Immune checkpoint inhibitors are standard-of-care for the treatment of advanced melanoma, but their use is limited by immune-related adverse events. Proteomic analyses and multiplex cytokine and chemokine assays from serum at baseline and at the adverse event onset indicated aberrant T cell activity with differential expression of type I and III immune signatures. This was in line with the finding of an increase in the proportion of CD4⁺ T cells with IL-17A expression at the adverse event onset in the peripheral blood using flow cytometry. Multiplex immunohistochemistry and spatial transcriptomics on immunotherapy-induced skin rash and colitis showed an increase in the proportion of CD4⁺ T cells with IL-17A expression. Anti-IL-17A was administered in two patients with mild myocarditis, colitis and skin rash with resolution of the adverse events. This study highlights the potential role of type III CD4⁺ T cells in adverse event development and provides proof-of-principle evidence for a clinical trial using anti-IL-17A for treating adverse events.

Background: Tebentafusp has recently been approved for the treatment of metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM) after proving to have survival benefits in a first-line setting. Patients and Methods: This retrospective, multicenter study analyzed the outcomes and safety of tebentafusp therapy in 78 patients with mUM. Results: Patients treated with tebentafusp had a median PFS of 3 months (95% CI 2.7 to 3.3) and a median OS of 22 months (95% CI 10.6 to 33.4). In contrast to a published Phase 3 study, our cohort had a higher rate of patients with elevated LDH (65.4% vs. 35.7%) and included patients with prior systemic and local ablative therapies. In patients treated with tebentafusp following ICI, there was a trend for a longer median OS (28 months, 95% CI 26.9 to 29.1) compared to the inverse treatment sequence (24 months, 95% CI 13.0 to 35.0, p = 0.257). The most common treatment-related adverse events were cytokine release syndrome in 71.2% and skin toxicity in 53.8% of patients. Tumor lysis syndrome occurred in one patient. Conclusions: Data from this real-life cohort showed a median PFS/OS similar to published Phase 3 trial data. Treatment with ICI followed by tebentafusp may result in longer PFS/OS compared to the inverse treatment sequence.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) can induce immune-related adverse events (irAEs), which may result in treatment discontinuation. We sought to describe the onset, frequency, and kinetics of irAEs in melanoma patients in a real-life setting and to further investigate the prognostic role of irAEs in treatment outcomes. In this retrospective single-center cohort study, we included 249 melanoma patients. Onset, grade, and resolution of irAEs and their treatment were analyzed. A total of 191 (74.6%) patients in the non-adjuvant and 65 (25.3%) in the adjuvant treatment setting were identified. In the non-adjuvant setting, 29 patients (59.2%) with anti-CTLA4, 43 (58.1%) with anti-PD1, and 54 (79.4%) with anti-PD1/anti-CTLA4 experienced some grade of irAE and these had an improved outcome. In the adjuvant setting, the frequency of irAEs was 84.6% in anti-CTLA4 and 63.5% in anti-PD1, but no correlation with disease relapse was observed. Patients with underlying autoimmune conditions have a risk of disease exacerbation. Immunomodulatory agents had no impact on treatment efficacy. IrAEs are correlated with increased treatment efficacy in the non-adjuvant setting. Application of steroids and immunomodulatory agents, such as anti-TNF-alpha or anti-IL6, did not affect ICI efficacy. These data support irAEs as possible prognostic markers for ICI treatment.

Tebentafusp is a gp100xCD3-bispecific ImmTAC designed to redirect polyclonal T cells against cells presenting the melanocyte lineage-specific antigen gp100 on HLA-A∗02:01. Skin-related adverse events, predominantly rash, are frequent and occur within a few hours after initial infusions; yet, the mechanisms are unknown. In this study, we analyzed clinical data from the randomized phase 3 trial (NCT03070392) of tebentafusp (n = 252) versus investigator's choice (n = 126). Translational analyses were performed on paired on-treatment skin samples from 19 patients collected in the phase 1 trial (NCT01211262). Our analyses showed that rash is a clinical manifestation of tebentafusp-induced recruitment of T cells to cutaneous melanocytes. Development of rash depended on baseline expression levels of gp100 and other melanin pathway genes in the skin. On treatment, melanocyte number was reduced, and expression of melanocytic genes decreased, whereas gene expression related to immunity and cytokine signaling increased. When adjusted for baseline prognostic features, patients with rash within the first week of tebentafusp treatment had the same overall survival as patients without a rash in the phase 3 randomized trial IMCgp100-202 (hazard ratio = 0.84, 95% confidence interval = 0.53-1.32). In summary, skin rash is an off-tumor, on-target effect of tebentafusp against gp100+ melanocytes, in line with the mechanism of action.

Purpose: Despite high clinical need, there are no biomarkers that accurately predict the response of patients with metastatic melanoma to anti-PD-1 therapy. Experimental Design: In this multicenter study, we applied protein depletion and enrichment methods prior to various proteomic techniques to analyze a serum discovery cohort (n = 56) and three independent serum validation cohorts (n = 80, n = 12, n = 17). Further validation analyses by literature and survival analysis followed. Results: We identified several significantly regulated proteins as well as biological processes such as neutrophil degranulation, cell–substrate adhesion, and extracellular matrix organization. Analysis of the three independent serum validation cohorts confirmed the significant differences between responders (R) and nonresponders (NR) observed in the initial discovery cohort. In addition, literature-based validation highlighted 30 markers overlapping with previously published signatures. Survival analysis using the TCGA database showed that overexpression of 17 of the markers we identified correlated with lower overall survival in patients with melanoma. Conclusions: Ultimately, this multilayered serum analysis led to a potential marker signature with 10 key markers significantly altered in at least two independent serum cohorts: CRP, LYVE1, SAA2, C1RL, CFHR3, LBP, LDHB, S100A8, S100A9, and SAA1, which will serve as the basis for further investigation. In addition to patient serum, we analyzed primary melanoma tumor cells from NR and found a potential marker signature with four key markers: LAMC1, PXDN, SERPINE1, and VCAN.

BACKGROUND: Tebentafusp is the first T cell receptor–based bispecific protein approved for clinical use in HLA-A*02:01 ⁺ adult patients with unresectable/metastatic uveal melanoma. It redirects T cells toward gp100-expressing target cells, frequently inducing skin-related early adverse events. METHODS: This study investigated immunological and cellular responses using single-cell and spatial analysis of skin biopsies from patients with metastatic uveal melanoma treated with tebentafusp. RESULTS: 81.8% of patients developed acute cutaneous adverse events, which correlated with improved survival. Multimodal analysis revealed a brisk infiltration of CD4 ⁺ and CD8 ⁺ T cells, while melanocyte numbers declined. Single-cell RNA-sequencing revealed T cell activation, proliferation, and IFN-γ/cytotoxic gene upregulation. CD8 ⁺ T cells colocalized with melanocytes and upregulated LAG3, suggesting potential for combination therapies with tebentafusp. Melanocytes upregulated antigen presentation and apoptotic pathways, while pigmentation gene expression decreased. However, gp100 remained stably expressed. CONCLUSION: Sequential skin biopsies enable in vivo pharmacodynamic modeling of tebentafusp, offering insights into immune activation, toxicity, and treatment response. Examining the on-target effects of bispecifics in tissues amenable to longitudinal sampling enhances our understanding of toxicity and therapeutic escape mechanisms, guiding strategies for treatment optimization. FUNDING: Cancer Research Foundation, Swiss National Science Foundation (323630_207029, 733 310030_170320, 310030_188450, CRSII5_183478), Iten-Kohaut Foundation, European Research Council no. 882424, University Priority Project Translational Cancer Research of the University of Zurich (UZH), UZH PostDoc grant (K-85810-02-01).