients who recur OFF PD1. Show less
Introduction: Immunotherapy is regarded as one of the major breakthroughs in cancer treatment. Despite its success, only a subset of patients responds-urging the quest for predictive biomarkers.... Show moreIntroduction: Immunotherapy is regarded as one of the major breakthroughs in cancer treatment. Despite its success, only a subset of patients responds-urging the quest for predictive biomarkers. We hypothesize that artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms can automatically quantify radiographic characteristics that are related to and may therefore act as noninvasive radiomic biomarkers for immunotherapy response.Patients and methods: In this study, we analyzed 1055 primary and metastatic lesions from 203 patients with advanced melanoma and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing anti-PD1 therapy. We carried out an AI-based characterization of each lesion on the pretreatment contrast-enhanced CT imaging data to develop and validate a noninvasive machine learning biomarker capable of distinguishing between immunotherapy responding and nonresponding. To define the biological basis of the radiographic biomarker, we carried out gene set enrichment analysis in an independent dataset of 262 NSCLC patients.Results: The biomarker reached significant performance on NSCLC lesions (up to 0.83 AUC, P < 0.001) and borderline significant for melanoma lymph nodes (0.64 AUC, P = 0.05). Combining these lesion-wide predictions on a patient level, immunotherapy response could be predicted with an AUC of up to 0.76 for both cancer types (P < 0.001), resulting in a 1-year survival difference of 24% (P = 0.02). We found highly significant associations with pathways involved in mitosis, indicating a relationship between increased proliferative potential and preferential response to immunotherapy.Conclusions: These results indicate that radiographic characteristics of lesions on standard-of-care imaging may function as noninvasive biomarkers for response to immunotherapy, and may show utility for improved patient stratification in both neoadjuvant and palliative settings. Show less
For many cancer types, the immune system plays an essential role in their development and growth. Based on these rather novel insights, immunotherapeutic strategies have been developed. In the past... Show moreFor many cancer types, the immune system plays an essential role in their development and growth. Based on these rather novel insights, immunotherapeutic strategies have been developed. In the past decade, immune checkpoint blockade has demonstrated a major breakthrough in cancer treatment and has currently been approved for the treatment of multiple tumor types. Adoptive cell therapy (ACT) with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) or gene-modified T cells expressing novel T cell receptors (TCR) or chimeric antigen receptors (CAR) is another strategy to modify the immune system to recognize tumor cells and thus carry out an anti-tumor effector function. These treatments have shown promising results in various tumor types, and multiple clinical trials are being conducted worldwide to further optimize this treatment modality. Most successful results were obtained in hematological malignancies with the use of CD19-directed CAR T cell therapy and already led to the commercial approval by the FDA. This review provides an overview of the developments in ACT, the associated toxicity, and the future potential of ACT in cancer treatment. Show less
