88 Evidence of enhanced immune activation within the tumor microenvironment and the circulation of female patients with high-risk melanoma compared to males

BackgroundSex differences in tumor immunity and response to immunotherapy were shown in murine models and descriptive analyses from recent clinical trials. We recently reported that female gender is a favorable prognostic marker for survival benefit following ipilimumab and high dose interferon-alfa (HDI) adjuvant therapy of high-risk melanoma in the ECOG-ACRIN E1609 trial (N=1670). Therefore, we investigated differences in candidate immune biomarkers in the circulation and tumor microenvironment (TME) of female and male patients.MethodsGene expression profiling (GEP) was performed on the tumor biopsies of 718 (454 male, 264 female) patients. The primary endpoint was mRNA expression profiling using U133A 2.0 Affymetrix gene chips. Raw microarray data sets were normalized by using the Robust Multi-array Average (RMA) method using Affymetrix Power Tools (APT) as previously published. Multiple probe sets representing the same genes were collapsed by using the probe with maximum gene expression. Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was performed by comparing the female and male tumor samples, and gene sets with FDR q-value <0.1 were deemed as significant. Similarly, peripheral blood (serum and PBMC) samples were tested for soluble (Luminex) and cellular (multicolor flow cytometry) prognostic biomarkers in a subset of patients (N=321; 109 female and 212 male). All patients provided an IRB-approved written informed consent.ResultsAmong the subset of patients tested for circulating biomarkers, females were significantly younger than males (P=0.03). Testing PBMCs, the percentages of CD3+ T cells (P=0.04) and CD3+CD4+ helper T cells (P=0.0005) were significantly higher in female patients compared to males. Also, there were trends toward higher levels of proinflammatory cytokines IL1beta (P=0.07) and IL6 (P=0.06) in females. On the other hand, males had significantly higher percentages of monocytes (P=0.03). Further, there were trends toward higher percentages of CD3+/CD4+/CD25hi+/Foxp3+ (P=0.1) and CD3+/CD4+/CD25+/CD127low+ (P=0.1) T-reg in male patients compared to females. Among the cohort of patients (N=718) with tumor GEP data, females were significantly younger than males (P=0.0009). GEP identified pathways and genes related to immune cell infiltration and activation that were significantly enriched in the tumors of females compared to males (table 1).Abstract 88 Table 1Immune pathways significantly enriched in tumors of femalesConclusionsFemale gender was associated with adjuvant immunotherapeutic benefits and female patients were more likely to have evidence of immune activation within the TME and the circulation, supporting a potentially important role for female related factors in the immune response against melanoma, and these require further investigation.AcknowledgementsWe are grateful to the patients and family members who participated in the E1609 trial and the E1609 trial investigators. This study was conducted by the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (Peter J. O’Dwyer, MD and Mitchell D. Schnall, MD, PhD, Group Co-Chairs) and supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under the following award numbers: U10CA180794, U10CA180820, U10CA180888, UG1CA233180, UG1CA233184. Biomarkers studies were supported under the following award number: P50CA12197310 (Tarhini and Kirkwood). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.Trial RegistrationNCT01274338Ethics ApprovalThe E1609 study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of each participating institution and conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice guidelines as defined by the International Conference on Harmonization. All patients provided an IRB-approved written informed consent.ConsentNot applicable.

87 Enhanced immunogenicity within the tumor microenvironment and the circulation of high-risk melanoma patients with unknown primary compared to those whose primary melanoma is known

BackgroundWe recently reported data supporting the unknown primary status as a potentially distinct prognostic group among high-risk melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab and high dose interferon-alfa (HDI) in the ECOG-ACRIN E1609 trial (N=1670) with improved RFS and OS outcomes compared to known primary. Therefore, we investigated differences in candidate immune biomarkers in the circulation and tumor microenvironment (TME) of patients with unknown compared to those with known primary melanoma enrolled in this trial that tested adjuvant ipilimumab at 3 and 10 mg/kg versus HDI.MethodsGene expression profiling (GEP) was performed on the tumor biopsies of 718 (102 unknown, 616 known primary) melanoma patients. The primary endpoint was mRNA expression profiling using U133A 2.0 Affymetrix gene chips. Raw microarray data sets were normalized by using the Robust Multi-array Average (RMA) method using Affymetrix Power Tools (APT) as previously published. Multiple probe sets representing the same genes were collapsed by using the probe with maximum gene expression. Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was performed by comparing the unknown and known primary tumor samples, and gene sets with FDR q-value <0.1 were deemed as significant. Similarly, peripheral blood (serum and PBMC) samples were tested for soluble (Luminex) and cellular (multicolor flow cytometry) immune biomarkers in a subset of patients (N=321; 66 unknown and 255 known primary). All patients provided an IRB-approved written informed consent.ResultsUnknown primary melanoma cases represented 12.8% of the total E1609 study population (N=1670) including 11.7% on the ipilimumab arms and 14.7% on the HDI arm. Stratifying by stage, relapse free survival (RFS) (P=0.001) and overall survival (OS) (P=0.009) were significantly better for patients with unknown primary tumor compared to known primary. Including only ipilimumab-treated patients, RFS (P=0.005) and OS (P=0.023) were significantly better in favor of the unknown primary status. Among the cohort of patients with tumor GEP data (N=718), GEP identified pathways and genes related to autoimmunity, inflammation, immune cell infiltration and immune activation that were significantly enriched in the unknown primary tumors compared to known primaries (table 1). Among the subset of patients tested for circulating biomarkers, patients with unknown primary melanoma had significantly higher circulating levels of IL-2R than those with known primary (P=0.04).Abstract 87 Table 1Immune pathways enriched in unknown primary melanomaConclusionsUnknown primary high-risk melanoma patients had significantly better prognosis and evidence of significantly enhanced immune activation within the TME and the circulation, supporting the designation of unknown primary melanoma as a distinct prognostic marker in patients with high-risk melanoma.AcknowledgementsWe are grateful to the patients and family members who participated in the E1609 trial and the E1609 trial investigators. This study was conducted by the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (Peter J. O’Dwyer, MD and Mitchell D. Schnall, MD, PhD, Group Co-Chairs) and supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under the following award numbers: U10CA180794, U10CA180820, U10CA180888, UG1CA233180, UG1CA233184. Biomarkers studies were supported under the following award number: P50CA12197310 (Tarhini and Kirkwood). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.Trial RegistrationNCT01274338Ethics ApprovalThe E1609 study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of each participating institution and conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice guidelines as defined by the International Conference on Harmonization. All patients provided an IRB-approved written informed consent.ConsentNot applicable.

Feasibility of assessing utilities with a single-item standard gamble questionnaire in patients with melanoma

Objectives To determine the feasibility of eliciting utilities with a standard gamble self-completion questionnaire that uses a single-item approach in melanoma patients. Methods 150 patients with low-risk melanoma completed a paper standard gamble questionnaire. Six scenarios described the adjuvant treatment of high-risk melanoma with interferon alfa-2b with varied side effects. Patients were asked to directly state the maximum death risk they would accept to prevent these health states. Methods were the same as in a study by Kilbridge et al. (J Clin Oncol 19(3):812–823, 2021. 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.3.812), except that they used computerised interviews and an iterative risk variation (Ping–Pong method) to elicit utilities. Results The rate of missing values in the standard gamble was 1.0%. The percentage of patients who misordered scenarios was very similar to the reference study (11.3% vs. 11.2%). Mean utilities were also similar with a maximum difference of 0.02 points, but median utilities were not (between 0.21 points below and 0.05 points above the reference study). Conclusions One-item utility elicitation with questionnaires might be a feasible alternative to computerised face-to-face interviews to conduct a standard gamble in melanoma patients.

Canadian Melanoma Conference Recommendations on High-Risk Melanoma Surveillance: A Report from the 14th Annual Canadian Melanoma Conference; Banff, Alberta; 20–22 February 2020

Introduction: There are a lack of established guidelines for the surveillance of high-risk cutaneous melanoma patients following initial therapy. We describe a novel approach to the development of a national expert recommendation statement on high-risk melanoma surveillance (HRS). Methods: A consensus-based, live, online voting process was undertaken at the 13th and 14th annual Canadian Melanoma Conferences (CMC) to collect expert opinions relating to “who, what, where, and when” HRS should be conducted. Initial opinions were gathered via audience participation software and used as the basis for a second iterative questionnaire distributed online to attendees from the 13th CMC and to identified melanoma specialists from across Canada. A third questionnaire was disseminated in a similar fashion to conduct a final vote on HRS that could be implemented. Results: The majority of respondents from the first two iterative surveys agreed on stages IIB to IV as high risk. Surveillance should be conducted by an appropriate specialist, irrespective of association to a cancer centre. Frequency and modality of surveillance favoured biannual visits and Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography (PET/CT) with brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) among the systemic imaging modalities available. No consensus was initially reached regarding the frequency of systemic imaging and ultrasound of nodal basins (US). The third iterative survey resolved major areas of disagreement. A 5-year surveillance schedule was voted on with 92% of conference members in agreement. Conclusion: This final recommendation was established following 92% overall agreement among the 2020 CMC attendees.