Operable Melanoma: Screening, Prognostication, and Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Therapy

Author(s):  
Ahmad A. Tarhini ◽  
Paul Lorigan ◽  
Sancy Leachman

The importance of reducing the numbers of patients with late-stage melanoma, identifying which patients are most likely to progress, and treating these patients at the earliest possible stage cannot be overemphasized. Improved screening of patients prior to diagnosis has the advantage of identifying early-stage disease that is for the most part treatable by surgical methods. The process of melanoma screening is rapidly evolving through population-based programs, mobile health technologies, and advanced imaging tools. For patients with newly diagnosed melanoma, accurately estimating disease prognosis has important implications for management and follow-up. Prognostic factors are individual host- or tumor-related factors or molecules that correlate with genetic predisposition and clinical course. These include clinical covariates and host and tumor proteomic/genomic markers that allow the prognostic subclassification of patients. Adjuvant therapy for high-risk surgically resected melanoma targets residual micrometastatic disease with the goal of reducing the risk of relapse and mortality. In the United States, three regimens have achieved regulatory approval for adjuvant therapy, including high-dose interferon alpha, pegylated interferon alpha, and ipilimumab at 10 mg/kg. Phase III trials have reported benefits in relapse-free survival (all regimens) and overall survival (high-dose interferon alpha and ipilimumab). The management of locally/regionally advanced melanoma may benefit from neoadjuvant therapy, which is the subject of several ongoing studies. Recent studies have shown promising clinical activity and yielded important biomarker findings and mechanistic insights.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 567-575 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmad A. Tarhini ◽  
Sandra J. Lee ◽  
F. Stephen Hodi ◽  
Uma N. M. Rao ◽  
Gary I. Cohen ◽  
...  

PURPOSE Phase III adjuvant trials have reported significant benefits in both relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) for high-dose interferon alfa (HDI) and ipilimumab at 10 mg/kg (ipi10). E1609 evaluated the safety and efficacy of ipilimumab at 3 mg/kg (ipi3) and ipi10 versus HDI. PATIENTS AND METHODS E1609 was a phase III trial in patients with resected cutaneous melanoma (American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition stage IIIB, IIIC, M1a, or M1b). It had 2 coprimary end points: OS and RFS. A 2-step hierarchic approach first evaluated ipi3 versus HDI followed by ipi10 versus HDI. RESULTS Between May 2011 and August 2014, 1,670 adult patients were centrally randomly assigned (1:1:1) to ipi3 (n = 523), HDI (n = 636), or ipi10 (n = 511). Treatment-related adverse events grade ≥ 3 occurred in 37% of patients receiving ipi3, 79% receiving HDI, and 58% receiving ipi10, with adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation in 35%, 20%, and 54%, respectively. Comparison of ipi3 versus HDI used an intent-to-treat analysis of concurrently randomly assigned patient cases (n = 1,051) and showed significant OS difference in favor of ipi3 (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95.6% repeated CI, 0.61 to 0.99; P = .044; RFS: HR, 0.85; 99.4% CI, 0.66 to 1.09; P = .065). In the second step, for ipi10 versus HDI (n = 989), trends in favor of ipi10 did not achieve statistical significance. Salvage patterns after melanoma relapse showed significantly higher rates of ipilimumab and ipilimumab/anti–programmed death 1 use in the HDI arm versus ipi3 and ipi10 ( P ≤ .001). CONCLUSION Adjuvant therapy with ipi3 benefits survival versus HDI; for the first time to our knowledge in melanoma adjuvant therapy, E1609 has demonstrated a significant improvement in OS against an active control regimen. The currently approved adjuvant ipilimumab dose (ipi10) was more toxic and not superior in efficacy to HDI.


2001 ◽  
Vol 19 (5) ◽  
pp. 1430-1436 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Kirkwood ◽  
Joseph Ibrahim ◽  
David H. Lawson ◽  
Michael B. Atkins ◽  
Sanjiv S. Agarwala ◽  
...  

PURPOSE: High-dose interferon alfa-2b (IFNα2b) is the only established adjuvant therapy of resectable high-risk melanoma. GM2-KLH/QS-21 (GMK) is a chemically defined vaccine that is one of the best developed of a range of vaccine candidates for melanoma. A single-institution phase III trial conducted at Memorial Hospital served as the impetus for an intergroup adjuvant E1694/S9512/C509801 trial, which recently completed enrollment of 880 patients. To build on the apparent benefit of IFNα2b in resectable high-risk American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage IIB or III melanoma, this phase II study was designed to evaluate the combination of GMK and IFNα2b. The E2696 trial was undertaken to evaluate the toxicity and other effects of the established adjuvant high-dose IFNα2b regimen in relation to immune responses to GMK and to evaluate the potential clinical and immunologic effects of the combined therapies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This trial enrolled 107 patients with resectable high- or very high–risk melanoma (AJCC stages IIB, III, and IV). RESULTS: The results demonstrate that IFNα2b does not significantly inhibit immunoglobulin M or G serologic responses to the vaccine and that the combination of high-dose IFNα2b and GMK is well tolerated in this patient population. CONCLUSION: Cox analysis of the results of the combination with IFNα2b show improvement in the relapse-free survival of patients with very high–risk melanoma (including those with resectable M1 disease).


2011 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 509-515 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie P. Grignol ◽  
Thomas Olencki ◽  
Kiran Relekar ◽  
Cynthia Taylor ◽  
Amanda Kibler ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8504-8504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence E. Flaherty ◽  
James Moon ◽  
Michael B. Atkins ◽  
Ralph Tuthill ◽  
John A. Thompson ◽  
...  

8504 Background: High-dose interferon for one year (HDI) is the FDA approved adjuvant therapy for patients (pts) with high-risk melanoma (HRM). Efforts to modify IFN dose or schedule have not improved efficacy. A meta-analysis demonstrated that biochemotherapy (BCT) produced superior response rates compared with chemotherapy in pts with stage IV melanoma (Wheatley et al J Clin Oncol 25:5426, 2007). We sought to determine whether a short course of BCT would be more effective than HDI as adjuvant treatment in pts with HRM. Methods: S-0008 (an Intergroup Phase III trial) enrolled pts who were high risk (Stage III A-N2a thru Stage III C N3) and randomized them to receive either HDI or BCT consisting of dacarbazine 800 mg/m2 day 1, cisplatin 20 mg/m2/ days 1-4, vinblastine 1.2 mg/m2 days 1-4, IL-2 9 MIU/m2/day continuous IV days 1-4, IFN 5 MU/m2/day sc days 1-4, 8,10,12, and G-CSF 5 ug/kg/day sc days 7-16. BCT cycles were given every 21 days x 3 cycles (9 weeks total). Pts were stratified for number of involved nodes (1-3 v ≥4), micro v macro metastasis, and ulceration of the primary. Co-primary endpoints were relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) using a one-sided log rank test at p= 0.05. Results: 432 pts were enrolled between 8/2000 and 11/2007: 30 were ineligible or withdrew consent. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events occurred in 57% and 7% respectively of HDI pts and 36% and 40% of BCT pts. At a median f/up of 6 yrs, BCT improved RFS (p = 0.02, HR 0.77 [90% CI: 0.62 – 0.96]) with median RFS for BCT of 4.0 yrs (90% CI:1.9 – 5.9) v 1.9 yrs (90% CI: 1.4 – 2.5) and 5 yr RFS of 47% v 39%. Median OS was not different between the two arms (p = 0.49 HR 1.0 [90% CI: 0.78 – 1.27]) with median OS not yet reached for BCT v 8.4 yrs (90% CI: 4.5 – 9.3) for HDI and 5 yr survival 56% for both arms. Conclusions: In HRM pts, BCT provides a statistically significant improvement in RFS compared to HDI, but no discernable difference in OS and more grade IV toxicity. BCT represents a shorter, alternative treatment for pts with HRM, and a potential control arm and basis for future combinations in the adjuvant setting.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document