Yun Song1, Richard J Straker2, Xiaowei Xu3, David E Elder3, Phyllis A Gimotty4, Alexander C Huang5,6, Tara C Mitchell5, Ravi K Amaravadi5, Lynn M Schuchter5, Giorgos C Karakousis2. 1. Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. yun.song@uphs.upenn.edu. 2. Department of Surgery, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 3. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 4. Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 5. Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 6. Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has transformed melanoma treatment, but optimal sequencing of ICB and surgery for clinically evident nodal metastasis remains undefined. We evaluated adjuvant-only (AT) and neoadjuvant/adjuvant (NAT) ICB with respect to survival outcomes in this patient population. METHODS: Patients who underwent lymphadenectomy (1 January 2011 to 31 July 2018) and received perioperative ICB at an academic center were identified. AT was defined as postoperative ICB, and NAT was defined as one to two cycles of ICB prior to resection with continuation of therapy following surgery. Three-year disease-free survival (DFS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were estimated. RESULTS: Of 59 patients, 18 (31%) received AT and 41 (69%) received NAT. The AT and NAT groups did not differ in age (median 53 vs. 62 years, p = 0.16) or stage (IIIB 33% vs. 29%, IIIC 56% vs. 68%, IIID 11% vs. 2%, p = 0.34). Although 3-year DFS did not differ significantly by treatment sequencing (NAT vs. AT, hazard ratio [HR] 0.56, p = 0.17), NAT was associated with improved 3-year DDFS (HR 0.38, p = 0.028). Of 39 NAT patients with evaluable pathologic response, 23 (59%) and 5 (13%) had a pathologic partial response (pPR) and pathologic complete response (pCR), respectively. Patients with pPR/pCR experienced improved 3-year DFS (HR 0.16, p = 0.001), LRFS (HR 0.17, p = 0.003), and DDFS (HR 0.26, p = 0.029) compared with those with no response. Three-year MSS did not differ significantly by response (p = 0.062). CONCLUSION: NAT may be associated with improved 3-year DDFS compared with AT sequencing, and allows for early assessment of pathologic response. Further prospective evaluation of treatment sequencing is warranted.
BACKGROUND: Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has transformed melanoma treatment, but optimal sequencing of ICB and surgery for clinically evident nodal metastasis remains undefined. We evaluated adjuvant-only (AT) and neoadjuvant/adjuvant (NAT) ICB with respect to survival outcomes in this patient population. METHODS:Patients who underwent lymphadenectomy (1 January 2011 to 31 July 2018) and received perioperative ICB at an academic center were identified. AT was defined as postoperative ICB, and NAT was defined as one to two cycles of ICB prior to resection with continuation of therapy following surgery. Three-year disease-free survival (DFS), locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were estimated. RESULTS: Of 59 patients, 18 (31%) received AT and 41 (69%) received NAT. The AT and NAT groups did not differ in age (median 53 vs. 62 years, p = 0.16) or stage (IIIB 33% vs. 29%, IIIC 56% vs. 68%, IIID 11% vs. 2%, p = 0.34). Although 3-year DFS did not differ significantly by treatment sequencing (NAT vs. AT, hazard ratio [HR] 0.56, p = 0.17), NAT was associated with improved 3-year DDFS (HR 0.38, p = 0.028). Of 39 NAT patients with evaluable pathologic response, 23 (59%) and 5 (13%) had a pathologic partial response (pPR) and pathologic complete response (pCR), respectively. Patients with pPR/pCR experienced improved 3-year DFS (HR 0.16, p = 0.001), LRFS (HR 0.17, p = 0.003), and DDFS (HR 0.26, p = 0.029) compared with those with no response. Three-year MSS did not differ significantly by response (p = 0.062). CONCLUSION: NAT may be associated with improved 3-year DDFS compared with AT sequencing, and allows for early assessment of pathologic response. Further prospective evaluation of treatment sequencing is warranted.
Authors: Alexander M M Eggermont; Christian U Blank; Mario Mandala; Georgina V Long; Victoria Atkinson; Stéphane Dalle; Andrew Haydon; Mikhail Lichinitser; Adnan Khattak; Matteo S Carlino; Shahneen Sandhu; James Larkin; Susana Puig; Paolo A Ascierto; Piotr Rutkowski; Dirk Schadendorf; Rutger Koornstra; Leonel Hernandez-Aya; Michele Maio; Alfonsus J M van den Eertwegh; Jean-Jacques Grob; Ralf Gutzmer; Rahima Jamal; Paul Lorigan; Nageatte Ibrahim; Sandrine Marreaud; Alexander C J van Akkooi; Stefan Suciu; Caroline Robert Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-04-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Christian U Blank; Elisa A Rozeman; Lorenzo F Fanchi; Karolina Sikorska; Bart van de Wiel; Pia Kvistborg; Oscar Krijgsman; Marlous van den Braber; Daisy Philips; Annegien Broeks; Johannes V van Thienen; Henk A Mallo; Sandra Adriaansz; Sylvia Ter Meulen; Loes M Pronk; Lindsay G Grijpink-Ongering; Annemarie Bruining; Rachel M Gittelman; Sarah Warren; Harm van Tinteren; Daniel S Peeper; John B A G Haanen; Alexander C J van Akkooi; Ton N Schumacher Journal: Nat Med Date: 2018-10-08 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Charles M Balch; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Seng-Jaw Soong; John F Thompson; Shouluan Ding; David R Byrd; Natale Cascinelli; Alistair J Cochran; Daniel G Coit; Alexander M Eggermont; Timothy Johnson; John M Kirkwood; Stanley P Leong; Kelly M McMasters; Martin C Mihm; Donald L Morton; Merrick I Ross; Vernon K Sondak Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-04-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Elisa A Rozeman; Alexander M Menzies; Alexander C J van Akkooi; Chandra Adhikari; Carolien Bierman; Bart A van de Wiel; Richard A Scolyer; Oscar Krijgsman; Karolina Sikorska; Hanna Eriksson; Annegien Broeks; Johannes V van Thienen; Alexander D Guminski; Alex Torres Acosta; Sylvia Ter Meulen; Anne Miek Koenen; Linda J W Bosch; Kerwin Shannon; Loes M Pronk; Maria Gonzalez; Sydney Ch'ng; Lindsay G Grijpink-Ongering; Jonathan Stretch; Stijn Heijmink; Harm van Tinteren; John B A G Haanen; Omgo E Nieweg; Willem M C Klop; Charlotte L Zuur; Robyn P M Saw; Winan J van Houdt; Daniel S Peeper; Andrew J Spillane; Johan Hansson; Ton N Schumacher; Georgina V Long; Christian U Blank Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2019-05-31 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Alexander M M Eggermont; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Jean-Jacques Grob; Reinhard Dummer; Jedd D Wolchok; Henrik Schmidt; Omid Hamid; Caroline Robert; Paolo A Ascierto; Jon M Richards; Céleste Lebbé; Virginia Ferraresi; Michael Smylie; Jeffrey S Weber; Michele Maio; Lars Bastholt; Laurent Mortier; Luc Thomas; Saad Tahir; Axel Hauschild; Jessica C Hassel; F Stephen Hodi; Corina Taitt; Veerle de Pril; Gaetan de Schaetzen; Stefan Suciu; Alessandro Testori Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-10-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jing Liu; Stephen J Blake; Michelle C R Yong; Heidi Harjunpää; Shin Foong Ngiow; Kazuyoshi Takeda; Arabella Young; Jake S O'Donnell; Stacey Allen; Mark J Smyth; Michele W L Teng Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2016-09-23 Impact factor: 39.397
Authors: Jeffrey Weber; Mario Mandala; Michele Del Vecchio; Helen J Gogas; Ana M Arance; C Lance Cowey; Stéphane Dalle; Michael Schenker; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; Ivan Marquez-Rodas; Jean-Jacques Grob; Marcus O Butler; Mark R Middleton; Michele Maio; Victoria Atkinson; Paola Queirolo; Rene Gonzalez; Ragini R Kudchadkar; Michael Smylie; Nicolas Meyer; Laurent Mortier; Michael B Atkins; Georgina V Long; Shailender Bhatia; Celeste Lebbé; Piotr Rutkowski; Kenji Yokota; Naoya Yamazaki; Tae M Kim; Veerle de Pril; Javier Sabater; Anila Qureshi; James Larkin; Paolo A Ascierto Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-09-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Richard A Scolyer; Kenneth R Hess; Vernon K Sondak; Georgina V Long; Merrick I Ross; Alexander J Lazar; Mark B Faries; John M Kirkwood; Grant A McArthur; Lauren E Haydu; Alexander M M Eggermont; Keith T Flaherty; Charles M Balch; John F Thompson Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2017-10-13 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Alexander C Huang; Robert J Orlowski; Xiaowei Xu; Rosemarie Mick; Sangeeth M George; Patrick K Yan; Sasikanth Manne; Adam A Kraya; Bradley Wubbenhorst; Liza Dorfman; Kurt D'Andrea; Brandon M Wenz; Shujing Liu; Lakshmi Chilukuri; Andrew Kozlov; Mary Carberry; Lydia Giles; Melanie W Kier; Felix Quagliarello; Suzanne McGettigan; Kristin Kreider; Lakshmanan Annamalai; Qing Zhao; Robin Mogg; Wei Xu; Wendy M Blumenschein; Jennifer H Yearley; Gerald P Linette; Ravi K Amaravadi; Lynn M Schuchter; Ramin S Herati; Bertram Bengsch; Katherine L Nathanson; Michael D Farwell; Giorgos C Karakousis; E John Wherry; Tara C Mitchell Journal: Nat Med Date: 2019-02-25 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Rodabe N Amaria; Sangeetha M Reddy; Hussein A Tawbi; Michael A Davies; Merrick I Ross; Isabella C Glitza; Janice N Cormier; Carol Lewis; Wen-Jen Hwu; Ehab Hanna; Adi Diab; Michael K Wong; Richard Royal; Neil Gross; Randal Weber; Stephen Y Lai; Richard Ehlers; Jorge Blando; Denái R Milton; Scott Woodman; Robin Kageyama; Daniel K Wells; Patrick Hwu; Sapna P Patel; Anthony Lucci; Amy Hessel; Jeffrey E Lee; Jeffrey Gershenwald; Lauren Simpson; Elizabeth M Burton; Liberty Posada; Lauren Haydu; Linghua Wang; Shaojun Zhang; Alexander J Lazar; Courtney W Hudgens; Vancheswaran Gopalakrishnan; Alexandre Reuben; Miles C Andrews; Christine N Spencer; Victor Prieto; Padmanee Sharma; James Allison; Michael T Tetzlaff; Jennifer A Wargo Journal: Nat Med Date: 2018-10-08 Impact factor: 53.440