Yenny Angela1, Sebastian Haferkamp2, Carsten Weishaupt3, Selma Ugurel4, Jürgen C Becker4,5, Florian Oberndörfer6, Vesna Alar6, Imke Satzger6, Ralf Gutzmer6. 1. Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Skin Cancer Center Hannover, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl Neuberg Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. angela.yenny@mh-hannover.de. 2. Department of Dermatology, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany. 3. Department of Dermatology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany. 4. Department of Dermatology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany. 5. Translational Skin Cancer Research (TSCR), German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Essen/Düsseldorf, Germany. 6. Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Skin Cancer Center Hannover, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Carl Neuberg Str. 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: PD-1 inhibition (PD-1i) is the standard of care in melanoma and other malignancies. In patients with bone metastases of solid tumors, the monoclonal antibody denosumab directed against RANKL is approved for the prevention of skeletal-related events. However, RANKL is not only relevant in osteoclastogenesis, but also has immunological effects. Hence, we aimed at investigating, whether the combination of PD-1i and denosumab produces synergistic effects in metastatic melanoma treatment. METHODS: We retrospectively collected and analyzed clinical data of metastatic melanoma patients with bone metastases, who received PD-1i and denosumab therapy. RESULTS: 29 patients were identified with a median age of 60.7 years: 20 were male and 9 were female. 20 patients (69%) were in stage IV M1c and 9 (31%) in stage IV M1d; 52% had an increased serum LDH. 24 patients (83%) received PD-1i as first-line therapy and five patients (17%) as second- or third-line therapy. 13 patients received the triple combination nivolumab, ipilimumab and denosumab (N + I+D), 16 patients received PD-1i and denosumab (PD-1i + D). Within a median follow-up time of 19.8 months, 17 patients progressed with a median time to progression of 6 months. The objective response rate was 54% in the N + I + D group and 50% in the PD-1i + D group. Recalcification of bone metastases was radiologically observed in 18 (62%) patients. No unexpected treatment-related adverse events emerged. CONCLUSIONS: The combination therapy of metastatic melanoma with PD-1i and denosumab was feasible without unexpected safety issues and showed a promising efficacy signal. Further investigation in prospective studies is needed.
BACKGROUND:PD-1 inhibition (PD-1i) is the standard of care in melanoma and other malignancies. In patients with bone metastases of solid tumors, the monoclonal antibody denosumab directed against RANKL is approved for the prevention of skeletal-related events. However, RANKL is not only relevant in osteoclastogenesis, but also has immunological effects. Hence, we aimed at investigating, whether the combination of PD-1i and denosumab produces synergistic effects in metastatic melanoma treatment. METHODS: We retrospectively collected and analyzed clinical data of metastatic melanomapatients with bone metastases, who received PD-1i and denosumab therapy. RESULTS: 29 patients were identified with a median age of 60.7 years: 20 were male and 9 were female. 20 patients (69%) were in stage IV M1c and 9 (31%) in stage IV M1d; 52% had an increased serum LDH. 24 patients (83%) received PD-1i as first-line therapy and five patients (17%) as second- or third-line therapy. 13 patients received the triple combination nivolumab, ipilimumab and denosumab (N + I+D), 16 patients received PD-1i and denosumab (PD-1i + D). Within a median follow-up time of 19.8 months, 17 patients progressed with a median time to progression of 6 months. The objective response rate was 54% in the N + I + D group and 50% in the PD-1i + D group. Recalcification of bone metastases was radiologically observed in 18 (62%) patients. No unexpected treatment-related adverse events emerged. CONCLUSIONS: The combination therapy of metastatic melanoma with PD-1i and denosumab was feasible without unexpected safety issues and showed a promising efficacy signal. Further investigation in prospective studies is needed.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adverse events; Bone metastasis; Immunotherapy; Melanoma; RANK/RANKL
Authors: Francesco Mannavola; Mario Mandala; Annalisa Todisco; Vanna Chiarion Sileni; Marco Palla; Alessandro Marco Minisini; Laura Pala; Francesca Morgese; Lorenza Di Guardo; Luigia Stefania Stucci; Michele Guida; Alice Indini; Pietro Quaglino; Virginia Ferraresi; Riccardo Marconcini; Maria Chiara Tronconi; Ernesto Rossi; Olga Nigro; Marcella Occelli; Alessio Cortellini; Silvia Quadrini; Giuseppe Palmieri; Jacopo Pigozzo; Paolo Antonio Ascierto; Maria Grazia Vitale; Sabino Strippoli; Pier Francesco Ferrucci; Rossana Berardi; Giovanni Randon; Pietro Cardone; Giovanni Schinzari; Franco Silvestris; Marco Tucci Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Angel Qin; Songzhu Zhao; Abdul Miah; Lai Wei; Sandipkumar Patel; Andrew Johns; Madison Grogan; Erin M Bertino; Kai He; Peter G Shields; Gregory P Kalemkerian; Shirish M Gadgeel; Nithya Ramnath; Bryan J Schneider; Khaled A Hassan; Nicholas Szerlip; Zoey Chopra; Sara Journey; Jessica Waninger; Daniel Spakowicz; David P Carbone; Carolyn J Presley; Gregory A Otterson; Michael D Green; Dwight H Owen Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2021-04-20 Impact factor: 12.693
Authors: Johanna Matull; Elisabeth Livingstone; Axel Wetter; Lisa Zimmer; Anne Zaremba; Harald Lahner; Dirk Schadendorf; Selma Ugurel Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2020-11-11 Impact factor: 6.244