@article{GerhardHartmannGoergenBroeckelmannetal.2022,
  author    = {Gerhard-Hartmann, Elena and Goergen, Helen and Br{\"o}ckelmann, Paul J. and Mottok, Anja and Steinm{\"u}ller, Tabea and Grund, Johanna and Zam{\`o}, Alberto and Ben-Neriah, Susana and Sasse, Stephanie and Borchmann, Sven and Fuchs, Michael and Borchmann, Peter and Reinke, Sarah and Engert, Andreas and Veldman, Johanna and Diepstra, Arjan and Klapper, Wolfram and Rosenwald, Andreas},
  title     = {9p24.1 alterations and programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 expression in early stage unfavourable classical Hodgkin lymphoma: an analysis from the German Hodgkin Study Group NIVAHL trial},
  series = {British Journal of Haematology},
  volume    = {196},
  journal   = {British Journal of Haematology},
  number    = {1},
  doi       = {10.1111/bjh.17793},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-258358},
  pages     = {116-126},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {High programmed cell death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1) protein expression and copy number alterations (CNAs) of the corresponding genomic locus 9p24.1 in Hodgkin- and Reed-Sternberg cells (HRSC) have been shown to be associated with favourable response to anti-PD-1 checkpoint inhibition in relapsed/refractory (r/r) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). In the present study, we investigated baseline 9p24.1 status as well as PD-L1 and major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I and II protein expression in 82 biopsies from patients with early stage unfavourable cHL treated with anti-PD-1-based first-line treatment in the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) NIVAHL trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03004833). All evaluated specimens showed 9p24.1 CNA in HRSC to some extent, but with high intratumoral heterogeneity and an overall smaller range of alterations than reported in advanced-stage or r/r cHL. All but two cases (97\%) showed PD-L1 expression by the tumour cells in variable amounts. While MHC-I was rarely expressed in >50\% of HRSC, MHC-II expression in >50\% of HRSC was found more frequently. No obvious impact of 9p24.1 CNA or PD-L1 and MHC-I/II expression on early response to the highly effective anti-PD-1-based NIVAHL first-line treatment was observed. Further studies evaluating an expanded panel of potential biomarkers are needed to optimally stratify anti-PD-1 first-line cHL treatment.},
  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{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{SchummerSchillingGesierich2020,
  author    = {Schummer, Patrick and Schilling, Bastian and Gesierich, Anja},
  title     = {Long‑Term Outcomes in BRAF‑Mutated Melanoma Treated with Combined Targeted Therapy or Immune Checkpoint Blockade: Are We Approaching a True Cure?},
  series = {American Journal of Clinical Dermatology},
  volume    = {21},
  journal   = {American Journal of Clinical Dermatology},
  issn      = {1175-0561},
  doi       = {10.1007/s40257-020-00509-z},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-234818},
  pages     = {493-504},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Approximately 50\% of all melanomas harbor an activating BRAF mutation. In patients suffering from an advanced melanoma with such a somatic alteration, combined targeted therapy with a BRAF and MEK inhibitor can be applied to significantly increase the survival probability. Nevertheless, resistance mechanisms, as well as negative predictive biomarkers (elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, high number of metastatic organ disease sites, brain metastasis), remain a major problem in treating melanoma patients. Recently, a landmark overall survival (OS) rate of 34\% after 5 years of combined targeted therapy in treatment-na{\"i}ve patients was reported. On the other hand, patients harboring a BRAF mutation and receiving first-line immune checkpoint blockade with ipilimumab plus nivolumab showed a 5-year OS rate of 60\%. As indicated by these data, long-term survival can be reached in melanoma patients but it remains unclear if this is equivalent to reaching a true cure for metastatic melanoma. In this review, we summarize the recent results for combined targeted therapy and immunotherapy in advanced melanoma harboring an activating BRAF mutation and discuss the impact of baseline characteristics on long-term outcome.},
  language  = {en}
}