Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (5)
Document Type
- Journal article (5)
Language
- English (5)
Keywords
- PD-1 (3)
- BRAF (2)
- CTLA-4 (2)
- immune checkpoint blockade (2)
- melanoma (2)
- treatment resistance (2)
- uveal melanoma (2)
- Autoimmunity (1)
- Cell therapy (1)
- Copaxone® (1)
The approval of BRAF and MEK inhibitors has signifi-cantly improved treatment outcomes for patients with BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma. The 3 first-line targeted therapy trials have provided similar results, and thus the identification of predictive biomarkers may generate a more precise basis for clinical deci-sion-making. Elevated baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) has already been determined as a strong prog-nostic factor. Therefore, this indirect analysis compa-red subgroups with elevated baseline LDH across the pivotal targeted therapy trials co-BRIM, COMBI-v and COLUMBUS part 1. The Bucher method was used to compare progression-free survival, objective response rate and overall survival indirectly. The results show a non-significant risk reduction for progression in the subgroup with elevated baseline LDH receiving vemu-rafenib plus cobimetinib compared with dabrafenib plus trametinib and encorafenib plus binimetinib. Al-though an indirect comparison, these data might pro-vide some guidance for treatment recommendations in melanoma patients with elevated LDH.
Background: Dendritic cells (DCs) rendered suppressive by treatment with mitomycin C and loaded with the autoantigen myelin basic protein demonstrated earlier their ability to prevent experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), the animal model for multiple sclerosis (MS). This provides an approach for prophylactic vaccination against autoimmune diseases. For clinical application such DCs are difficult to generate and autoantigens hold the risk of exacerbating the disease.
Methods: We replaced DCs by peripheral mononuclear cells and myelin autoantigens by glatiramer acetate (Copaxone ®), a drug approved for the treatment of MS. Spleen cells were loaded with Copaxone®, incubated with mitomycin C (MICCop) and injected into mice after the first bout of relapsing-remitting EAE. Immunosuppression mediated by MICCop was investigated in vivo by daily assessment of clinical signs of paralysis and in in vitro restimulation assays of peripheral immune cells. Cytokine profiling was performed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Migration of MICCop cells after injection was examined by biodistribution analysis of 111Indium-labelled MICCop. The number and inhibitory activity of CD4+CD25+FoxP3+ regulatory T cells were analysed by histology, flow cytometry and in vitro mixed lymphocyte cultures. In order to assess the specificity of MICCop-induced suppression, treated EAE mice were challenged with the control protein ovalbumin. Humoral and cellular immune responses were then determined by ELISA and in vitro antigen restimulation assay.
Results: MICCop cells were able to inhibit the harmful autoreactive T-cell response and prevented mice from further relapses without affecting general immune responses. Administered MICCop migrated to various organs leading to an increased infiltration of the spleen and the central nervous system with CD4+CD25+FoxP3+ cells displaying a suppressive cytokine profile and inhibiting T-cell responses.
Conclusion: We describe a clinically applicable cell therapeutic approach for controlling relapses in autoimmune encephalomyelitis by specifically silencing the deleterious autoimmune response.
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.
Adjuvant treatment of melanoma patients with immune-checkpoint inhibition (ICI) and targeted therapy (TT) significantly improved recurrence-free survival. This study investigates the real-world situation of 904 patients from 13 German skin cancer centers with an indication for adjuvant treatment since the approval of adjuvant ICI and TT. From adjusted log-binomial regression models, we estimated relative risks for associations between various influence factors and treatment decisions (adjuvant therapy yes/no, TT vs. ICI in BRAF mutant patients). Of these patients, 76.9% (95% CI 74–80) opted for a systemic adjuvant treatment. The probability of starting an adjuvant treatment was 26% lower in patients >65 years (RR 0.74, 95% CI 68–80). The most common reasons against adjuvant treatment given by patients were age (29.4%, 95% CI 24–38), and fear of adverse events (21.1%, 95% CI 16–28) and impaired quality of life (11.9%, 95% CI 7–16). Of all BRAF-mutated patients who opted for adjuvant treatment, 52.9% (95% CI 47–59) decided for ICI. Treatment decision for TT or ICI was barely associated with age, gender and tumor stage, but with comorbidities and affiliated center. Shortly after their approval, adjuvant treatments have been well accepted by physicians and patients. Age plays a decisive role in the decision for adjuvant treatment, while pre-existing autoimmune disease and regional differences influence the choice between TT or ICI.
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.