| Literature DB >> 32582963 |
Giulia C Leonardi1, Saverio Candido1, Luca Falzone2, Demetrios A Spandidos3, Massimo Libra1.
Abstract
In a relatively short period of time, treatment strategies for metastatic melanoma have radically changed leading to an unprecedented improvement in patient survival. In this period, immunotherapy options have evolved from cytokine‑based approaches to antibody‑mediated inhibition of immune checkpoints, cancer vaccines and pharmacological modulation of the melanoma microenvironment. Combination of immunotherapy strategies and the association of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with BRAF V600 targeted therapy show encouraging results. The future of drug development in this field is promising. The comprehension of primary and acquired resistance mechanisms to ICIs and the dissection of melanoma immunobiology will be instrumental for the development of new treatment strategies and to improve clinical trial design. Moreover, biomarker discovery will help patient stratification and management during immunotherapy treatment. In this review, we summarize landmark clinical trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced melanoma and discuss the rational for immunotherapy combinations. Immunotherapy approaches at early stage of clinical development and recent advances in melanoma immunotherapy biomarker development are also discussed.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32582963 PMCID: PMC7384846 DOI: 10.3892/ijo.2020.5088
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Oncol ISSN: 1019-6439 Impact factor: 5.650
Figure 1The cancer immunity cycle.
Landmark clinical trials of immunotherapy in locally advanced and metastatic melanoma.
| Trial name | Primary outcome | Treatment arms | ORR (%) | Median PFS (months) | Median OS (months) | 1yr-RFS (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CA184-002 ( | OS | gp100 vaccine | 1.5 | 2.8 | 6.4 | - |
| gp100 vaccine+ipilimumab | 5.7 | 2.8 | 10.0 | - | ||
| ipilimumab | 11.0 | 2.9 | 10.1 | - | ||
| CA184-024 | OS | Dacarbazine | 10.3 | 3.0 | 9.1 | - |
| Dacarbazine+ipilimumab | 15.2 | 3.0 | 11.2 | - | ||
| CheckMate 066 ( | OS | Dacarbazine | 14.4 | 2.2 | 11.2 | - |
| Nivolumab | 42.9 | 5.1 | 37.5 | - | ||
| KEYNOTE-006 ( | PFS, OS | Ipilimumab | 11.9 | 3.4 | 16.0 | - |
| Pembrolizumab q2w | 33.7 | 5.6 | 32.7 | |||
| Pembrolizumab q3w | 32.9 | 4.1 | ||||
| CheckMate 067 ( | PFS, OS | Ipilimumab | 19.0 | 2.9 | 19.9 | - |
| Nivolumab | 45.0 | 6.9 | 36.9 | - | ||
| Nivolumab+ipilimumab | 58.0 | 11.5 | NR | - | ||
| OPTiM ( | Durable response lasting ≥6 months | GM-CSF | Not reported | Not reported | 18.9 | - |
| T-VEC | Not reported | Not reported | 23.3 | - | ||
| CheckMate 238 ( | RFS | Nivolumab | - | - | - | 70.5 |
| Ipilimumab | - | - | - | 60.8 | ||
| EORTC1325/ KEYNOTE-054 ( | RFS | Pembrolizumab | - | - | - | 75.4 |
| Placebo | - | - | - | 61.0 |
ORR, overall response rate; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; RFS, relapse-free survival; NR, not reached; q2w, every two weeks; q3w, every three weeks.
Pooled data from the pembrolizumab arms.
Figure 2Immune checkpoints and their inhibitors in advanced melanoma. PD, programmed death; TIM-3, T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin-domain containing-3; LAG3, lymphocyte activation gene 3; TCR, T cell receptor; CTLA-4, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4.