Importance: Few data are available on patients with leptomeningeal disease (LM) from melanoma treated with new systemic therapies. Objective: To gain a better understanding of patients, disease characteristics, and therapeutic interventions in melanoma patients with LM in the era of new systemic treatment. Design: Clinical characteristics, treatments, and survival of melanoma patients diagnosed with LM, isolated or associated with brain metastases, were collected. The Cox regression model assessed the influence of patient and melanoma characteristics on survival. Setting: Monocentric, retrospective, real-life cohort of patients with LM from melanoma. Participants: All patients followed up at Saint-Louis University Hospital and diagnosed with LM between December 2013 and February 2020 were included. For each patient identified, a central review by dermato-oncologist and neuro-oncologist experts was performed to confirm the diagnosis of LM. Exposure: Impact of new systemic therapies and radiotherapy. Results: Among the 452 advanced melanoma patients followed at St Louis Hospital between 2013 and 2020, 41 patients with LM from melanoma were identified. Among them, 29 patients with a diagnosis of LM “confirmed” or “probable” after central neuro-oncologists reviewing were included. Nineteen patients had known melanoma brain metastases at LM diagnosis. Among the 27 patients treated with systemic therapy, 17 patients were treated with immunotherapy, 5 patients received targeted therapy, 1 was treated with chemotherapy, and 4 patients were treated with anti-PD-1 in combination with BRAF inhibitor. The median overall survival (OS) from LM diagnosis was 5.1 months. Median OS was 7.1 months for the 9 patients receiving systemic therapy combined with radiotherapy, and 3.2 months for the 20 patients not receiving combined radiotherapy. Elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.09–1.90, p < 0.01) and presence of neurological symptoms at LM diagnosis (HR 2.96, 95% CI 1.25–6.99, p = 0.01) were associated with poor survival. At the time of data analysis, five patients were still alive with a median follow-up of 47.4 months and had persistent complete response. Conclusion: Targeted therapy and immunotherapy are promising new treatment options in LM from melanoma that can increase overall survival, and may induce long lasting remission in some patients.

KIT is a bona fide oncogene in a subset of melanoma and, ex vivo, KIT inhibitors are very efficient at killing KIT-mutant melanoma cell lines. However, KIT-mutant melanoma tumors tend to show a de novo resistance in most cases and a limited duration of response when response is achieved. We performed pharmacodynamic studies on patients with KIT-mutated melanoma treated with nilotinib, which suggested that the FGF2 axis may be a mechanism of resistance in this subset of melanoma. Using several melanoma cell lines, which are dependent on oncogenic KIT, we showed that although KIT inhibition markedly decreased cell viability in melanoma cell lines with distinct KIT mutations, this effect was lessened in the presence of FGF2 due to inhibition of BIM expression by MAPK pathway activation. Addition of a MEK inhibitor reversed the FGF2-driven resistance for all KIT mutants. We confirmed the expression of FGF2 and activation of MEK-ERK in melanoma patients using in situ data from a clinical trial. Therefore, the combined inhibition of KIT with FGFR or MEK may be a next-step effective clinical strategy in KIT-mutant melanoma.

Purpose of review: Although targeted therapy provides a high response rate and rapid disease control in advanced melanoma, most patients experience disease progression due to acquired resistance mechanisms leading to reactivation of mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. The purpose of this article is to review the recently published data on the impact of an intermittent versus continuous dosing schedule of BRAF and MEK inhibition in advanced melanoma to determine the best approach in clinical practice. Recent findings: Some preclinical studies have highlighted the concept that drug-resistant cells may also display drug dependency, such that intermittent dosing of targeted therapy may prevent the emergence of lethal drug resistance. Moreover, clinical observations have suggested that repeated treatment after a break or an intervening therapy may provide clinical benefit. However, recent preclinical and clinical studies have also failed to demonstrate an advantage of intermittent dosing and showed a similar efficacy of the intermittent versus continuous regimens of BRAF and MEK inhibitors in mice models and phase 2 clinical trial. Summary: Owing to these discordant results, continuous dosing of BRAF and MEK inhibitors remains the optimal therapeutic approach until additional clinical data demonstrate the superiority of another combination or dosing regimen.