@article{KochPetzoldWesselyetal.2022,
  author    = {Koch, Elias A. T. and Petzold, Anne and Wessely, Anja and Dippel, Edgar and Gesierich, Anja and Gutzmer, Ralf and Hassel, Jessica C. and Haferkamp, Sebastian and K{\"a}hler, Katharina C. and Knorr, Harald and Kreuzberg, Nicole and Leiter, Ulrike and Loquai, Carmen and Meier, Friedegund and Meissner, Markus and Mohr, Peter and Pf{\"o}hler, Claudia and Rahimi, Farnaz and Schadendorf, Dirk and Schell, Beatrice and Schlaak, Max and Terheyden, Patrick and Thoms, Kai-Martin and Schuler-Thurner, Beatrice and Ugurel, Selma and Ulrich, Jens and Utikal, Jochen and Weichenthal, Michael and Ziller, Fabian and Berking, Carola and Heppt, Markus V.},
  title     = {Immune checkpoint blockade for metastatic uveal melanoma: re-induction following resistance or toxicity},
  series = {Cancers},
  volume    = {14},
  journal   = {Cancers},
  number    = {3},
  issn      = {2072-6694},
  doi       = {10.3390/cancers14030518},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-254814},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Re-induction with immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) needs to be considered in many patients with uveal melanoma (UM) due to limited systemic treatment options. Here, we provide hitherto the first analysis of ICB re-induction in UM. A total of 177 patients with metastatic UM treated with ICB were included from German skin cancer centers and the German national skin cancer registry (ADOReg). To investigate the impact of ICB re-induction, two cohorts were compared: patients who received at least one ICB re-induction (cohort A, n = 52) versus those who received only one treatment line of ICB (cohort B, n = 125). In cohort A, a transient benefit of overall survival (OS) was observed at 6 and 12 months after the treatment start of ICB. There was no significant difference in OS between both groups (p = 0.1) with a median OS of 16.2 months (cohort A, 95\% CI: 11.1-23.8) versus 9.4 months (cohort B, 95\% CI: 6.1-14.9). Patients receiving re-induction of ICB (cohort A) had similar response rates compared to those receiving ICB once. Re-induction of ICB may yield a clinical benefit for a small subgroup of patients even after resistance or development of toxicities.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KochPetzoldWesselyetal.2021,
  author    = {Koch, Elias A. T. and Petzold, Anne and Wessely, Anja and Dippel, Edgar and Gesierich, Anja and Gutzmer, Ralf and Hassel, Jessica C. and Haferkamp, Sebastian and Hohberger, Bettina and K{\"a}hler, Katharina C. and Knorr, Harald and Kreuzberg, Nicole and Leiter, Ulrike and Loquai, Carmen and Meier, Friedegund and Meissner, Markus and Mohr, Peter and Pf{\"o}hler, Claudia and Rahimi, Farnaz and Schadendorf, Dirk and Schell, Beatrice and Schlaak, Max and Terheyden, Patrick and Thoms, Kai-Martin and Schuler-Thurner, Beatrice and Ugurel, Selma and Ulrich, Jens and Utikal, Jochen and Weichenthal, Michael and Ziller, Fabian and Berking, Carola and Heppt, Markus},
  title     = {Immune checkpoint blockade for metastatic uveal melanoma: patterns of response and survival according to the presence of hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis},
  series = {Cancers},
  volume    = {13},
  journal   = {Cancers},
  number    = {13},
  issn      = {2072-6694},
  doi       = {10.3390/cancers13133359},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-242603},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Background: Since there is no standardized and effective treatment for advanced uveal melanoma (UM), the prognosis is dismal once metastases develop. Due to the availability of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) in the real-world setting, the prognosis of metastatic UM has improved. However, it is unclear how the presence of hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis impacts the response and survival after ICB. Methods: A total of 178 patients with metastatic UM treated with ICB were included in this analysis. Patients were recruited from German skin cancer centers and the German national skin cancer registry (ADOReg). To investigate the impact of hepatic metastasis, two cohorts were compared: patients with liver metastasis only (cohort A, n = 55) versus those with both liver and extra-hepatic metastasis (cohort B, n = 123). Data were analyzed in both cohorts for response to treatment, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). The survival and progression probabilities were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Log-rank tests, χ\(^2\) tests, and t-tests were performed to detect significant differences between both cohorts. Results: The median OS of the overall population was 16 months (95\% CI 13.4-23.7) and the median PFS, 2.8 months (95\% CI 2.5-3.0). The median OS was longer in cohort B than in cohort A (18.2 vs. 6.1 months; p = 0.071). The best objective response rate to dual ICB was 13.8\% and to anti-PD-1 monotherapy 8.9\% in the entire population. Patients with liver metastases only had a lower response to dual ICB, yet without significance (cohort A 8.7\% vs. cohort B 16.7\%; p = 0.45). Adverse events (AE) occurred in 41.6\%. Severe AE were observed in 26.3\% and evenly distributed between both cohorts. Conclusion: The survival of this large cohort of patients with advanced UM was more favorable than reported in previous benchmark studies. Patients with both hepatic and extrahepatic metastasis showed more favorable survival and higher response to dual ICB than those with hepatic metastasis only.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HaistStegeLangetal.2022,
  author    = {Haist, Maximilian and Stege, Henner and Lang, Berenice Mareen and Tsochataridou, Aikaterini and Salzmann, Martin and Mohr, Peter and Schadendorf, Dirk and Ugurel, Selma and Placke, Jan-Malte and Weichenthal, Michael and Gutzmer, Ralf and Leiter, Ulrike and Kaatz, Martin and Haferkamp, Sebastian and Berking, Carola and Heppt, Markus and Tschechne, Barbara and Schummer, Patrick and Gebhardt, Christoffer and Grabbe, Stephan and Loquai, Carmen},
  title     = {Response to first-line treatment with immune-checkpoint inhibitors in patients with advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: a multicenter, retrospective analysis from the German ADOReg registry},
  series = {Cancers},
  volume    = {14},
  journal   = {Cancers},
  number    = {22},
  issn      = {2072-6694},
  doi       = {10.3390/cancers14225543},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-297506},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is a common malignancy of the skin and has an overall favorable outcome, except for patients with an advanced stage of the disease. The efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) for advanced cSCC has been demonstrated in recent clinical studies, but data from real-world cohorts and trial-ineligible cSCC patients are limited. We retrospectively investigated patients with advanced cSCC who have been treated with CPI in a first-line setting at eight German skin cancer centers registered within the multicenter registry ADOReg. Clinical outcome parameters including response, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS), time-to-next-treatment (TTNT), and toxicity were analyzed and have been stratified by the individual immune status. Among 39 evaluable patients, the tumor response rate (rwTRR) was 48.6\%, the median PFS was 29.0 months, and the median OS was not reached. In addition, 9 patients showed an impaired immune status due to immunosuppressive medication or hematological diseases. Our data demonstrated that CPI also evoked tumor responses among immunocompromised patients (rwTRR: 48.1 vs. 50.0\%), although these responses less often resulted in durable remissions. In line with this, the median PFS (11 vs. 40 months, p = 0.059), TTNT (12 months vs. NR, p = 0.016), and OS (29 months vs. NR, p < 0.001) were significantly shorter for this patient cohort. CPI therapy was well tolerated in both subcohorts with 15\% discontinuing therapy due to toxicity. Our real-world data show that first-line CPI therapy produced strong and durable responses among patients with advanced cSCC. Immunocompromised patients were less likely to achieve long-term benefit from anti-PD1 treatment, despite similar tumor response rates.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GlutschSchummerKneitzetal.2022,
  author    = {Glutsch, Valerie and Schummer, Patrick and Kneitz, Hermann and Gesierich, Anja and Goebeler, Matthias and Klein, Detlef and Posch, Christian and Gebhardt, Christoffer and Haferkamp, Sebastian and Zimmer, Lisa and Becker, J{\"u}rgen C and Leiter, Ulrike and Weichenthal, Michael and Schadendorf, Dirk and Ugurel, Selma and Schilling, Bastian},
  title     = {Ipilimumab plus nivolumab in avelumab-refractory Merkel cell carcinoma: a multicenter study of the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG},
  series = {Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer},
  volume    = {10},
  journal   = {Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer},
  number    = {11},
  issn      = {2051-1426},
  doi       = {10.1136/jitc-2022-005930},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-304613},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Merkel cell carcinoma is a rare, highly aggressive skin cancer with neuroendocrine differentiation. Immune checkpoint inhibition has significantly improved treatment outcomes in metastatic disease with response rates to programmed cell death protein 1/programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-1/PD-L1) inhibition of up to 62\%. However, primary and secondary resistance to PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition remains a so far unsolved clinical challenge since effective and safe treatment options for these patients are lacking.Fourteen patients with advanced (non-resectable stage III or stage IV, Union international contre le cancer 2017) Merkel cell carcinoma with primary resistance to the PD-L1 inhibitor avelumab receiving subsequent therapy (second or later line) with ipilimumab plus nivolumab (IPI/NIVO) were identified in the prospective multicenter skin cancer registry ADOREG. Five of these 14 patients were reported previously and were included in this analysis with additional follow-up. Overall response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and adverse events were analyzed.All 14 patients received avelumab as first-line treatment. Thereof, 12 patients had shown primary resistance with progressive disease in the first tumor assessment, while two patients had initially experienced a short-lived stabilization (stable disease). Six patients had at least one systemic treatment in between avelumab and IPI/NIVO. In total, 7 patients responded to IPI/NIVO (overall response rate 50\%), and response was ongoing in 4 responders at last follow-up. After a median follow-up of 18.85 months, median PFS was 5.07 months (95\% CI 2.43—not available (NA)), and median OS was not reached. PFS rates at 12 months and 24 months were 42.9\% and 26.8 \%, respectively. The OS rate at 36 months was 64.3\%. Only 3 (21\%) patients did not receive all 4 cycles of IPI/NIVO due to immune-related adverse events.In this multicenter evaluation, we observed high response rates, a durable benefit and promising OS rates after treatment with later-line combined IPI/NIVO. In conclusion, our patient cohort supports our prior findings with an encouraging activity of second-line or later-line IPI/NIVO in patients with anti-PD-L1-refractory Merkel cell carcinoma.},
  language  = {en}
}