| 1. |
- Broman, K. K., et al.
(författare)
-
Surveillance of Sentinel Node-Positive Melanoma Patients with Reasons for Exclusion from MSLT-II: Multi-Institutional Propensity Score Matched Analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Surgeons. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 1072-7515. ; 232:4, s. 424-431
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: In sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma, two randomized trials demonstrated equivalent melanoma-specific survival with nodal surveillance vs completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Patients with microsatellites, extranodal extension (ENE) in the SLN, or >3 positive SLNs constitute a high-risk group largely excluded from the randomized trials, for whom appropriate management remains unknown. STUDY DESIGN: SLN-positive patients with any of the three high-risk features were identified from an international cohort. CLND patients were matched 1:1 with surveillance patients using propensity scores. Risk of any-site recurrence, SLN-basin-only recurrence, and melanoma specific mortality were compared. RESULTS: Among 1,154 SLN-positive patients, 166 had ENE, microsatellites, and/or >3 positive SLN. At 18.5 months median follow-up, 49% had recurrence (vs 26% in patients without high-risk features, p < 0.01). Among high-risk patients, 52 (31%) underwent CLND and 114 (69%) received surveillance. Fifty-one CLND patients were matched to 51 surveillance patients. The matched cohort was balanced on tumor, nodal, and adjuvant treatment factors. There were no significant differences in any-site recurrence (CLND 49%, surveillance 45%, p = 0.99), SLN-basin-only recurrence (CLND 6%, surveillance 14%, p = 0.20), or melanoma-specific mortality (CLND 14%, surveillance 12%, p = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: SLN-positive patients with microsatellites, ENE, or >3 positive SLN constitute a high-risk group with a 2-fold greater recurrence risk. For those managed with nodal surveillance, SLN-basin recurrences were more frequent, but all-site recurrence and melanoma-specific mortality were comparable to patients treated with CLND. Most recurrences were outside the SLN-basin, supporting use of nodal surveillance for SLN-positive patients with microsatellites, ENE, and/or >3 positive SLN. Crown Copyright (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the American College of Surgeons. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 2. |
- Broman, K. K., et al.
(författare)
-
Active surveillance of patients who have sentinel node positive melanoma: An international, multi-institution evaluation of adoption and early outcomes after the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy trial II (MSLT-2)
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Cancer. - : Wiley. - 0008-543X .- 1097-0142. ; 127:13, s. 2251-2261
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background For patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive cutaneous melanoma, the Second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy trial demonstrated equivalent disease-specific survival (DSS) with active surveillance using nodal ultrasound versus completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Adoption and outcomes of active surveillance in clinical practice and in adjuvant therapy recipients are unknown. Methods In a retrospective cohort of SLN-positive adults treated at 21 institutions in Australia, Europe, and the United States from June 2017 to November 2019, the authors evaluated the impact of active surveillance and adjuvant therapy on all-site recurrence-free survival (RFS), isolated nodal RFS, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and DSS using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models. Results Among 6347 SLN biopsies, 1154 (18%) were positive and had initial negative distant staging. In total, 965 patients (84%) received active surveillance, 189 (16%) underwent CLND. Four hundred thirty-nine patients received adjuvant therapy (surveillance, 38%; CLND, 39%), with the majority (83%) receiving anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. After a median follow-up of 11 months, 220 patients developed recurrent disease (surveillance, 19%; CLND, 22%), and 24 died of melanoma (surveillance, 2%; CLND, 4%). Sixty-eight patients had an isolated nodal recurrence (surveillance, 6%; CLND, 4%). In patients who received adjuvant treatment without undergoing prior CLND, all isolated nodal recurrences were resectable. On risk-adjusted multivariable analyses, CLND was associated with improved isolated nodal RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.88), but not all-site RFS (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45-1.02). Adjuvant therapy improved all-site RFS (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.47-0.57). DSS and DMFS did not differ by nodal management or adjuvant treatment. Conclusions Active surveillance has been adopted for most SLN-positive patients. At initial assessment, real-world outcomes align with randomized trial findings, including in adjuvant therapy recipients. Lay Summary For patients with melanoma of the skin and microscopic spread to lymph nodes, monitoring with ultrasound is an alternative to surgically removing the remaining lymph nodes. The authors studied adoption and real-world outcomes of ultrasound monitoring in over 1000 patients treated at 21 centers worldwide, finding that most patients now have ultrasounds instead of surgery. Although slightly more patients have cancer return in the lymph nodes with this strategy, typically, it can be removed with delayed surgery. Compared with up-front surgery, ultrasound monitoring results in the same overall risk of melanoma coming back at any location or of dying from melanoma.
|
|
| 3. |
- Eroglu, Z., et al.
(författare)
-
Outcomes with adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy in patients with sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma without completion lymph node dissection
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal for Immunotherapy of Cancer. - : BMJ. - 2051-1426. ; 10:8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Until recently, most patients with sentinel lymph node-positive (SLN+) melanoma underwent a completion lymph node dissection (CLND), as mandated in published trials of adjuvant systemic therapies. Following multicenter selective lymphadenectomy trial-II, most patients with SLN+ melanoma no longer undergo a CLND prior to adjuvant systemic therapy. A retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes in SLN+ melanoma patients treated with adjuvant systemic therapy after July 2017 was performed in 21 international cancer centers. Of 462 patients who received systemic adjuvant therapy, 326 patients received adjuvant anti-PD-1 without prior immediate (IM) CLND, while 60 underwent IM CLND. With median follow-up of 21 months, 24-month relapse-free survival (RFS) was 67% (95% CI 62% to 73%) in the 326 patients. When the patient subgroups who would have been eligible for the two adjuvant anti-PD-1 clinical trials mandating IM CLND were analyzed separately, 24-month RFS rates were 64%, very similar to the RFS rates from those studies. Of these no-CLND patients, those with SLN tumor deposit >1 mm, stage IIIC/D and ulcerated primary had worse RFS. Of the patients who relapsed on adjuvant anti-PD-1, those without IM CLND had a higher rate of relapse in the regional nodal basin than those with IM CLND (46% vs 11%). Therefore, 55% of patients who relapsed without prior CLND underwent surgery including therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND), with 30% relapsing a second time; there was no difference in subsequent relapse between patients who received observation vs secondary adjuvant therapy. Despite the increased frequency of nodal relapses, adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy may be as effective in SLN+ pts who forego IM CLND and salvage surgery with TLND at relapse may be a viable option for these patients.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Egeler, M.D., et al.
(författare)
-
Understanding quality of life issues in patients with advanced melanoma : Phase 1 and 2 in the development of the EORTC advanced melanoma module
- 2024
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Cancer. - : Elsevier. - 0959-8049 .- 1879-0852. ; 207
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: We aimed to develop a European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life (QoL) module tailored for patients with advanced (resectable or unresectable stage III/IV) melanoma receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors or targeted therapy.Methods: Following the EORTC QoL Group module development guidelines, we conducted phases 1 and 2 of the development process. In phase 1, we generated a list of health-related (HR)QoL issues through a systematic literature review and semi-structured interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients with advanced melanoma. In phase 2, these issues were converted into questionnaire items to create the preliminary module.Results: Phase 1: we retrieved 8006 articles for the literature review, of which 35 were deemed relevant, resulting in 84 HRQoL issues being extracted to create the initial issue list. Semi-structured interviews with 18 HCPs and 28 patients with advanced melanoma resulted in 28 issues being added to the initial issue list. Following EORTC module development criteria, 26 issues were removed, and two issues were added after review by patient advocates.Phase 2: To ensure uniformity and avoid duplication, 16 issues were consolidated into eight items. Additionally, an independent expert contributed one new item, resulting in a preliminary module comprising 80 HRQoL items.Conclusion: We identified a range of HRQoL issues (dry skin, xerostomia, and arthralgia) relevant to patients with stage III/IV melanoma. Future module development phases will refine the questionnaire. Once completed, this module will enable standardized assessment of HRQoL in patients with (locally) advanced melanoma.
|
|
| 6. |
- van Akkooi, Alexander C. J., et al.
(författare)
-
Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy (NAST) in Patients with Melanoma: Surgical Considerations by the International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium (INMC)
- 2022
-
Ingår i: ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1068-9265 .- 1534-4681. ; 29:6, s. 3694-3708
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Exciting advances in melanoma systemic therapies have presented the opportunity for surgical oncologists and their multidisciplinary colleagues to test the neoadjuvant systemic treatment approach in high-risk, resectable metastatic melanomas. Here we describe the state of the science of neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) for melanoma, focusing on the surgical aspects and the key role of the surgical oncologist in this treatment paradigm. This paper summarizes the past decade of developments in melanoma treatment and the current evidence for NAST in stage III melanoma specifically. Issues of surgical relevance are discussed, including the risk of progression on NAST prior to surgery. Technical aspects, such as the definition of resectability for melanoma and the extent and scope of routine surgery are presented. Other important issues, such as the utility of radiographic response evaluation and method of pathologic response evaluation, are addressed. Surgical complications and perioperative management of NAST related adverse events are considered. The International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium has the goal of harmonizing NAST trials in melanoma to facilitate rapid advances with new approaches, and facilitating the comparison of results across trials evaluating different treatment regimens. Our ultimate goals are to provide definitive proof of the safety and efficacy of NAST in melanoma, sufficient for NAST to become an acceptable standard of care, and to leverage this platform to allow more personalized, biomarker-driven, tailored approaches to subsequent treatment and surveillance.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Keilholz, U., et al.
(författare)
-
ESMO consensus conference recommendations on the management of metastatic melanoma: under the auspices of the ESMO Guidelines Committee
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Annals of Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0923-7534. ; 31:11, s. 1435-1448
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a consensus conference on melanoma on 5-7 September 2019 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The conference included a multidisciplinary panel of 32 leading experts in the management of melanoma. The aim of the conference was to develop recommendations on topics that are not covered in detail in the current ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline and where available evidence is either limited or conflicting. The main topics identified for discussion were (i) the management of locoregional disease; (ii) targeted versus immunotherapies in the adjuvant setting; (iii) targeted versus immunotherapies for the first-line treatment of metastatic melanoma; (iv) when to stop immunotherapy or targeted therapy in the metastatic setting; and (v) systemic versus local treatment for brain metastases. The expert panel was divided into five working groups to each address questions relating to one of the five topics outlined above. Relevant scientific literature was reviewed in advance. Recommendations were developed by the working groups and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This manuscript presents the results relating to the management of metastatic melanoma, including findings from the expert panel discussions, consensus recommendations and a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation. All participants approved the final manuscript.
|
|
| 11. |
- Michielin, O., et al.
(författare)
-
ESMO consensus conference recommendations on the management of locoregional melanoma: under the auspices of the ESMO Guidelines Committee
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Annals of Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0923-7534. ; 31:11, s. 1449-1461
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) held a consensus conference on melanoma on 5-7 September 2019 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The conference included a multidisciplinary panel of 32 leading experts in the management of melanoma. The aim of the conference was to develop recommendations on topics that are not covered in detail in the current ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline and where available evidence is either limited or conflicting. The main topics identified for discussion were: (i) the management of locoregional disease; (ii) targeted versus immunotherapies in the adjuvant setting; (iii) targeted versus immunotherapies for the first-line treatment of metastatic melanoma; (iv) when to stop immunotherapy or targeted therapy in the metastatic setting; and (v) systemic versus local treatment of brain metastases. The expert panel was divided into five working groups in order to each address questions relating to one of the five topics outlined above. Relevant scientific literature was reviewed in advance. Recommendations were developed by the working groups and then presented to the entire panel for further discussion and amendment before voting. This manuscript presents the results relating to the management of locoregional melanoma, including findings from the expert panel discussions, consensus recommendations and a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation. All participants approved the final manuscript.
|
|
| 12. |
|
|
| 13. |
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
| 19. |
- Bagge, Roger Olofsson, et al.
(författare)
-
Population-Based Validation of the MIA and MSKCC Tools for Predicting Sentinel Lymph Node Status
- 2024
-
Ingår i: JAMA Surgery. - : AMER MEDICAL ASSOC. - 2168-6254 .- 2168-6262.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Importance Patients with melanoma are selected for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) based on their risk of a positive SLN. To improve selection, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and Melanoma Institute Australia (MIA) developed predictive models, but the utility of these models remains to be tested.Objective To determine the clinical utility of the MIA and MSKCC models.Design, Setting, and Participants This was a population-based comparative effectiveness research study including 10 089 consecutive patients with cutaneous melanoma undergoing SLNB from the Swedish Melanoma Registry from January 2007 to December 2021. Data were analyzed from May to August 2023.Main Outcomes and Measures, The predicted probability of SLN positivity was calculated using the MSKCC model and a limited MIA model (using mitotic rate as absent/present instead of count/mm(2) and excluding the optional variable lymphovascular invasion) for each patient. The operating characteristics of the models were assessed and compared. The clinical utility of each model was assessed using decision curve analysis and compared with a strategy of performing SLNB on all patients.Results Among 10 089 included patients, the median (IQR) age was 64.0 (52.0-73.0) years, and 5340 (52.9%) were male. The median Breslow thickness was 1.8 mm, and 1802 patients (17.9%) had a positive SLN. Both models were well calibrated across the full range of predicted probabilities and had similar external area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC; MSKCC: 70.8%; 95% CI, 69.5-72.1 and limited MIA: 69.7%; 95% CI, 68.4-71.1). At a risk threshold of 5%, decision curve analysis indicated no added net benefit for either model compared to performing SLNB for all patients. At risk thresholds of 10% or higher, both models added net benefit compared to SLNB for all patients. The greatest benefit was observed in patients with T2 melanomas using a threshold of 10%; in that setting, the use of the nomograms led to a net reduction of 8 avoidable SLNBs per 100 patients for the MSKCC nomogram and 7 per 100 patients for the limited MIA nomogram compared to a strategy of SLNB for all.Conclusions and Relevance This study confirmed the statistical performance of both the MSKCC and limited MIA models in a large, nationally representative data set. However, decision curve analysis demonstrated that using the models only improved selection for SLNB compared to biopsy in all patients when a risk threshold of at least 7% was used, with the greatest benefit seen for T2 melanomas at a threshold of 10%. Care should be taken when using these nomograms to guide selection for SLNB at the lowest thresholds.
|
|
| 20. |
|
|
| 21. |
|
|
| 22. |
- Olofsson Bagge, Roger, 1978, et al.
(författare)
-
The efficacy of immunotherapy for in-transit metastases of melanoma: an analysis of randomized controlled trials
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Melanoma research. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 0960-8931. ; 31:2, s. 181-185
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Nearly 10% of patients with high-risk early-stage melanoma will develop satellite or in-transit metastases (ITM), classified as stage III disease similar to lymph node metastases. The pivotal registration trials of the CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab, and the PD-1 antibodies nivolumab and pembrolizumab, also included patients with unresectable stage III disease. However, there has been no analysis of patients with ITM, and anecdotal retrospective small series have indicated a potential lesser effect. This study aimed to identify patients with unresectable ITM within the randomized trials, and to determine response, progression-free survival and overall survival. The pivotal phase III randomized intervention trials that included melanoma patients with ITM, with or without nodal metastasis, and were treated with ipilimumab, nivolumab or pembrolizumab was identified. The datasets from each trial were then searched to identify the specific details of the investigated patient population for a pooled analysis. The primary endpoint was complete response rate. Seven trials that included stage III patients, and with accessible datasets, were identified. There was a total of 4711 patients, however, no patients with ITM could be identified, as this data was not captured by the case report forms. Evidence from prospective clinical trials on the use of immunotherapy in patients with ITM is lacking. We recommend pooling data from multiple institutions to examine efficacy of available drug therapies in this patient population, but more importantly, prospective clinical trials of locoregional treatments with or without systemic drug therapies are required.
|
|
| 23. |
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
| 25. |
- Holmberg, Carl Jacob, et al.
(författare)
-
The efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade for melanoma in-transit with or without nodal metastases - A multicenter cohort study
- 2022
-
Ingår i: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-8049 .- 1879-0852. ; 40:16
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: Guidelines addressing melanoma in-transit metastasis (ITM) recommend immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) as a first-line treatment option, despite the fact that there are no efficacy data available from prospective trials for exclusively ITM disease. The study aims to analyze the outcome of patients with ITM treated with ICI based on data from a large cohort of patients treated at international referral clinics. Methods: A multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients treated between January 2015 and December 2020 from Australia, Europe, and the USA, evaluating treatment with ICI for ITM with or without nodal involvement (AJCC8 N1c, N2c, and N3c) and without distant disease (M0). Treatment was with PD-1 inhibitor (nivolumab or pembrolizumab) and/or CTLA-4 inhibitor (ipilimumab). The response was evaluated according to the RECIST criteria modified for cutaneous lesions. Results: A total of 287 patients from 21 institutions in eight countries were included. Immunotherapy was first-line treatment in 64 (22%) patients. PD-1 or CTLA-4 inhibitor monotherapy was given in 233 (81%) and 23 (8%) patients, respectively, while 31 (11%) received both in combination. The overall response rate was 56%, complete response (CR) rate was 36%, and progressive disease (PD) rate was 32%. Median PFS was ten months (95% CI 7.4-12.6 months) with a one-, two-, and five-year PFS rate of 48%, 33%, and 18%, respectively. Median MSS was not reached, and the one-, two-, and five-year MSS rates were 95%, 83%, and 71%, respectively. Conclusion: Systemic immunotherapy is an effective treatment for melanoma ITM. Future studies should evaluate the role of systemic immunotherapy in the context of multimodality therapy, including locoregional treatments such as surgery, intralesional therapy, and regional therapies.
|
|
| 26. |
|
|
