Chemotherapy in Cutaneous Melanoma: Is There Still a Role?

Purpose of review: In the preceding decade, the management of metastatic cutaneous melanoma has been revolutionised with the development of highly effective therapies including immune checkpoint inhibitors (specifically CTLA-4 and PD-1 inhibitors) and targeted therapies (BRAF and MEK inhibitors). The role of chemotherapy in the contemporary management of melanoma is undefined. Recent findings: Extended analyses highlight substantially improved 5-year survival rates of approximately 50% in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with first-line therapies. However, most patients will progress on these first-line treatments. Sequencing of chemotherapy following failure of targeted and immunotherapies is associated with low objective response rates and short progression-free survival, and thus, meaningful benefits to patients are minimal. Chemotherapy has limited utility in the contemporary management of cutaneous melanoma (with a few exceptions, discussed herein) and should not be the standard treatment sequence following failure of first-line therapies. Instead, enrolment onto clinical trials should be standard-of-care in these patients. Summary: Chemotherapy has limited utility in the contemporary management of cutaneous melanoma (with a few exceptions, discussed herein) and should not be the standard treatment sequence following failure of first-line therapies. Instead, enrolment onto clinical trials should be standard-of-care in these patients

Clinical experience with combination BRAF/MEK inhibitors for melanoma with brain metastases: a real-life multicenter study

BRAF and MEK kinase inhibitors can be highly effective in treating BRAF-mutant melanomas, but their safety and activity in patients with active/symptomatic brain metastases are unclear. We sought to shed light on this open clinical question. We conducted a multicenter retrospective study on real-life patients with melanoma and active brain metastases treated with combination BRAF/MEK inhibitors. A total of 65 patients were included (38 men and 27 women; median age: 49 years). Of them, 53 patients received dabrafenib/trametinib, 10 received vemurafenib/cobimetinib, one received encorafenib/binimetinib, and one received vemurafenib/trametinib. We did not observe any unexpected treatment-related safety signals in our cohort. Overall, 17 patients continued on therapy through the cutoff date. After initiation of therapy, steroid dose could be decreased in 22 of 33 patients (11 tapered off entirely), anticonvulsants were stopped in four of 21, and narcotics were stopped in four of 12. Median progression-free survival from the start of therapy was 5.3 months (95% confidence interval: 3.6-6.1), and median overall survival was 9.5 months (95% confidence interval: 7.7-13.5). A total of 20 patients were surviving at the cutoff date. Univariate analysis of age, sex, ulceration status, thickness, stage, location, or lactate dehydrogenase did not reveal significant predictors of progression-free survival or overall survival within our cohort, but multivariate analysis suggested that older age, lower risk location of original lesion, and nodular melanoma are poor prognostic indicators. Combination therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors is a viable treatment option for patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma and brain metastases, but further studies should help to define the optimal treatment approach in this population

The price of tumor control

Ipilimumab, a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) blocking antibody, has been approved for the treatment of metastatic melanoma and induces adverse events (AE) in up to 64% of patients. Treatment algorithms for the management of common ipilimumab-induced AEs have lead to a reduction of morbidity, e.g. due to bowel perforations. However, the spectrum of less common AEs is expanding as ipilimumab is increasingly applied. Stringent recognition and management of AEs will reduce drug-induced morbidity and costs, and thus, positively impact the cost-benefit ratio of the drug. To facilitate timely identification and adequate management data on rare AEs were analyzed at 19 skin cancer centers. Patient files (n = 752) were screened for rare ipilimumab-associated AEs. A total of 120 AEs, some of which were life-threatening or even fatal, were reported and summarized by organ system describing the most instructive cases in detail. Previously unreported AEs like drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), granulomatous inflammation of the central nervous system, and aseptic meningitis, were documented. Obstacles included patientś delay in reporting symptoms and the differentiation of steroid-induced from ipilimumab-induced AEs under steroid treatment. Importantly, response rate was high in this patient population with tumor regression in 30.9% and a tumor control rate of 61.8% in stage IV melanoma patients despite the fact that some patients received only two of four recommended ipilimumab infusions. This suggests that ipilimumab-induced antitumor responses can have an early onset and that severe autoimmune reactions may reflect overtreatment. The wide spectrum of ipilimumab-induced AEs demands doctor and patient awareness to reduce morbidity and treatment costs and true ipilimumab success is dictated by both objective tumor responses and controlling severe side effects

The price of tumor control: an analysis of rare side effects of anti-CTLA-4 therapy in metastatic melanoma from the ipilimumab network

Background: Ipilimumab, a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) blocking antibody, has been approved for the treatment of metastatic melanoma and induces adverse events (AE) in up to 64% of patients. Treatment algorithms for the management of common ipilimumab-induced AEs have lead to a reduction of morbidity, e.g. due to bowel perforations. However, the spectrum of less common AEs is expanding as ipilimumab is increasingly applied. Stringent recognition and management of AEs will reduce drug-induced morbidity and costs, and thus, positively impact the cost-benefit ratio of the drug. To facilitate timely identification and adequate management data on rare AEs were analyzed at 19 skin cancer centers. Methods and Findings: Patient files (n = 752) were screened for rare ipilimumab-associated AEs. A total of 120 AEs, some of which were life-threatening or even fatal, were reported and summarized by organ system describing the most instructive cases in detail. Previously unreported AEs like drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), granulomatous inflammation of the central nervous system, and aseptic meningitis, were documented. Obstacles included patientś delay in reporting symptoms and the differentiation of steroid-induced from ipilimumab-induced AEs under steroid treatment. Importantly, response rate was high in this patient population with tumor regression in 30.9% and a tumor control rate of 61.8% in stage IV melanoma patients despite the fact that some patients received only two of four recommended ipilimumab infusions. This suggests that ipilimumab-induced antitumor responses can have an early onset and that severe autoimmune reactions may reflect overtreatment. Conclusion: The wide spectrum of ipilimumab-induced AEs demands doctor and patient awareness to reduce morbidity and treatment costs and true ipilimumab success is dictated by both objective tumor responses and controlling severe side effects

Malignes Melanom, gezielte Therapie und Immuntherapie – Der Weg zum Erfolg

Dank der Zulassung neuer Therapieansätze konnte die Behandlung des fortgeschrittenen Melanoms in den letzten Jahren weiterentwickelt werden. ――Patienten mit metastasiertem Melanom, die sich einer Immuntherapie und/oder zielgerichteten Therapie unterziehen, können jetzt auf ein langfristiges Überleben hoffen. ――Während für genetisch zielgerichtete Therapien gute Biomarker existieren, besteht bei den Immuntherapien noch Forschungsbedarf. Wahrscheinlich ist eine Kombination unterschiedlicher Marker erforderlich. ――Künftig müssen Patienten eindeutig identifiziert werden, die langfristig von den aktuellen Mono- und Zweifachtherapien sowie neuen Kombinationen profitieren, um die Wirksamkeit weiter zu verbessern und die Toxizität zu reduzieren

Long‐term response to intermittent binimetinib in patients with NRAS‐mutant melanoma

Melanoma can be classified based on the detection of relevant oncogenic driver mutations. These mutations partially determine a patient's treatment options. MEK inhibitors have demonstrated little efficacy in patients with NRAS-mutated melanoma owing to primary and secondary resistance. We report two patients with NRAS-mutant metastatic melanoma with long-term response to intermittent MEK-inhibitor binimetinib therapy. Intermittent dosing schedules could play a key role in preventing resistance to targeted therapy. This article highlights the efficacy of an intermittent dosing schedule, toxicities associated with binimetinib, and possible mechanisms preventing resistance in targeted therapy. Intermittent MEK-inhibitor therapy may be considered in patients with NRAS-mutated melanoma that have failed all standard therapies. KEY POINTS: Melanomas harbor NRAS mutations in 10%-30% of the cases. These mutations promote hyperactivation of the MAPK pathway, leading to proliferation and prolonged survival of tumor cells. Currently, drugs directly targeting NRAS are not available. Downstream inhibition of the MAPK pathway can be considered as a therapeutic option after immunotherapeutic failure. Intermittent administration of kinase inhibitors might be the way to partially overcome the development of drug resistance by (a) inducing a fitness deficit for drug-resistant cells on treatment break, (b) increasing the immunogenicity, and (c) inducing apoptosis and cell cycle arrest. It also enhances expression of numerous immunomodulating molecules, and reduction of immunosuppressive factors, which suggests better access of the immune system to the tumor