The Role of Immune Checkpoint Blockade in Uveal Melanoma

Uveal melanoma (UM) represents the most common intraocular malignancy in adults and accounts for about 5% of all melanomas. Primary disease can be effectively controlled by several local therapy options, but UM has a high potential for metastatic spread, especially to the liver. Despite its clinical and genetic heterogeneity, therapy of metastatic UM has largely been adopted from cutaneous melanoma (CM) with discouraging results until now. The introduction of antibodies targeting CTLA-4 and PD-1 for immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has revolutionized the field of cancer therapy and has achieved pioneering results in metastatic CM. Thus, expectations were high that patients with metastatic UM would also benefit from these new therapy options. This review provides a comprehensive and up-to-date overview on the role of ICB in UM. We give a summary of UM biology, its clinical features, and how it differs from CM. The results of several studies that have been investigating ICB in metastatic UM are presented. We discuss possible reasons for the lack of efficacy of ICB in UM compared to CM, highlight the pitfalls of ICB in this cancer entity, and explain why other immune-modulating therapies could still be an option for future UM therapies.

Download Full-text

Immuncheckpoint-Blockade – neue Hoffnung für Patienten mit Aderhautmelanom?

Karger Kompass Ophthalmologie ◽

10.1159/000511989 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 6 (4) ◽

pp. 192-195

Author(s):

Anja Wessely

Keyword(s):

Cancer Therapy ◽

Clinical Features ◽

Uveal Melanoma ◽

Genetic Heterogeneity ◽

Immune Checkpoint ◽

Cutaneous Melanoma ◽

Local Therapy ◽

Immune Checkpoint Blockade ◽

Therapy Options

Uveal melanoma (UM) represents the most common intraocular malignancy in adults and accounts for about 5% of all melanomas. Primary disease can be effectively controlled by several local therapy options, but UM has a high potential for metastatic spread, especially to the liver. Despite its clinical and genetic heterogeneity, therapy of metastatic UM has largely been adopted from cutaneous melanoma (CM) with discouraging results until now. The introduction of antibodies targeting CTLA-4 and PD-1 for immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has revolutionized the field of cancer therapy and has achieved pioneering results in metastatic CM. Thus, expectations were high that patients with metastatic UM would also benefit from these new therapy options. This review provides a comprehensive and up-to-date overview on the role of ICB in UM. We give a summary of UM biology, its clinical features, and how it differs from CM. The results of several studies that have been investigating ICB in metastatic UM are presented. We discuss possible reasons for the lack of efficacy of ICB in UM compared to CM, highlight the pitfalls of ICB in this cancer entity, and explain why other immune-modulating therapies could still be an option for future UM therapies.

Download Full-text

Rethinking immune checkpoint blockade: ‘Beyond the T cell’

Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer ◽

10.1136/jitc-2020-001460 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. e001460 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Xiuting Liu ◽

Graham D Hogg ◽

David G DeNardo

Keyword(s):

Immune System ◽

T Cell ◽

Immune Checkpoint ◽

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽

Antitumor Immunity ◽

Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽

Clinical Success ◽

Immune Checkpoint Blockade ◽

Checkpoint Blockade

The clinical success of immune checkpoint inhibitors has highlighted the central role of the immune system in cancer control. Immune checkpoint inhibitors can reinvigorate anti-cancer immunity and are now the standard of care in a number of malignancies. However, research on immune checkpoint blockade has largely been framed with the central dogma that checkpoint therapies intrinsically target the T cell, triggering the tumoricidal potential of the adaptive immune system. Although T cells undoubtedly remain a critical piece of the story, mounting evidence, reviewed herein, indicates that much of the efficacy of checkpoint therapies may be attributable to the innate immune system. Emerging research suggests that T cell-directed checkpoint antibodies such as anti-programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) or programmed death-ligand-1 (PD-L1) can impact innate immunity by both direct and indirect pathways, which may ultimately shape clinical efficacy. However, the mechanisms and impacts of these activities have yet to be fully elucidated, and checkpoint therapies have potentially beneficial and detrimental effects on innate antitumor immunity. Further research into the role of innate subsets during checkpoint blockade may be critical for developing combination therapies to help overcome checkpoint resistance. The potential of checkpoint therapies to amplify innate antitumor immunity represents a promising new field that can be translated into innovative immunotherapies for patients fighting refractory malignancies.

Download Full-text

Immune Checkpoint Blockade for Metastatic Uveal Melanoma: Patterns of Response and Survival According to the Presence of Hepatic and Extrahepatic Metastasis

Cancers ◽

10.3390/cancers13133359 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (13) ◽

pp. 3359

Author(s):

Elias Koch ◽

Anne Petzold ◽

Anja Wessely ◽

Edgar Dippel ◽

Anja Gesierich ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Skin Cancer ◽

Uveal Melanoma ◽

Hepatic Metastasis ◽

Immune Checkpoint ◽

Objective Response ◽

Immune Checkpoint Blockade ◽

Checkpoint Blockade ◽

Response To Treatment ◽

Extrahepatic Metastasis ◽

The Impact

Background: Since there is no standardized and effective treatment for advanced uveal melanoma (UM), the prognosis is dismal once metastases develop. Due to the availability of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in the real-world setting, the prognosis of metastatic UM has improved. However, it is unclear how the presence of hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis impacts the response and survival after ICB. Methods: A total of 178 patients with metastatic UM treated with ICB were included in this analysis. Patients were recruited from German skin cancer centers and the German national skin cancer registry (ADOReg). To investigate the impact of hepatic metastasis, two cohorts were compared: patients with liver metastasis only (cohort A, n = 55) versus those with both liver and extra-hepatic metastasis (cohort B, n = 123). Data were analyzed in both cohorts for response to treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The survival and progression probabilities were calculated with the Kaplan–Meier method. Log-rank tests, χ2 tests, and t-tests were performed to detect significant differences between both cohorts. Results: The median OS of the overall population was 16 months (95% CI 13.4–23.7) and the median PFS, 2.8 months (95% CI 2.5–3.0). The median OS was longer in cohort B than in cohort A (18.2 vs. 6.1 months; p = 0.071). The best objective response rate to dual ICB was 13.8% and to anti-PD-1 monotherapy 8.9% in the entire population. Patients with liver metastases only had a lower response to dual ICB, yet without significance (cohort A 8.7% vs. cohort B 16.7%; p = 0.45). Adverse events (AE) occurred in 41.6%. Severe AE were observed in 26.3% and evenly distributed between both cohorts. Conclusion: The survival of this large cohort of patients with advanced UM was more favorable than reported in previous benchmark studies. Patients with both hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis showed more favorable survival and higher response to dual ICB than those with hepatic metastasis only.

Download Full-text