No abstract

Talimogene laherparepvec (T‐VEC) is a modified herpes simplex virus, type 1 (HSV‐1), which can be administered intralesionally in patients with stage IIIB/C‐IVM1a unresectable melanoma (EMA label). The phase 3 OPTiM registration study showed an overall response rate (ORR) of 26%. Since December 2016, 48 eligible patients started treatment at the Netherlands Cancer Institute. We included 26 patients in this study with a follow up time ≥6 months, reporting Overall Response Rate (ORR), Disease Control Rate (DCR), Adverse Events (AE), prior treatment for melanoma and baseline characteristics, documented in a prospectively maintained database. In house developed treatment protocol consists of clinical evaluation, periodic PET‐CT and histological biopsies for response evaluation. Median follow‐up was 12.5 months. Of 26 patients, 16 (61.5%) had a Complete Response (CR) as their best response. Seven (26.9%) patients had a Partial Response (PR) as their best response, 1 (3.8%) patient Stable Disease (SD) and 2 (7.7%) patients Progressive Disease (PD). Best ORR was 88.5%. DCR was 92.3%. Grade 1–2 AEs occurred in all patients. Mostly, these consisted of fatigue, influenza‐like symptoms and injection site erythema. All patients underwent prior treatment. Prior treatment did not influence response or toxicity of T‐VEC. Best ORR for T‐VEC monotherapy at our institute was 88.5% with 61.5% achieving a CR. This prospective study for T‐VEC in early metastatic (stage IIIB/C‐IVM1a) melanoma demonstrated superior results to the phase 3 OPTiM study and confirms the role of oncolytic immunotherapy for melanoma.

Background Patients with melanoma and negative sentinel nodes (SNs) have varying outcomes, dependent on several prognostic factors. Considering all these factors in a prediction model might aid in identifying patients who could benefit from a personalized treatment strategy. The objective was to construct and validate a nomogram for recurrence and melanoma‐specific mortality (MSM) in patients with melanoma and negative SNs. Methods A total of 3220 patients with negative SNs were identified from a cohort of 4124 patients from four EORTC Melanoma Group centres who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy. Prognostic factors for recurrence and MSM were studied with Cox regression analysis. Significant factors were incorporated in the models. Performance was assessed by discrimination (c‐index) and calibration in cross‐validation across the four centres. A nomogram was developed for graphical presentation. Results There were 3180 eligible patients. The final prediction model for recurrence and the calibrated model for MSM included three independent prognostic factors: ulceration, anatomical location and Breslow thickness. The c‐index was 0·74 for recurrence and 0·76 for the calibrated MSM model. Cross‐validation across the four centres showed reasonable model performance. A nomogram was developed based on these models. One‐third of the patients had a 5‐year recurrence probability of 8·2 per cent or less, and one‐third had a recurrence probability of 23·0 per cent or more. Conclusion A nomogram for predicting recurrence and MSM in patients with melanoma and negative SNs was constructed and validated. It could provide personalized estimates useful for tailoring surveillance strategies (reduce or increase intensity), and selection of patients for adjuvant therapy or clinical trials.

This pilot study explored the value of localized index node removal after neoadjuvant immunotherapy in patients with stage III melanoma, for use as a response indicator to guide the extent of completion lymph node dissection. Promising technology

No abstract