Performance of long-term CT and PET/CT surveillance for detection of distant recurrence in patients with resected stage IIIA-D melanoma

Background Follow-up for patients with resected stage IIIA–D melanoma may include computed tomography (CT) or positron emission tomography (PET)/CT imaging to identify distant metastases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the test performance over follow-up time, of structured 6- and 12-monthly follow-up imaging schedules in these patients. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of consecutive resected stage IIIA–D melanoma patients from Melanoma Institute Australia (2000–2017). Patients were followed until a confirmed diagnosis of distant metastasis, end of follow-up schedule, or death. Test accuracy was evaluated by cross-classifying the results of the test against a composite reference standard of histopathology, cytology, radiologic imaging, and/or clinical follow-up, and then quantified longitudinally using logistic regression models with random effects. Results In total, 1373 imaging tests were performed among 332 patients. Distant metastases were detected in 110 (33%) patients during a median follow-up of 61 months (interquartile range 38–86), and first detected by imaging in 86 (78%) patients. 152 (68%) patients had at least one false-positive result. Sensitivity of the schedule over 5 years was 79% [95% confidence interval (CI) 70–86%] and specificity was 88% (95% CI 86–90%). There was no evidence of a significant difference in test performance over follow-up time or by American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) substage. The positive predictive value ranged between 33 and 48% over follow-up time, reflecting a ratio of 1:2 false-positives per true-positive finding. Conclusions Regular 6- or 12-monthly surveillance imaging using CT or PET/CT has reasonable and consistent sensitivity and specificity over 5-year follow-up for resected stage IIIA–D melanoma patients. These data are useful when discussing the risks and benefits of long-term follow-up

Perspectives and Experiences of Patient-Led Melanoma Surveillance Using Digital Technologies From Clinicians Involved in the MEL-SELF Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial: Qualitative Interview Study

The growing number of melanoma patients who need long-term surveillance increasingly exceeds the capacity of the dermatology workforce, particularly outside of metropolitan areas. Digital technologies that enable patients to perform skin self-examination and send dermoscopic images of lesions of concern to a dermatologist (mobile teledermoscopy) are a potential solution. If these technologies and the remote delivery of melanoma surveillance are to be incorporated into routine clinical practice, they need to be accepted by clinicians providing melanoma care, such as dermatologists and general practitioners (GPs). Objective: This study aimed to explore perceptions of potential benefits and harms of mobile teledermoscopy, as well as experiences with this technology, among clinicians participating in a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) of patient-led melanoma surveillance. Methods: This qualitative study was nested within a pilot RCT conducted at dermatologist and skin specialist GP–led melanoma clinics in New South Wales, Australia. We conducted semistructured interviews with 8 of the total 11 clinicians who were involved in the trial, including 4 dermatologists (3 provided teledermatology, 2 were treating clinicians), 1 surgical oncologist, and 3 GPs with qualifications in skin cancer screening (the remaining 3 GPs declined an interview). Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data with reference to the concepts of “medical overuse” and “high-value care.

Phylogenetic analyses of melanoma reveal complex patterns of metastatic dissemination.

Melanoma is difficult to treat once it becomes metastatic. However, the precise ancestral relationship between primary tumors and their metastases is not well understood. We performed whole-exome sequencing of primary melanomas and multiple matched metastases from eight patients to elucidate their phylogenetic relationships. In six of eight patients, we found that genetically distinct cell populations in the primary tumor metastasized in parallel to different anatomic sites, rather than sequentially from one site to the next. In five of these six patients, the metastasizing cells had themselves arisen from a common parental subpopulation in the primary, indicating that the ability to establish metastases is a late-evolving trait. Interestingly, we discovered that individual metastases were sometimes founded by multiple cell populations of the primary that were genetically distinct. Such establishment of metastases by multiple tumor subpopulations could help explain why identical resistance variants are identified in different sites after initial response to systemic therapy. One primary tumor harbored two subclones with different oncogenic mutations in CTNNB1, which were both propagated to the same metastasis, raising the possibility that activation of wingless-type mouse mammary tumor virus integration site (WNT) signaling may be involved, as has been suggested by experimental models

Phylogenetic analyses of melanoma reveal complex patterns of metastatic dissemination.

Melanoma is difficult to treat once it becomes metastatic. However, the precise ancestral relationship between primary tumors and their metastases is not well understood. We performed whole-exome sequencing of primary melanomas and multiple matched metastases from eight patients to elucidate their phylogenetic relationships. In six of eight patients, we found that genetically distinct cell populations in the primary tumor metastasized in parallel to different anatomic sites, rather than sequentially from one site to the next. In five of these six patients, the metastasizing cells had themselves arisen from a common parental subpopulation in the primary, indicating that the ability to establish metastases is a late-evolving trait. Interestingly, we discovered that individual metastases were sometimes founded by multiple cell populations of the primary that were genetically distinct. Such establishment of metastases by multiple tumor subpopulations could help explain why identical resistance variants are identified in different sites after initial response to systemic therapy. One primary tumor harbored two subclones with different oncogenic mutations in CTNNB1, which were both propagated to the same metastasis, raising the possibility that activation of wingless-type mouse mammary tumor virus integration site (WNT) signaling may be involved, as has been suggested by experimental models

Phylogenetic analyses of melanoma reveal complex patterns of metastatic dissemination.

Melanoma is difficult to treat once it becomes metastatic. However, the precise ancestral relationship between primary tumors and their metastases is not well understood. We performed whole-exome sequencing of primary melanomas and multiple matched metastases from eight patients to elucidate their phylogenetic relationships. In six of eight patients, we found that genetically distinct cell populations in the primary tumor metastasized in parallel to different anatomic sites, rather than sequentially from one site to the next. In five of these six patients, the metastasizing cells had themselves arisen from a common parental subpopulation in the primary, indicating that the ability to establish metastases is a late-evolving trait. Interestingly, we discovered that individual metastases were sometimes founded by multiple cell populations of the primary that were genetically distinct. Such establishment of metastases by multiple tumor subpopulations could help explain why identical resistance variants are identified in different sites after initial response to systemic therapy. One primary tumor harbored two subclones with different oncogenic mutations in CTNNB1, which were both propagated to the same metastasis, raising the possibility that activation of wingless-type mouse mammary tumor virus integration site (WNT) signaling may be involved, as has been suggested by experimental models

The efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade for melanoma in-transit with or without nodal metastases - A multicenter cohort study.

PURPOSE Guidelines addressing melanoma in-transit metastasis (ITM) recommend immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) as a first-line treatment option, despite the fact that there are no efficacy data available from prospective trials for exclusively ITM disease. The study aims to analyze the outcome of patients with ITM treated with ICI based on data from a large cohort of patients treated at international referral clinics. METHODS A multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients treated between January 2015 and December 2020 from Australia, Europe, and the USA, evaluating treatment with ICI for ITM with or without nodal involvement (AJCC8 N1c, N2c, and N3c) and without distant disease (M0). Treatment was with PD-1 inhibitor (nivolumab or pembrolizumab) and/or CTLA-4 inhibitor (ipilimumab). The response was evaluated according to the RECIST criteria modified for cutaneous lesions. RESULTS A total of 287 patients from 21 institutions in eight countries were included. Immunotherapy was first-line treatment in 64 (22%) patients. PD-1 or CTLA-4 inhibitor monotherapy was given in 233 (81%) and 23 (8%) patients, respectively, while 31 (11%) received both in combination. The overall response rate was 56%, complete response (CR) rate was 36%, and progressive disease (PD) rate was 32%. Median PFS was ten months (95% CI 7.4-12.6 months) with a one-, two-, and five-year PFS rate of 48%, 33%, and 18%, respectively. Median MSS was not reached, and the one-, two-, and five-year MSS rates were 95%, 83%, and 71%, respectively. CONCLUSION Systemic immunotherapy is an effective treatment for melanoma ITM. Future studies should evaluate the role of systemic immunotherapy in the context of multimodality therapy, including locoregional treatments such as surgery, intralesional therapy, and regional therapies

Adjuvant therapy with high dose vitamin D following primary treatment of melanoma at high risk of recurrence: a placebo controlled randomised phase II trial (ANZMTG 02.09 Mel-D)

BACKGROUND: Patients with primary cutaneous melanomas that are ulcerated and >2 mm in thickness, >4 mm in thickness and those with nodal micrometastases at diagnosis, have few options for adjuvant treatment. Recent studies have suggested a role for vitamin D to delay melanoma recurrence and improve overall prognosis. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a pilot placebo-controlled randomised phase II trial to assess the feasibility, safety and toxicity of an oral loading dose of Vitamin D (500,000 IU) followed by an oral dose of 50,000 IU of Vitamin D monthly for 2 years in patients who have been treated for cutaneous melanoma by wide excision of the primary. Patients aged 18 – 79 years who have completed primary surgical treatment and have Stage IIb, IIc, IIIa (N1a, N2a) or IIIb (N1a, N2a) disease are eligible for randomisation 2:1 to active treatment or placebo. The primary endpoints are sufficiency of dose, adherence to study medication and safety of the drug. The secondary endpoints are participation and progression free survival. The study has been approved by the Ethics Review Committee (RPAH Zone) of the Sydney Local Health District, protocol number X09-0138. DISCUSSION: Effective, non-toxic adjuvant therapy for high risk primary melanoma is not currently available. Favorable outcomes of this phase II study will form the basis for a multi-centre phase III study to assess whether the addition of oral high-dose vitamin D therapy in patients who have completed primary treatment for melanoma and are at high risk of recurrence will: 1. prolong time to recurrence within 5 years; 2. improve overall survival at 5 years and 3. be both safe and tolerable. 62 patients have been randomised since the study commenced in December 2010. Target accrual for the study has been met with 75 patients randomised between December 2010 and August 2014. The Mel-D trial is conducted by the Australia and New Zealand Melanoma Trials Group (ANZMTG 02.09) TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN1260900035121