Basal cell carcinoma is the most common type of skin cancer, and surgical excision with clear mar... more Basal cell carcinoma is the most common type of skin cancer, and surgical excision with clear margins is the standard of care. Surgical margins are determined based on risk factors (high or low risk) for recurrence according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and Japanese basal cell carcinoma guidelines. The clarity of the clinical tumor border (well‐defined or poorly defined) is considered a risk factor, and significant discrepancies in the judgment of clinical tumor borders among dermato‐oncologists may occur. Therefore, we analyzed the dermato‐oncologists’ concordance in judging the clinical tumor border of basal cell carcinoma. Forty‐seven dermato‐oncologists (experts: 37; young trainees: 10) participated in this study. The datasets of clinical and dermoscopic photographs of 79 Japanese cases of head and neck basal cell carcinoma were used to determine the concordance in the judgment of clinical tumor border. The probability of the border that was selected more often was used to calculate the rater agreement rate for each dataset. Correct judgment was defined as a more frequently selected border, and the concordance rate of clarity of clinical tumor border for each dermato‐oncologist was calculated based on the definition of the correct judgment. A median concordance rate of 85% or higher for all dermato‐oncologists was predefined as an acceptable rate for clinical use. Of the 79 datasets, rater agreement rates were 80–100%, 60–79%, and 51–59% for 55, 19, and five datasets, respectively. The median concordance rate for all dermato‐oncologists was 86% (interquartile range: 82–89%). There was no significant difference in the concordance rate between the experts and the trainees (median, 87% vs. 85.5%; p = 0.58). The concordance rates of dermato‐oncologists for all datasets were relatively high and acceptable for clinical use.
9542 Background: Anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy (PD1) has been commonly used for patients with ad... more 9542 Background: Anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy (PD1) has been commonly used for patients with advanced acral melanoma (AM). However, recent studies have demonstrated the limited clinical efficacy of PD1 in AM compared to non-acral cutaneous melanoma, particularly in nail apparatus melanoma. Although advanced AM patients are strong candidates for first-line anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 combination therapy (PD1+CTLA4), data on the clinical efficacy of PD1+CTLA4 in AM are lacking. Thus, we aimed to compare the clinical efficacies of PD1+CTLA4 and PD1 in Japanese advanced AM patients. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of advanced AM patients treated with PD1+CTLA4 or PD1 as first-line immunotherapy at 23 Japanese institutions. Clinical response was assessed using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. Survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Toxicity was assessed according to CTCAE 4.0. Results: A total of 192 patients (median age, 72 years) with advanced AM (palm and sole melanoma, 135; nail apparatus melanoma, 57) were included in the study. PD1+CTLA4 and PD1 were used as first-line immunotherapy in 39 and 153 patients, respectively. The baseline demographics and characteristics were similar between the PD1+CTLA4 and PD1 groups, except for age (median age 67.3 vs. 73.2; P = 0.005). The objective response rate (ORR) in PD1+CTLA4 was significantly higher than that of the PD1 group (38.5% vs. 16.3%; P = 0.047). The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the PD1+CTLA4 group tended to be longer than those of the PD1 group, but the differences were not significant (median PFS 7.3 months vs. 4.5 months; P = 0.19, median OS 43.6 months vs. 18.2 months; P = 0.19). In the subgroup analysis of the palm and sole melanoma cohorts, no significant differences in ORR, PFS, and OS were observed between the PD1+CTLA4 and PD1 groups (ORR 31% vs. 20.8%; P = 0.67, median PFS 5.3 months vs. 5.9 months; P = 0.87, median OS not reached vs. 22.3 months; P = 0.66). Meanwhile, the nail apparatus melanoma cohort in the PD1+CTLA4 group exhibited significantly higher ORR, and longer PFS and OS than the PD1 group (ORR 60% vs 6.1%; P < 0.001; median PFS 19.6 months vs 3.8 months; P = 0.008, median OS 43.6 months vs 13.5 months; P = 0.049). Due to immune-related adverse events in all cohorts, the treatment cessation rate was higher in the PD1+CTLA4 group than the PD1 group (59% vs. 11.8%). Conclusions: PD1+CTLA4 was clinically more efficacious than PD 1 in advanced AM patients. Notably, advanced nail apparatus melanoma patients were strong candidates for first-line PD1+CTLA4.
BackgroundThe clinicopathologic and genetic features of cutaneous melanoma with a BRAF V600K muta... more BackgroundThe clinicopathologic and genetic features of cutaneous melanoma with a BRAF V600K mutation are not well‐known. We aimed to evaluate these characteristics in comparison with those associated with BRAF V600E.MethodsReal‐time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and/or the MassARRAY® system were used to detect BRAF V600K in 16 invasive melanomas and confirm BRAF V600E in another 60 cases. Immunohistochemistry and panel next‐generation sequencing were used to evaluate protein expression and tumor mutation burden, respectively.ResultsThe median age of melanoma patients harboring the BRAF V600K mutation (72.5 years) was higher than those with the BRAF V600E (58.5 years). The two groups also differed in sex (13/16 [81.3%] male in the V600K group vs. 23/60 [38.3%] in V600E) and in the frequency of scalp involvement (8/16 [50.0%] in V600K vs. 1/60 [1.6%] in V600E). The clinical appearance was similar to a superficial spreading melanoma. Histopathologically, non‐nested lentiginous intraepidermal spread and subtle solar elastosis were observed. One patient (1/13, 7.7%) had a pre‐existing intradermal nevus. Diffuse PRAME immunoexpression was seen in only one (14.3%) of seven tested cases. Loss of p16 expression was observed in all 12 cases (100%) analyzed. The tumor mutation burden was 8 and 6 mutations/Mb in the two tested cases.ConclusionsMelanoma carrying the BRAF V600K mutation showed the predominance on the scalp of elderly men, lentiginous intraepidermal growth, subtle solar elastosis, possible existence of intradermal nevus component, frequent loss of p16 immunoexpression, limited immunoreactivity for PRAME, and intermediate tumor mutation burden.
TPS11579 Background: Cutaneous angiosarcoma (CAS) is a rare sarcoma and advanced cases face a com... more TPS11579 Background: Cutaneous angiosarcoma (CAS) is a rare sarcoma and advanced cases face a complex treatment regimen and dismal prognosis. Several cytotoxic agents (anthracycline, taxane, and gemcitabine) and targeted therapies (bevacizumab and sorafenib) have been tested for advanced disease in clinical trials with poor results. Since CAS commonly develops in elderly patients, high-grade adverse events from treatment may not be ideal and thus therapies featuring durable response and low comorbidity are in great demand. Recent studies suggest that CAS has a distinct genomic profile, including higher tumor mutational burden (TMB), compared to angiosarcomas developed in other sites. Moreover, we have shown that CAS with higher PD-1/L1 in the tumor microenvironment had statistically better overall survival compared with those without, indicating CAS susceptibility to immune checkpoint blockade therapy. However, to date, reports of immune checkpoint inhibitors for CAS are nonexistent. Methods: The present study is a phase 2, multicenter, single-arm clinical trial of ONO-4538 (nivolumab, 480 mg IV every 4 weeks) for patients with unresectable or metastatic CAS refractory to first-line paclitaxel. Twenty-three patients with advanced CAS will be enrolled at 11 sites in Japan with a primary objective to assess the confirmed response rate (H0 p < 5%, H1: p > 20%) to nivolumab. Secondary endpoints include PFS, OS, time to response, and adverse events. A correlative aim includes assessing tissue biomarkers using whole-genome sequencing (1023 genes including interferon-gamma associated genes and other known factors associated with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors) for association with response to nivolumab. The study started in April 2020 and remains open with 7 patients enrolled at time of Clinical trial information: UMIN000043039.
Background: Anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy is considered a preferred first-line treatment for adva... more Background: Anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy is considered a preferred first-line treatment for advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma. However, a recent international multi-center study suggested that the efficacy of immunotherapy is poorer in Asian patients in the non-acral cutaneous subtype. We hypothesized that the optimal first-line treatment for Asian patients may be different. Methods: We retrospectively collected data of Asian patients with advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma treated with first-line BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi), anti-PD-1 monotherapy (Anti-PD-1), and nivolumab plus ipilimumab (PD-1/CTLA-4) between 2016 and 2021 from 28 institutions in Japan. Results: We identified 336 patients treated with BRAF/MEKi (n = 236), Anti-PD-1 (n = 64) and PD-1/CTLA-4 (n = 36). The median follow-up duration was 19.9 months for all patients and 28.6 months for the 184 pa tients who were alive at their last follow-up. For patients treated with BRAF/MEKi, anti-PD-1, PD-1/CTLA-4, the median ages at baseline were 62, 62, and 53 years (p = 0.03); objective response rates were 69%, 27%, and 28% (p < 0.001); median progression-free survival (PFS) was 14.7, 5.4, and 5.8 months (p = 0.003), and median overall survival (OS) was 34.6, 37.0 months, and not reached, respectively (p = 0.535). In multivariable analysis, hazard ratios (HRs) for PFS of Anti-PD-1 and PD-1/CTLA-4 compared with BRAF/MEKi were 2.30 (p < 0.001) and 1.38 (p = 0.147), and for OS, HRs were 1.37 (p = 0.111) and 0.56 (p = 0.075), respectively. In propensity-score matching, BRAF/MEKi showed a tendency for longer PFS and equivalent OS with PD-1/CTLA-4 (HRs for PD-1/CTLA-4 were 1.78 [p = 0.149]) and 1.03 [p = 0.953], respectively). For patients who received second-line treatment, BRAF/MEKi followed by PD-1/CTLA-4 showed poor survival outcomes. Conclusions: The superiority of PD-1/CTLA-4 over BRAF/MEKi appears modest in Asian patients. First-line BRAF/MEKi remains feasible, but it is difficult to salvage at progression. Ethnicity should be considered when selecting systemic therapies until personalized biomarkers are available in daily practice. Further studies are needed to establish the optimal treatment sequence for Asian patients.
Basal cell carcinoma is the most common type of skin cancer, and surgical excision with clear mar... more Basal cell carcinoma is the most common type of skin cancer, and surgical excision with clear margins is the standard of care. Surgical margins are determined based on risk factors (high or low risk) for recurrence according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and Japanese basal cell carcinoma guidelines. The clarity of the clinical tumor border (well‐defined or poorly defined) is considered a risk factor, and significant discrepancies in the judgment of clinical tumor borders among dermato‐oncologists may occur. Therefore, we analyzed the dermato‐oncologists’ concordance in judging the clinical tumor border of basal cell carcinoma. Forty‐seven dermato‐oncologists (experts: 37; young trainees: 10) participated in this study. The datasets of clinical and dermoscopic photographs of 79 Japanese cases of head and neck basal cell carcinoma were used to determine the concordance in the judgment of clinical tumor border. The probability of the border that was selected more often was used to calculate the rater agreement rate for each dataset. Correct judgment was defined as a more frequently selected border, and the concordance rate of clarity of clinical tumor border for each dermato‐oncologist was calculated based on the definition of the correct judgment. A median concordance rate of 85% or higher for all dermato‐oncologists was predefined as an acceptable rate for clinical use. Of the 79 datasets, rater agreement rates were 80–100%, 60–79%, and 51–59% for 55, 19, and five datasets, respectively. The median concordance rate for all dermato‐oncologists was 86% (interquartile range: 82–89%). There was no significant difference in the concordance rate between the experts and the trainees (median, 87% vs. 85.5%; p = 0.58). The concordance rates of dermato‐oncologists for all datasets were relatively high and acceptable for clinical use.
9542 Background: Anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy (PD1) has been commonly used for patients with ad... more 9542 Background: Anti-PD-1 antibody monotherapy (PD1) has been commonly used for patients with advanced acral melanoma (AM). However, recent studies have demonstrated the limited clinical efficacy of PD1 in AM compared to non-acral cutaneous melanoma, particularly in nail apparatus melanoma. Although advanced AM patients are strong candidates for first-line anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 combination therapy (PD1+CTLA4), data on the clinical efficacy of PD1+CTLA4 in AM are lacking. Thus, we aimed to compare the clinical efficacies of PD1+CTLA4 and PD1 in Japanese advanced AM patients. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of advanced AM patients treated with PD1+CTLA4 or PD1 as first-line immunotherapy at 23 Japanese institutions. Clinical response was assessed using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. Survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Toxicity was assessed according to CTCAE 4.0. Results: A total of 192 patients (median age, 72 years) with advanced AM (palm and sole melanoma, 135; nail apparatus melanoma, 57) were included in the study. PD1+CTLA4 and PD1 were used as first-line immunotherapy in 39 and 153 patients, respectively. The baseline demographics and characteristics were similar between the PD1+CTLA4 and PD1 groups, except for age (median age 67.3 vs. 73.2; P = 0.005). The objective response rate (ORR) in PD1+CTLA4 was significantly higher than that of the PD1 group (38.5% vs. 16.3%; P = 0.047). The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the PD1+CTLA4 group tended to be longer than those of the PD1 group, but the differences were not significant (median PFS 7.3 months vs. 4.5 months; P = 0.19, median OS 43.6 months vs. 18.2 months; P = 0.19). In the subgroup analysis of the palm and sole melanoma cohorts, no significant differences in ORR, PFS, and OS were observed between the PD1+CTLA4 and PD1 groups (ORR 31% vs. 20.8%; P = 0.67, median PFS 5.3 months vs. 5.9 months; P = 0.87, median OS not reached vs. 22.3 months; P = 0.66). Meanwhile, the nail apparatus melanoma cohort in the PD1+CTLA4 group exhibited significantly higher ORR, and longer PFS and OS than the PD1 group (ORR 60% vs 6.1%; P &amp;lt; 0.001; median PFS 19.6 months vs 3.8 months; P = 0.008, median OS 43.6 months vs 13.5 months; P = 0.049). Due to immune-related adverse events in all cohorts, the treatment cessation rate was higher in the PD1+CTLA4 group than the PD1 group (59% vs. 11.8%). Conclusions: PD1+CTLA4 was clinically more efficacious than PD 1 in advanced AM patients. Notably, advanced nail apparatus melanoma patients were strong candidates for first-line PD1+CTLA4.
BackgroundThe clinicopathologic and genetic features of cutaneous melanoma with a BRAF V600K muta... more BackgroundThe clinicopathologic and genetic features of cutaneous melanoma with a BRAF V600K mutation are not well‐known. We aimed to evaluate these characteristics in comparison with those associated with BRAF V600E.MethodsReal‐time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and/or the MassARRAY® system were used to detect BRAF V600K in 16 invasive melanomas and confirm BRAF V600E in another 60 cases. Immunohistochemistry and panel next‐generation sequencing were used to evaluate protein expression and tumor mutation burden, respectively.ResultsThe median age of melanoma patients harboring the BRAF V600K mutation (72.5 years) was higher than those with the BRAF V600E (58.5 years). The two groups also differed in sex (13/16 [81.3%] male in the V600K group vs. 23/60 [38.3%] in V600E) and in the frequency of scalp involvement (8/16 [50.0%] in V600K vs. 1/60 [1.6%] in V600E). The clinical appearance was similar to a superficial spreading melanoma. Histopathologically, non‐nested lentiginous intraepidermal spread and subtle solar elastosis were observed. One patient (1/13, 7.7%) had a pre‐existing intradermal nevus. Diffuse PRAME immunoexpression was seen in only one (14.3%) of seven tested cases. Loss of p16 expression was observed in all 12 cases (100%) analyzed. The tumor mutation burden was 8 and 6 mutations/Mb in the two tested cases.ConclusionsMelanoma carrying the BRAF V600K mutation showed the predominance on the scalp of elderly men, lentiginous intraepidermal growth, subtle solar elastosis, possible existence of intradermal nevus component, frequent loss of p16 immunoexpression, limited immunoreactivity for PRAME, and intermediate tumor mutation burden.
TPS11579 Background: Cutaneous angiosarcoma (CAS) is a rare sarcoma and advanced cases face a com... more TPS11579 Background: Cutaneous angiosarcoma (CAS) is a rare sarcoma and advanced cases face a complex treatment regimen and dismal prognosis. Several cytotoxic agents (anthracycline, taxane, and gemcitabine) and targeted therapies (bevacizumab and sorafenib) have been tested for advanced disease in clinical trials with poor results. Since CAS commonly develops in elderly patients, high-grade adverse events from treatment may not be ideal and thus therapies featuring durable response and low comorbidity are in great demand. Recent studies suggest that CAS has a distinct genomic profile, including higher tumor mutational burden (TMB), compared to angiosarcomas developed in other sites. Moreover, we have shown that CAS with higher PD-1/L1 in the tumor microenvironment had statistically better overall survival compared with those without, indicating CAS susceptibility to immune checkpoint blockade therapy. However, to date, reports of immune checkpoint inhibitors for CAS are nonexistent. Methods: The present study is a phase 2, multicenter, single-arm clinical trial of ONO-4538 (nivolumab, 480 mg IV every 4 weeks) for patients with unresectable or metastatic CAS refractory to first-line paclitaxel. Twenty-three patients with advanced CAS will be enrolled at 11 sites in Japan with a primary objective to assess the confirmed response rate (H0 p &lt; 5%, H1: p &gt; 20%) to nivolumab. Secondary endpoints include PFS, OS, time to response, and adverse events. A correlative aim includes assessing tissue biomarkers using whole-genome sequencing (1023 genes including interferon-gamma associated genes and other known factors associated with response to immune checkpoint inhibitors) for association with response to nivolumab. The study started in April 2020 and remains open with 7 patients enrolled at time of Clinical trial information: UMIN000043039.
Background: Anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy is considered a preferred first-line treatment for adva... more Background: Anti-PD-1-based immunotherapy is considered a preferred first-line treatment for advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma. However, a recent international multi-center study suggested that the efficacy of immunotherapy is poorer in Asian patients in the non-acral cutaneous subtype. We hypothesized that the optimal first-line treatment for Asian patients may be different. Methods: We retrospectively collected data of Asian patients with advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma treated with first-line BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi), anti-PD-1 monotherapy (Anti-PD-1), and nivolumab plus ipilimumab (PD-1/CTLA-4) between 2016 and 2021 from 28 institutions in Japan. Results: We identified 336 patients treated with BRAF/MEKi (n = 236), Anti-PD-1 (n = 64) and PD-1/CTLA-4 (n = 36). The median follow-up duration was 19.9 months for all patients and 28.6 months for the 184 pa tients who were alive at their last follow-up. For patients treated with BRAF/MEKi, anti-PD-1, PD-1/CTLA-4, the median ages at baseline were 62, 62, and 53 years (p = 0.03); objective response rates were 69%, 27%, and 28% (p < 0.001); median progression-free survival (PFS) was 14.7, 5.4, and 5.8 months (p = 0.003), and median overall survival (OS) was 34.6, 37.0 months, and not reached, respectively (p = 0.535). In multivariable analysis, hazard ratios (HRs) for PFS of Anti-PD-1 and PD-1/CTLA-4 compared with BRAF/MEKi were 2.30 (p < 0.001) and 1.38 (p = 0.147), and for OS, HRs were 1.37 (p = 0.111) and 0.56 (p = 0.075), respectively. In propensity-score matching, BRAF/MEKi showed a tendency for longer PFS and equivalent OS with PD-1/CTLA-4 (HRs for PD-1/CTLA-4 were 1.78 [p = 0.149]) and 1.03 [p = 0.953], respectively). For patients who received second-line treatment, BRAF/MEKi followed by PD-1/CTLA-4 showed poor survival outcomes. Conclusions: The superiority of PD-1/CTLA-4 over BRAF/MEKi appears modest in Asian patients. First-line BRAF/MEKi remains feasible, but it is difficult to salvage at progression. Ethnicity should be considered when selecting systemic therapies until personalized biomarkers are available in daily practice. Further studies are needed to establish the optimal treatment sequence for Asian patients.
Uploads