BACKGROUND: Metastatic melanoma of unknown primary (MUP) is uncommon, biologically ill defined, and clinically understudied. MUP outcomes are seldom reported in clinical trials. In this study, we analyze responses of MUP patients treated with systemic therapy in an attempt to inform treatment guidelines for this unique population. METHODS: New York University (NYU)'s prospective melanoma database was searched for MUP patients treated with systemic therapy. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for MUP patients treated with immunotherapy or targeted therapy reported in the literature, and their response and survival data were compared to the MUP patient data from NYU. Both groups' response data were compared to those reported for melanoma of known primary (MKP). RESULTS: The MUP patients treated at NYU had better outcomes on immunotherapy but worse on targeted therapy than the MUP patients in the literature. The NYU MUP patients and those in the literature had worse outcomes than the majority-MKP populations in 10 clinical trial reports. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that MUP patients might have poorer outcomes on systemic therapy as compared to MKP patients. Our cohort was small and limited data were available, highlighting the need for increased reporting of MUP outcomes and multi-institutional efforts to understand the mechanism behind the observed differences.
BACKGROUND:Metastatic melanoma of unknown primary (MUP) is uncommon, biologically ill defined, and clinically understudied. MUP outcomes are seldom reported in clinical trials. In this study, we analyze responses of MUP patients treated with systemic therapy in an attempt to inform treatment guidelines for this unique population. METHODS: New York University (NYU)'s prospective melanoma database was searched for MUP patients treated with systemic therapy. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for MUP patients treated with immunotherapy or targeted therapy reported in the literature, and their response and survival data were compared to the MUP patient data from NYU. Both groups' response data were compared to those reported for melanoma of known primary (MKP). RESULTS: The MUP patients treated at NYU had better outcomes on immunotherapy but worse on targeted therapy than the MUP patients in the literature. The NYU MUP patients and those in the literature had worse outcomes than the majority-MKP populations in 10 clinical trial reports. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that MUP patients might have poorer outcomes on systemic therapy as compared to MKP patients. Our cohort was small and limited data were available, highlighting the need for increased reporting of MUP outcomes and multi-institutional efforts to understand the mechanism behind the observed differences.
Authors: Caroline Robert; Boguslawa Karaszewska; Jacob Schachter; Piotr Rutkowski; Andrzej Mackiewicz; Daniil Stroiakovski; Michael Lichinitser; Reinhard Dummer; Florent Grange; Laurent Mortier; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Kamil Drucis; Ivana Krajsova; Axel Hauschild; Paul Lorigan; Pascal Wolter; Georgina V Long; Keith Flaherty; Paul Nathan; Antoni Ribas; Anne-Marie Martin; Peng Sun; Wendy Crist; Jeff Legos; Stephen D Rubin; Shonda M Little; Dirk Schadendorf Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-11-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Georgina V Long; Daniil Stroyakovskiy; Helen Gogas; Evgeny Levchenko; Filippo de Braud; James Larkin; Claus Garbe; Thomas Jouary; Axel Hauschild; Jean Jacques Grob; Vanna Chiarion Sileni; Celeste Lebbe; Mario Mandalà; Michael Millward; Ana Arance; Igor Bondarenko; John B A G Haanen; Johan Hansson; Jochen Utikal; Virginia Ferraresi; Nadezhda Kovalenko; Peter Mohr; Volodymyr Probachai; Dirk Schadendorf; Paul Nathan; Caroline Robert; Antoni Ribas; Douglas J DeMarini; Jhangir G Irani; Michelle Casey; Daniele Ouellet; Anne-Marie Martin; Ngocdiep Le; Kiran Patel; Keith Flaherty Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-09-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Georgina V Long; Daniil Stroyakovskiy; Helen Gogas; Evgeny Levchenko; Filippo de Braud; James Larkin; Claus Garbe; Thomas Jouary; Axel Hauschild; Jean-Jacques Grob; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Celeste Lebbe; Mario Mandalà; Michael Millward; Ana Arance; Igor Bondarenko; John B A G Haanen; Johan Hansson; Jochen Utikal; Virginia Ferraresi; Nadezhda Kovalenko; Peter Mohr; Volodymr Probachai; Dirk Schadendorf; Paul Nathan; Caroline Robert; Antoni Ribas; Douglas J DeMarini; Jhangir G Irani; Suzanne Swann; Jeffrey J Legos; Fan Jin; Bijoyesh Mookerjee; Keith Flaherty Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-05-31 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Oliver Klein; Antoni Ribas; Bartosz Chmielowski; Grant Walker; Arthur Clements; Georgina V Long; Richard F Kefford Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-03-18 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jung Min Bae; Yoon Young Choi; Dae Suk Kim; Ji Hye Lee; Hong Sun Jang; Joo Hee Lee; Heesu Kim; Byung Ho Oh; Mi Ryung Roh; Kyoung Ae Nam; Kee Yang Chung Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2014-11-01 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: D Verver; Aam van der Veldt; Acj van Akkooi; C Verhoef; D J Grünhagen; W J Louwman Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2019-03-20 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Bethan Clayton; Ferhan Muneeb; Maria Celia B Hughes; Megan E Grant; Kiarash Khosrotehrani; B Mark Smithers; Romina Spina; Luca G Campana; Deemesh Oudit; Adele C Green Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2022-04-25 Impact factor: 7.316