A C Tan1, L Emmett2, S Lo3, V Liu4, R Kapoor5, M S Carlino6, A D Guminski7, G V Long7, A M Menzies8. 1. Melanoma Institute Australia and The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Department of Medical Oncology, Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 2. Melanoma Institute Australia and The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Department of Nuclear Medicine, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia; The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. 3. Melanoma Institute Australia and The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 4. Department of Nuclear Medicine, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 5. Department of Radiology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia; Mater Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 6. Melanoma Institute Australia and The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Department of Medical Oncology, Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead and Blacktown Hospitals, Sydney, Australia. 7. Melanoma Institute Australia and The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Department of Medical Oncology, Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, Australia; Mater Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 8. Melanoma Institute Australia and The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Department of Medical Oncology, Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, Australia; Mater Hospital, Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: alexander.menzies@sydney.edu.au.
Abstract
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy has resulted in impressive and durable clinical activity for many cancers including melanoma; however, there remain few reliable predictors for long-term response. This study investigated whether [18F]2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG-PET) imaging may better predict long-term outcomes compared with standard computed tomography (CT) response criteria. Patients and methods: Retrospective analysis of metastatic melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy with baseline and 1-year FDG-PET and CT imaging at Melanoma Institute Australia. One-year response was determined using RECIST for CT and EORTC criteria for PET, coded as complete response (CR or CMR), partial response (PR or PMR), stable disease (SD or SMD) or progressive disease (PD or PMD). Progression-free survival (PFS) was determined from the 1-year landmark. Results: Patients (n = 104) were evaluated with median follow-up 30.1 months and 98% remain alive. Most received anti-PD-1 as monotherapy (67%) or combined with ipilimumab (31%). At 1 year, 28% had CR, 66% had PR and 6% had SD on CT, while 75% had CMR, 16% PMR and 9% SMD/PMD on PET. CMR was observed in 68% of patients with PR on CT. RECIST PFS post 1-year landmark was similar in patients with CR versus PR/SD, but improved in patients with CMR versus non-CMR {median not reached [NR] versus 12.8 month; hazard ratio [HR] 0.06 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02-0.23]; P < 0.01}. In patients with PR on CT, PFS was improved in patients with PR + CMR versus PR + non-CMR (median NR versus 12.8 months; HR 0.07 [95% CI 0.02-0.27]; P < 0.01). In the 78 CMR patients, 78% had discontinued treatment and 96% had ongoing response. Conclusions: Whilst only a small proportion of patients have a CR at 1 year, most patients with a PR have CMR on PET. Almost all patients with CMR at 1 year have ongoing response to therapy thereafter. PET may have utility in predicting long-term benefit and help guide discontinuation of therapy.
Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy has resulted in impressive and durable clinical activity for many cancers including melanoma; however, there remain few reliable predictors for long-term response. This study investigated whether [18F]2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG-PET) imaging may better predict long-term outcomes compared with standard computed tomography (CT) response criteria. Patients and methods: Retrospective analysis of metastatic melanomapatients treated with anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy with baseline and 1-year FDG-PET and CT imaging at Melanoma Institute Australia. One-year response was determined using RECIST for CT and EORTC criteria for PET, coded as complete response (CR or CMR), partial response (PR or PMR), stable disease (SD or SMD) or progressive disease (PD or PMD). Progression-free survival (PFS) was determined from the 1-year landmark. Results:Patients (n = 104) were evaluated with median follow-up 30.1 months and 98% remain alive. Most received anti-PD-1 as monotherapy (67%) or combined with ipilimumab (31%). At 1 year, 28% had CR, 66% had PR and 6% had SD on CT, while 75% had CMR, 16% PMR and 9% SMD/PMD on PET. CMR was observed in 68% of patients with PR on CT. RECIST PFS post 1-year landmark was similar in patients with CR versus PR/SD, but improved in patients with CMR versus non-CMR {median not reached [NR] versus 12.8 month; hazard ratio [HR] 0.06 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02-0.23]; P < 0.01}. In patients with PR on CT, PFS was improved in patients with PR + CMR versus PR + non-CMR (median NR versus 12.8 months; HR 0.07 [95% CI 0.02-0.27]; P < 0.01). In the 78 CMR patients, 78% had discontinued treatment and 96% had ongoing response. Conclusions: Whilst only a small proportion of patients have a CR at 1 year, most patients with a PR have CMR on PET. Almost all patients with CMR at 1 year have ongoing response to therapy thereafter. PET may have utility in predicting long-term benefit and help guide discontinuation of therapy.
Authors: Romain-David Seban; John S Nemer; Aurélien Marabelle; Randy Yeh; Eric Deutsch; Samy Ammari; Antoine Moya-Plana; Fatima-Zohra Mokrane; Robyn D Gartrell; Grace Finkel; Luke Barker; Amélie E Bigorgne; Lawrence H Schwartz; Yvonne Saenger; Caroline Robert; Laurent Dercle Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2019-07-25 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Timo E Schank; Andrea Forschner; Michael Max Sachse; Antonia Dimitrakopoulou-Strauss; Christos Sachpekidis; Albrecht Stenzinger; Anna-Lena Volckmar; Alexander Enk; Jessica C Hassel Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Nežka Hribernik; Daniel T Huff; Andrej Studen; Katarina Zevnik; Žan Klaneček; Hamid Emamekhoo; Katja Škalic; Robert Jeraj; Martina Reberšek Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-12-27 Impact factor: 10.057