BackgroundIpilimumab is an approved immunotherapy that has shown an overall survival benefit in patients with cutaneous metastatic melanoma in two phase III trials. As results of registrational trials might not answer all questions regarding safety and efficacy of ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma seen in daily clinical practice, the Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group conducted a phase II study to assess the efficacy and safety of ipilimumab in patients with different subtypes of metastatic melanoma.Patients and methodsWe undertook a multicenter phase II study in melanoma patients irrespective of location of the primary melanoma. Here we present data on patients with pretreated metastatic cutaneous, mucosal and occult melanoma who received up to four cycles of ipilimumab administered at a dose of 3 mg/kg in 3 week intervals. Tumor assessments were conducted at baseline, weeks 12, 24, 36 and 48 according to RECIST 1.1 criteria. Adverse events (AEs), including immune-related AEs were graded according to National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC) v.4.0. Primary endpoint was the OS rate at 12 months.Results103 pretreated patients received at least one dose of ipilimumab, including 83 cutaneous, seven mucosal and 13 occult melanomas. 1-year OS rates for cutaneous, mucosal and occult melanoma were 38 %, 14 % and 27 %, respectively. Median OS was 6.8 months (95 % CI 5.3–9.9) for cutaneous, 9.6 months (95 % CI 1.6–11.1) for mucosal, and 9.9 months (lower 95 % CI 2.3, upper 95 % CI non-existent) for occult melanoma. Overall response rates for cutaneous, mucosal and occult melanoma were 16 %, 17 % and 11 %, respectively. Eleven patients had partial response (16 %) and ten patients experienced stable disease (14 %), none achieved a complete response. Treatment-related AEs were observed in 71 patients (69 %), including 20 grade 3–4 events (19 %). No new and unexpected safety findings were noted.ConclusionsIpilimumab is a treatment option for pretreated patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma seen in daily routine. Toxicity was manageable when treated as per protocol-specific guidelines.Trial registration: Clinical Trials.gov NCT01355120Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12967-015-0716-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundIn patients with advanced melanoma the detection of BRAF mutations is considered mandatory before the initiation of an expensive treatment with BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Sometimes it is difficult to perform such an analysis if archival tumor tissue is not available and fresh tissue has to be collected.Results514 of 1170 patients (44%) carried a BRAF mutation. All models revealed age and histological subtype of melanoma as the two major predictive variables. Accuracy ranged from 0.65–0.71, being best in the random forest model. Sensitivity ranged 0.76–0.84, again best in the random forest model. Specificity was low in all models ranging 0.51–0.55.MethodsWe collected the clinical data and mutational status of 1170 patients with advanced melanoma and established three different predictive models (binary logistic regression, classification and regression trees, and random forest) to forecast the BRAF status.ConclusionsUp to date statistical models are not able to predict BRAF mutations in an acceptable accuracy. The analysis of the mutational status by sequencing or immunohistochemistry must still be considered as standard of care.