Until very few years ago, the oncology community dogmatically excluded any clinical potential for immunotherapy in controlling brain metastases. Therefore, despite the significant therapeutic efficacy of monoclonal antibodies to immune check-point(s) across a wide range of tumor types, patients with brain disease were invariably excluded from clinical trials with these agents. Recent insights on the immune landscape of the central nervous system, as well as of the brain tumor microenvironment, are shedding light on the immune-biology of brain metastases.Interestingly, retrospective analyses, case series, and initial prospective clinical trials have recently investigated the role of different immune check-point inhibitors in brain metastases, reporting a significant clinical activity also in this subset of patients. These findings, and their swift translation in the daily practice, are driving fundamental changes in the clinical management of patients with brain metastases, and raise important neuroradiologic challenges. Along this line, neuro-oncology undoubtedly represents an additional area of active investigation and of growing interest to support medical oncologists in the evaluation of clinical responses of brain metastases to ICI treatment, and in the management of neurologic immune-related adverse events.Aim of this review is to summarize the most recent findings on brain metastases immunobiology, on the evolving scenario of clinical efficacy of ICI therapy in patients with brain metastases, as well as on the increasing relevance of neuroradiology in this therapeutic setting.

Background: Immunotherapy has completely changed the treatment of solid tumors. Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) seem to be an appealing alternative to chemotherapy, especially in elderly patients, due to a more tolerable toxicity profile, they can lead to a peculiar variety of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). However, data on tolerability and outcome of ICIs in the elderly are lacking due to poor accrual in clinical trials of these patients. Methods: We performed a retro-prospective analysis on patients treated with single agent anti-PD-L1/PD-1 at the Clinical Oncology Unit, Careggi University Hospital, from March 2016 to March 2020. Data on the treatment responses, type and severity of irAEs, as well as the corticosteroids (CCS) dosage used for irAEs and the discontinuation rate, were described per each patient, according to two different age-based cohorts of patients (< or ≥70 years). Results: We reported a lower incidence of all-grade toxicity in elderly compared to younger patients (64.9% vs. 44.9%, p = 0.018). The two age-cohorts showed a different profile of irAEs. Endocrine irAEs were significantly higher in younger patients (39.7% vs. 21.7%, p = 0.002), while dermatologic toxicities were more common in the older group (35.0% vs. 11.3%, p = 0.047). Use of CCS and treatment discontinuation rate do not differ significantly between the two age groups. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that treatment with ICIs in elderly populations is safe and feasible. Patients over 70 years are more prone to develop skin irAEs, while younger patients are more subject to experience endocrine toxicities.

Aims: It is debated whether the NRAS-mutant melanoma is more aggressive than NRAS wildtype. It is equally controversial whether NRAS-mutant metastatic melanoma (MM) is more responsive to checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy (CII). 331 patients treated with CII as first-line were retrospectively recruited: 162 NRAS-mutant/BRAF wild-type (mut/wt) and 169 wt/wt. We compared the two cohorts regarding the characteristics of primary and metastatic disease, disease-free interval (DFI) and outcome to CII. No substantial differences were observed between the two groups at melanoma onset, except for a more frequent ulceration in the wt/wt group (p = 0.03). Also, the DFI was very similar in the two cohorts. In advanced disease, we only found lung and brain progression more frequent in the wt/wt group. Regarding the outcomes to CII, no significant differences were reported in overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) (42% versus 37%, 60% versus 59%, 12 (95% CI, 7–18) versus 9 months (95% CI, 6–16) and 32 (95% CI, 23–49) versus 27 months (95% CI, 16–35), respectively). Irrespectively of mutational status, a longer OS was significantly associated with normal LDH, <3 metastatic sites, lower white blood cell and platelet count, lower neutrophil-to-lymphocyte (N/L) ratio. Our data do not show increased aggressiveness and higher responsiveness to CII in NRAS-mutant MM.

Background/Aim: Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is a common skin cancer with significant morbidity and mortality, particularly in advanced stages. Treatment options for metastatic cutaneous SCC in very elderly patients are limited due to concerns about treatment tolerability and potential adverse effects. Case Report: We report the case of a 90-year-old female patient with metastatic cutaneous SCC who was treated with cemiplimab, a monoclonal antibody (m-Ab) against programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1), in combination with radiotherapy. The patient received cemiplimab for a limited period, during which time she demonstrated significant clinical improvement without severe adverse events. Radiotherapy was performed as a locoregional treatment with the aim to enhance immunotherapy efficacy. Discussion: This case highlights the feasibility and effectiveness of cemiplimab in very elderly patients with metastatic cutaneous SCC. Despite the common apprehensions regarding the use of immunotherapy in this age group, our patient tolerated cemiplimab well, and the combination with radiotherapy proved beneficial. This suggests that even in very elderly patients, short-term use of cemiplimab, in conjunction with locoregional treatments such as radiotherapy, can be a viable and successful therapeutic approach. Conclusion: Cemiplimab, even in combination with radiotherapy, can be effectively and safely administered to very elderly patients with metastatic cutaneous SCC. This case supports the consideration of immunotherapy, even for a limited duration, as a practical option in the management of advanced cutaneous SCC in elderly patients, expanding the potential treatment strategies for this population.

Background: Melanoma is the fourth and sixth most common malignancy in men and women, respectively, and the 5-year survival rate critically depends on disease stage (American Cancer Society, 2016). MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small, non-coding, single-stranded RNAs endogenously produced by the cells, which regulate the expression of hundreds of target genes. Circulating miRNAs actively secreted by tumor cells or released as the consequence of tumor cell death, have been proposed as potential biomarkers in cancer patients because of their stability in body fluids, resistance to endogenous RNase and constant expression in healthy individuals (Mitchell et al. 2008; Chen et al. 2008). Materials and methods: In the current study, the expression profiles of a selected panel of circulating miRNAs were analysed in plasma samples derived from patients and healthy donors to identify possible candidate biomarkers for diagnosis, prognosis and/or surveillance of human cutaneous melanoma. The study protocol was approved by local Ethics Committee and conducted in accordance to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Blood samples were collected from melanoma patients (n = 30) at different disease stages, and from healthy age- and sex-matched volunteers (n = 32). Plasma miRNAs were isolated by miRNeasy Serum/Plasma Kit (Qiagen) and real-time PCR were carried out using miRCURY LNATM Universal RT microRNA PCR system (Exiqon, Denmark). Data analysis was carried out using two different strategies for normalization: Global Mean Normalization (GMN) and NormFinder model. Results: The GMN approach and NormFinder algorithm provided 13 and 7 significantly dysregulated miRNAs (p < 0.05), respectively, and those that resulted significantly dysregulated after normalizations and the Bonferroni correction were selected. Circulating miR-15b-5p (p = 1.34e−05), miR-149-3p (p = 3.40e−12), and miR- 150-5p (p = 2.85e−12) were up-regulated, while miR-193a-3p (p = 1.30e−06) and miR-524-5p (p = 2.41e−05) were down-regulated in patients (regardless of disease stage) compared to healthy controls. Linear regression and following receiving operator curves (ROC) analyses were performed to evaluate the diagnostic value of these five selected miRNAs (i.e., the ability to discriminate between cases and controls). The area under ROC curve (AUCs) for individual miRNAs ranged from 0.801 to 0.951. Although the predictive power of all selected miRNAs was clearly demonstrated, miR-150-5p and miR-149-3p gave the best performance (AUCs of 0.9489, 95% CI from0.8852 to 1.017 and 0.9510, 95% CI from 0.8852 to 1.017, respectively). Noteworthy, predictive performance was further improved when considering the double combination of miR-150-5p and miR-149-3p. The double classifier has indeed an increased area under ROC curve (AUC) of 0.966 (95% CI 0.938–0.994) with 90% sensitivity, 68% specificity. Conclusions: In conclusion, findings of the current pilot study identified five circulating miRNAs in melanoma patients, of which three detected for the first time as circulating in this type of cancer, as potential diagnostic biomarkers with high sensitivity and specificity. In particular, the combined miR-149-3p, miR-150-3p and miR-193a-3p signature showed a high capacity to discriminate between healthy subjects and affected individuals. This feature make the signature suitable to be used in controversial melanoma diagnosis. Indeed, these preliminary data that identify a new panel of three miRNAs, including two identified for the first time as circulating in melanoma, deserve to be validated in a larger number of patients, in order to confirm their diagnostic power not only as a possible support to controversial pathology reports histological results but also in early diagnosis of melanoma