We explored the association between liver metastases, tumor CD8+ T-cell count, and response in patients with melanoma or lung cancer treated with the anti-PD-1 antibody, pembrolizumab. The melanoma discovery cohort was drawn from the phase I Keynote 001 trial, whereas the melanoma validation cohort was drawn from Keynote 002, 006, and EAP trials and the non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cohort from Keynote 001. Liver metastasis was associated with reduced response and shortened progression-free survival [PFS; objective response rate (ORR), 30.6%; median PFS, 5.1 months] compared with patients without liver metastasis (ORR, 56.3%; median PFS, 20.1 months) P ≤ 0.0001, and confirmed in the validation cohort (P = 0.0006). The presence of liver metastasis significantly increased the likelihood of progression (OR, 1.852; P < 0.0001). In a subset of biopsied patients (n = 62), liver metastasis was associated with reduced CD8+ T-cell density at the invasive tumor margin (liver metastasis+ group, n = 547 ± 164.8; liver metastasis− group, n = 1,441 ± 250.7; P < 0.016). A reduced response rate and shortened PFS was also observed in NSCLC patients with liver metastasis [median PFS, 1.8 months; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.4–2.0], compared with those without liver metastasis (n = 119, median PFS, 4.0 months; 95% CI, 2.1–5.1), P = 0.0094. Thus, liver metastatic patients with melanoma or NSCLC that had been treated with pembrolizumab were associated with reduced responses and PFS, and liver metastases were associated with reduced marginal CD8+ T-cell infiltration, providing a potential mechanism for this outcome.

No abstract

Background:Anti-PD-1 therapy has shown significant clinical activity in advanced melanoma. We developed and validated a clinical prediction scale for response to anti- PD-1 monotherapy.Methods:A total of 315 patients with advanced melanoma treated with pembrolizumab (2 or 10 mg kg−1 Q2W or Q3W) or nivolumab (3 mg kg−1 Q2W) at four cancer centres between 2011 to 2013 served as the setting for the present cohort study. Variables with significant association to response on a univariate analysis were entered into a forward stepwise logistic regression model and were given a score based on ORs to calculate a clinical prediction scale.Results:The developed clinical prediction scale included elevated LDH (1 point), age <65 years (1 point), female sex (1 point), history of ipilimumab treatment (2 points) and the presence of liver metastasis (2 points). The scale had an area under the receiver-operating curve (AUC) of 0.73 (95% CI 0.67, 0.80) in predicting response to therapy. The predictive performance of the score was maintained in the validation cohort (AUC 0.70 (95% CI 0.58, 0.81)) and the goodness-to-fit model demonstrated good calibration.Conclusions:Based on a large cohort of patients, we developed and validated a simple five-factor prediction scale for the clinical activity of PD-1 antibodies in advanced melanoma patients. This scale can be used to stratify patients participating in clinical trials.

IMPORTANCE Melanoma in situ (MIS) is increasing in incidence, and expert consensus opinion recommends surgical excision for therapeutic management. Currently, wide local excision (WLE) is the standard of care. However, Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is now used to treat a growing subset of individuals with MIS. During MMS, unlike WLE, the entire cutaneous surgical margin is evaluated intraoperatively for tumor cells.OBJECTIVE To assess the outcomes of patients with MIS treated with MMS compared with those treated with WLE. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective review of a prospective database. The study cohort consisted of 662 patients with MIS treated with MMS or WLE per standard of care in dermatology and surgery (general surgery, otolaryngology, plastics, oculoplastics, surgical oncology) at an academic tertiary care referral center from January 1, 1978, to December 31, 2013, with follow-up through 2015. EXPOSURE Mohs micrographic surgery or WLE. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Recurrence, overall survival, and melanoma-specific survival. RESULTS There were 277 patients treated with MMS (mean [SD] age, 64.0 [13.1] years; 62.1% male) and 385 treated with WLE (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [15.6] years; P < .001 for age; 54.8% male). Median follow-up was 8.6 (range, 0.2-37) years. Compared with WLE, MMS was used more frequently on the face (222 [80.2%] vs 141 [36.7%]) and scalp and neck (23 [8.3%] vs 26 [6.8%]; P < .001). The median (range) year of diagnosis was 2008 for the MMS group vs 2003MMS group vs (1978MMS group vs -2013 for the WLE group (P < .001). Overall recurrence rates were 5 (1.8%) in the MMS group and 22 (5.7%) in the WLE group (P = .07). Mean (SD) time to recurrence after MMS was 3.91 (4.4) years, and after WLE, 4.45 (2.7) years (P = .73). The 5-year recurrence rate was 1.1% in the MMS group and 4.1% in the WLE group (P = .07). For WLE-treated tumors, the surgical margin taken was greater for tumors that recurred compared with tumors that did not recur (P = .003). Five-year overall survival for MMS was 92% and for WLE was 94% (P = .28). Melanoma-specific mortality for the MMS group was 2 vs 13 patients for the WLE group, with mean (SD) survival of 6.5 (4.8) and 6.1 (0.8) years, respectively (P = .77).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE No significant differences were found in the recurrence rate, overall survival, or melanoma-specific survival of patients with MIS treated with MMS compared with WLE.

No abstract

No abstract

The incidence and patient survival rates of melanoma have increased over the last several decades, with a growing population of patients who develop multiple primary melanomas (MPMs). To determine risk factors for developing MPMs and compare the survival of patients with MPMs to those with single primary melanomas, a prospective, multidisciplinary database of patients with melanoma at a single tertiary care institution was retrospectively reviewed. From 1985 to 2013, 6,963 patients with single primary melanomas and 305 patients with MPMs were identified. Mean follow-up was 8.3 ± 6.3 years for patients with single primary melanomas and 8.8 ± 5.9 years for patients with MPMs. Risk of developing multiple melanomas increased with age at diagnosis of first melanoma (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.20 for a 10-year increase in age, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.11-1.29, P < 0.001), male sex (HR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.12-1.84, P = 0.005), and white race (HR = 3.07, 95% CI = 1.45-6.51). Patients with invasive MPMs had increased risk of melanoma-specific death both before (HR = 1.47, 95% CI = 1.0-2.2) and after adjusting for age, sex, site, race, family history of melanoma, personal history of other cancer, and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) stage (HR = 1.44, 95% CI = 0.95-2.2); however, this result did not reach statistical significance.

Aberrant MAPK and PI3K pathway signaling may drive the malignant phenotype in NRAS-mutant and BRAF NRAS metastatic melanoma. To target these pathways, NRAS-mutant and BRAF NRAS patients received oral trametinib at 1.5 mg daily and GSK2141795 at 50 mg daily in a two-cohort Simon two-stage design. Participants had adequate end-organ function and no more than two prior treatment regimens. Imaging assessments were performed at 8-week intervals. A total of 10 NRAS-mutant and 10 BRAF NRAS patients were enrolled. No objective responses were noted in either cohort. The median PFS and OS were 2.3 and 4.0 months in the NRAS-mutant cohort and 2.8 and 3.5 months in the wild-type cohort. Grade 3 and grade 4 adverse events, primarily rash, were observed in 25% of patients. We conclude that the combination of trametinib and GSK2141795 does not have significant clinical activity in NRAS-mutant or BRAF NRAS melanoma.