Social support and its implications in older, early-stage breast cancer patients in CALGB 49907 (Alliance A171301): Social support in older breast cancer patients

Most studies point to a direct association between social support and better cancer outcomes. This study examined whether baseline social support is associated with better survival and fewer chemotherapy-related adverse events in older, early-stage breast cancer patients

Surveillance of Sentinel Node-Positive Melanoma Patients with Reasons for Exclusion from MSLT-II:Multi-Institutional Propensity Score Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND: In sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma, two randomized trials demonstrated equivalent melanoma-specific survival with nodal surveillance vs completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Patients with microsatellites, extranodal extension (ENE) in the SLN, or >3 positive SLNs constitute a high-risk group largely excluded from the randomized trials, for whom appropriate management remains unknown. STUDY DESIGN: SLN-positive patients with any of the three high-risk features were identified from an international cohort. CLND patients were matched 1:1 with surveillance patients using propensity scores. Risk of any-site recurrence, SLN-basin-only recurrence, and melanoma-specific mortality were compared. RESULTS: Among 1,154 SLN-positive patients, 166 had ENE, microsatellites, and/or >3 positive SLN. At 18.5 months median follow-up, 49% had recurrence (vs 26% in patients without high-risk features, p 3 positive SLN constitute a high-risk group with a 2-fold greater recurrence risk. For those managed with nodal surveillance, SLN-basin recurrences were more frequent, but all-site recurrence and melanoma-specific mortality were comparable to patients treated with CLND. Most recurrences were outside the SLN-basin, supporting use of nodal surveillance for SLN-positive patients with microsatellites, ENE, and/ or >3 positive SLN

Active surveillance of patients who have sentinel node positive melanoma:An international, multi-institution evaluation of adoption and early outcomes after the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy trial II (MSLT-2)

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/168248/1/cncr33483.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/168248/2/cncr33483_am.pd

A phase I oncolytic virus trial with vesicular stomatitis virus expressing human interferon beta and tyrosinase related protein 1 administered intratumorally and intravenously in uveal melanoma: safety, efficacy, and T cell responses

IntroductionMetastatic uveal melanoma (MUM) has a poor prognosis and treatment options are limited. These patients do not typically experience durable responses to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Oncolytic viruses (OV) represent a novel approach to immunotherapy for patients with MUM.MethodsWe developed an OV with a Vesicular Stomatitis Virus (VSV) vector modified to express interferon-beta (IFN-β) and Tyrosinase Related Protein 1 (TYRP1) (VSV-IFNβ-TYRP1), and conducted a Phase 1 clinical trial with a 3 + 3 design in patients with MUM. VSV-IFNβ-TYRP1 was injected into a liver metastasis, then administered on the same day as a single intravenous (IV) infusion. The primary objective was safety. Efficacy was a secondary objective.Results12 patients with previously treated MUM were enrolled. Median follow up was 19.1 months. 4 dose levels (DLs) were evaluated. One patient at DL4 experienced dose limiting toxicities (DLTs), including decreased platelet count (grade 3), increased aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and cytokine release syndrome (CRS). 4 patients had stable disease (SD) and 8 patients had progressive disease (PD). Interferon gamma (IFNγ) ELIspot data showed that more patients developed a T cell response to virus encoded TYRP1 at higher DLs, and a subset of patients also had a response to other melanoma antigens, including gp100, suggesting epitope spreading. 3 of the patients who responded to additional melanoma antigens were next treated with ICIs, and 2 of these patients experienced durable responses.DiscussionOur study found that VSV-IFNβ -TYRP1 can be safely administered via intratumoral (IT) and IV routes in a previously treated population of patients with MUM. Although there were no clear objective radiographic responses to VSV-IFNβ-TYRP1, dose-dependent immunogenicity to TYRP1 and other melanoma antigens was seen

Role of radiotherapy in extracranial metastatic malignant melanoma in the modern era

Background: To assess the role of radiotherapy in metastatic malignant melanoma (MM) patients in modern era. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective study of MM patients treated with radiotherapy at Mayo Clinic from 1999 to 2014. Patients with pre- and post-treatment imaging studies (CT, MRI, and/or PET/CT) were assessed for metastasis failure (MF), regional/distant failure, and overall survival (OS). Results: In 75 MM patients, 56 and 68 lesions were treated with conventional/hypofractionated radiotherapy (CHRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), respectively. The median doses for CHRT and SBRT were 30 Gy and 50 Gy, respectively. 1-year MF was 17% (SBRT 6% vs CHRT 31%, p < 0.01). 1-year regional (5% vs 29%, p < 0.01) and distant progression (75% vs 89%, p < 0.01) were improved with SBRT. Median OS was 15.6 months (CHRT 7.0 vs SBRT 22.9, p < 0.01). Prognostic factors for OS included age ≤55 years (RR 0.25), oligometastatic disease (RR 0.34), SBRT (RR 0.38) and treating all lesions (RR 0.28, all p < 0.01). Conclusions: SBRT for extracranial MM exhibited improved MF compared with CHRT, consistent with intracranial radiosurgery data. Though these data are retrospective and subject to selection bias, our findings support the prudent use of SBRT in a select group of favorable, oligometastatic MM patients, and should be discussed as an alternative to surgery and ablation

Role of radiotherapy in extracranial metastatic malignant melanoma in the modern era

Background: To assess the role of radiotherapy in metastatic malignant melanoma (MM) patients in modern era. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective study of MM patients treated with radiotherapy at Mayo Clinic from 1999 to 2014. Patients with pre- and post-treatment imaging studies (CT, MRI, and/or PET/CT) were assessed for metastasis failure (MF), regional/distant failure, and overall survival (OS). Results: In 75 MM patients, 56 and 68 lesions were treated with conventional/hypofractionated radiotherapy (CHRT) and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), respectively. The median doses for CHRT and SBRT were 30 Gy and 50 Gy, respectively. 1-year MF was 17% (SBRT 6% vs CHRT 31%, p < 0.01). 1-year regional (5% vs 29%, p < 0.01) and distant progression (75% vs 89%, p < 0.01) were improved with SBRT. Median OS was 15.6 months (CHRT 7.0 vs SBRT 22.9, p < 0.01). Prognostic factors for OS included age ≤55 years (RR 0.25), oligometastatic disease (RR 0.34), SBRT (RR 0.38) and treating all lesions (RR 0.28, all p < 0.01). Conclusions: SBRT for extracranial MM exhibited improved MF compared with CHRT, consistent with intracranial radiosurgery data. Though these data are retrospective and subject to selection bias, our findings support the prudent use of SBRT in a select group of favorable, oligometastatic MM patients, and should be discussed as an alternative to surgery and ablation