Pierre-Emmanuel Stoebner

The prognostic value of BRAF V600 mutation level on clinical outcomes in patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF and MEK inhibitors remains uncertain. The association was retrospectively analysed between BRAF V600 mutation level (defined as the ratio of the quantification of the BRAF V600 allele to the percentage of tumoral cells in the sample analysed) and progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS, respectively) and 3-month response rate in a cohort of 58 patients with metastatic melanoma who harboured BRAF V600E/K mutations and received dual targeted-therapy BRAF/MEK inhibitors. The BRAF mutation level cut-off determined by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve after internal validation by bootstrap methods was 0.44. Risk of poor PFS and OS was associated with BRAF V600 mutation level > 0.44 on multivariate analysis (p = 0.02 and p = 0.02, respectively) after adjusting for major confounding factors (age, sex, lactate dehydrogenase level, brain metastasis, and treatment line). No association was found between BRAF mutation level and 3-month response rate. Our study shows that high BRAF V600 mutation level in melanoma tissue was associated with poor prognosis in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF and MEK inhibitors.

Nine drugs have been marketed for 10 years for the treatment of advanced melanoma (AM). With half of patients reaching a second line, the optimal sequence of treatments remains unclear. To inform policy-makers about their efficiency, we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of sequential strategies in clinical practice in France, for BRAF-mutated and wild-type patients. A multistate model was developed to describe treatment sequences, associated costs, and health outcomes over 10 years. Sequences, clinical outcomes, utility scores, and economic data were extracted from the prospective Melbase cohort, collecting individual data in 1518 patients since 2013, from their AM diagnosis until their death. To adjust the differences in patients’ characteristics among sequences, weighting by inverse probability was used. In the BRAF-mutated population, the MONO-targeted therapies (TT)-anti-PD1 sequence was the less expensive, whereas the anti-PD1-BI-TT sequence had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 180,441 EUR/QALY. Regarding the BRAF wild-type population, the three sequences constituted the cost-effective frontier, with ICERs ranging from 116 to 806,000 EUR/QALY. For BRAF-mutated patients, the sequence anti-PD1-BI-TT appeared to be the most efficient one in BRAF-mutated AM patients until 2018. Regarding the BRAF wild-type population until 2018, the sequence starting with IPI+NIVO appeared inefficient compared to anti-PD1, considering the extra cost for the QALY gained.

Background Anti-PD1 agents are currently recommended as first-line treatment in advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (acSCC) by updated European guidelines. Although acSCC frequently affects elderly patients with multiple comorbidities, this subset of patients is often excluded of registration clinical trials. Purpose To assess anti-PD-1 efficacy and safety in elderly acSCC patients in real-life conditions and describe this specific population with oncogeriatric evaluation tools. Methods A multicenter retrospective study including acSCC patients at least 70 years old treated with PD-1 inhibitors was conducted in French referral centers. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included safety data, time to response (TTR), duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Results 63 patients were included. ORR was 57.1% (95% CI 44.0–69.5), median TTR and DOR were 3 and 5.5 months respectively. Median OS was not reached (95% CI 12.5 months-not reached) at data cut-off after a median follow-up of 8 months while median PFS was 8 months. (95% CI 5 months-not reached). Grade 3–5 adverse effects occurred in 47.6% of patients. 41.3% of patients experienced degradation of ECOG performance status during anti-PD-1 treatment. Nutritional state worsened in 27% of patients and 57.1% lost weight during treatment. Conclusion In this particular subset of acSCC patients PD-1 inhibitors obtain results similar to those obtained in younger populations included in pivotal clinical trials, with acceptable safety. A specific oncogeriatric evaluation at treatment initiation and during follow-up appears important in this setting most notably to help manage toxicity.

Although cemiplimab has been approved for locally advanced (la) and metastatic (m) cutaneous squamous-cell carcinomas (CSCCs), its real-life value has not yet been demonstrated. An early-access program enrolled patients with la/mCSCCs to receive cemiplimab. Endpoints were best overall response rate (BOR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), duration of response (DOR) and safety. The 245 patients (mean age 77 years, 73% male, 49% prior systemic treatment, 24% immunocompromised, 27% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (PS) ≥ 2) had laCSCCs (35%) or mCSCCs (65%). For the 240 recipients of ≥1 infusion(s), the BOR was 50.4% (complete, 21%; partial, 29%). With median follow-up at 12.6 months, median PFS was 7.9 months, and median OS and DOR were not reached. One-year OS was 73% versus 36%, respectively, for patients with PS < 2 versus ≥ 2. Multivariate analysis retained PS ≥ 2 as being associated during the first 6 months with PFS and OS. Head-and-neck location was associated with longer PFS. Immune status had no impact. Severe treatment-related adverse events occurred in 9% of the patients, including one death from toxic epidermal necrolysis. Cemiplimab real-life safety and efficacy support its use for la/mCSCCs. Patients with PS ≥ 2 benefited less from cemiplimab, but it might represent an option for immunocompromised patients.

Purpose: Melanoma’s incidence is increasing, and elderly people could be significantly impacted since the majority occurs in people over 65 years of age. Combined BRAF and MEK targeted therapies (TT) are current standard regimen for BRAF mutated metastatic melanoma (MM). Except for subgroups of pivotal trials, little data are available for TT in this population. Materials and Methods: Outcomes were explored in real life patients from MelBase, a French multicentric biobank dedicated to the prospective follow-up of unresectable stage III or IV melanoma. Patients treated by BRAF TT and/or MEK TT combined or not, were included from 2013 to 2017 in 2 groups: group 1 ≤ 65-year-old (yo), group 2 > 65 yo, analyzed for tolerance and efficacy. Results: 353 patients were included: 231 in group 1, 122 in group 2. Median follow-up was 12 months (M). Median time of treatment was 6.9 M. A total of 80% had at least one Adverse Effect (AE). Most frequent AE (all grades) were mainly skin and subcutaneous, general, and gastrointestinal disorders. A total of 31% of AE were grade 3–4: 28% in group 1 and 39% in group 2 (p = 0.05). No differences were observed in all AE grades proportion, dose modifications, interruptions, and discontinuations. For each group, median overall survival was 20.3 M (CI 95%: 15.5–27.9) and 16.3 M (CI: 14.5–26.9), respectively (p = 0.8). Median progression free survival was 7.8 M (6.4–9.9) and 7.7 M (CI: 5.8–11.3) (p = 0.4). Objective response rate was 59% and 50% (p = 0.6). Conclusion: This study on a large multicentric cohort is the first to assess that TT is well tolerated in elderly BRAF-mutated patients such as in patients younger than 65. Efficacy was similar between groups with outcomes reaching those from pivotal studies. There is thus no argument against using TT in elderly people, although an onco-geriatric opinion is welcome for the most vulnerable.

Purpose: Melanoma’s incidence is increasing, and elderly people could be significantly impacted since the majority occurs in people over 65 years of age. Combined targeted therapies (TT) are current standard regimen for BRAF mutated metastatic melanoma (MM). Except for subgroups of pivotal trials, little data are available for TT in this population. Materials and Methods: Outcomes were explored in real life patients from MelBase, a French multicentric biobank dedicated to the prospective follow-up of unresectable stage III or IV melanoma. Patients treated by BRAF TT and/or MEK TT combined or not, were included from 2013 to 2017 in 2 groups: group 1 65 yo, analyzed for tolerance and efficacy. Results: 353 patients were included: 231 in group 1, 122 in group 2. Median follow-up was 12 months (M). Median time of treatment was 6.9 M. A total of 80% had at least one Adverse Effect (AE). Most frequent AE (all grades) were mainly skin and subcutaneous, general, and gastrointestinal disorders. A total of 31% of AE were grade 3–4: 28% in group 1 and 39% in group 2 (p = 0.05). No differences were observed in all AE grades proportion, dose modifications, interruptions, and discontinuations. For each group, median overall survival was 20.3 M (CI 95%: 15.5–27.9) and 16.3 M (CI: 14.5–26.9), respectively (p = 0.8). Median progression free survival was 7.8 M (6.4–9.9) and 7.7 M (CI: 5.8–11.3) (p = 0.4). Objective response rate was 59% and 50% (p = 0.6). Conclusion: This study on a large multicentric cohort is the first to assess that TT is well tolerated in elderly BRAF-mutated patients such as in patients younger than 65. Efficacy was similar between groups with outcomes reaching those from pivotal studies. There is thus no argument against using TT in elderly people, although an onco-geriatric opinion is welcome for the most vulnerable.

Metastatic melanoma is one of the most aggressive and drug-resistant cancers with very poor overall survival. Circulating melanoma cells (CMCs) were first described in 1991. However, there is no general consensus on the clinical utility of CMC detection, largely due to conflicting results linked to the use of heterogeneous patient populations and different detection methods. Here, we developed a new EPithelial ImmunoSPOT (EPISPOT) assay to detect viable CMCs based on their secretion of the S100 protein (S100-EPISPOT). Then, we compared the results obtained with the S100-EPISPOT assay and the CellSearch^® CMC kit using blood samples from a homogeneous population of patients with metastatic melanoma. We found that S100-EPISPOT sensitivity was significantly higher than that of CellSearch^®. Specifically, the percentage of patients with ≥2 CMCs was significantly higher using S100-EPISPOT than CellSearch^® (48% and 21%, respectively; p = 0.0114). Concerning CMC prognostic value, only the CellSearch^® results showed a significant association with overall survival (p = 0.006). However, due to the higher sensitivity of the new S100-EPISPOT assay, it would be interesting to determine whether this functional test could be used in patients with non-metastatic melanoma for the early detection of tumor relapse and for monitoring the treatment response.