Background: Melanoma in people of Asian descent presents primarily in non-sun-exposed areas, such as acral and mucosal melanoma. Compared with the predominant sun-exposed area melanomas in Caucasians, acral and mucosal melanomas do not respond as well to immunotherapy and are associated with a worse prognosis. Hence, there is an urgent need for improved treatment for melanoma in Asians. This phase Ib trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of the modified herpes simplex virus-1 oncolytic virus OrienX010 in Chinese patients with unresectable stage IIIC–IV melanoma. Methods: Patients were treated in two different cohorts. In cohort 08 (n=12), patients received up to 5 mL of 8×10⁷ pfu/mL OrienX010 intratumoral injections every 2 weeks until disease progression and responses were evaluated every 6 weeks. In cohort 09 (n=14), patients received up to 10 mL of 8×10⁷ pfu/mL OrienX010 intratumoral injections and responses were evaluated every 8 weeks. Results: Between June 2014 and May 2017, 26 patients were enrolled, including 18 (69.2%) patients with acral melanoma. Fever and injection site reaction were the most frequent adverse events. Only one patient experienced a grade ≥3 adverse event and no dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The objective response rate was 19.2% and the disease control rate was 53.8%. The median duration of response was 6.0 months. Antitumor effects were observed in 54.6% of injected lesions and 48.8% of non-injected lesions, including one (16.7%) of six evaluable distant lung metastases. The median progression-free survival was 2.9 months and overall survival was 19.2 months. Compared with patients treated in cohort 08, patients treated in cohort 09 had an improved objective response rate (28.6% vs 8.3%) and a median progression-free survival of 3.0 months vs 2.8 months. Conclusions: OrienX010 oncolytic virotherapy has a tolerable safety profile with antitumor effects in both injected and non-injected metastases and warrants further evaluation in patients with melanoma. Based on these results, the higher cohort 09 dose (up to 10 mL of 8×10⁷ pfu/mL every 2 weeks) was selected as the recommended phase II dose for ongoing trials. Trial registration number: CTR20140631 (cohort 08), CTR20150881 (cohort 09).

Background Mucosal melanoma is an aggressive melanoma subtype with poor response to antiprogrammed cell death-1 (PD-1) monotherapy. Axitinib in combination with toripalimab, a humanized IgG4 mAb against PD-1, showed a promising response rate in patients with metastatic mucosal melanoma (MM) in a phase Ib study. Here, we report the updated overall survival (OS), duration of response (DoR), and biomarker analysis results. Methods Patients with advanced MM received toripalimab 1 or 3 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks combined with axitinib 5 mg orally two times per day until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Tumor programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and gene expression profile (GEP) by messenger RNA sequencing were evaluated for correlation with survival. Results As of April 2, 2021, the median follow-up was 42.5 months. Among 29 chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic MM, the median OS was 20.7 months (95% CI 9.7 to 32.7 months); the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.5 months (95% CI 3.8 to 14.8 months); and the median DoR was 13.4 months (95% CI 5.5 to 20.6 months). The OS rates of 1, 2, and 3 years were 62.1%, 44.8%, and 31.0%, respectively. Biomarker analysis found that PD-L1 expression and TMB level were not associated with survival benefits. In contrast, a 12-GEP signature correlated with improved PFS (17.7 vs 5.7 months, p=0.0083) and OS (35.6 vs 17.6 months, p=0.039). Conclusions The 3-year survival update confirmed the antitumor activity and long-term survival benefit of the toripalimab plus axitinib combination in patients with advanced MM. The 12-gene GEP is of value in predicting the outcomes of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor and PD-1 blockade combination therapy, but requires further validation. Trial registration numbers NCT03086174.

The frequency of HER2 overexpression in bladder cancer is reported as 9%-61%. HER2 alteration correlates with aggressive disease in bladder cancer. Traditional anti-HER2 targeted therapy has failed to show clinical benefits in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma . The information on pathologically proven patients with urothelial carcinoma with detected HER2 status was collected from the database of Peking University Cancer Hospital. The HER2 expression, as well as its association with clinical characteristics and prognosis, was analyzed. A total of 284 consecutive patients with urothelial carcinoma were enrolled. HER2 was positive (IHC 2+/3+) in 44% of urothelial carcinoma. HER2 positivity was found more frequent in UCB than in UTUC (51% vs. 38%). Stage, radical surgery, and histological variant were associated with survival (P < .05). For metastatic patients, multivariate analysis shows that 3 indicators, including liver metastasis, the number of involved organs, and anemia, are independent risk factors of prognosis. Receiving immunotherapy or disitamab vedotin (DV) treatment is an independent protecting factor. The survival of patients with low HER2 expression was also significantly improved by the treatment of DV (P < .001). HER2 expression (IHC 1+, 2+, 3+) was associated with a better prognosis in this population. DV has improved the survival of patients with urothelial carcinoma in the real world. With the new-generation anti-HER2 ADC treatment, HER2 expression is no longer a poor prognostic factor.

Contradictory characteristics of elevated mutational burden and a “cold” tumor microenvironment (TME) coexist in liver kinase B1 (LKB1)–mutant non–small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). The molecular basis underlying this paradox and strategies tailored to these historically difficult to treat cancers are lacking. Here, by mapping the single-cell transcriptomic landscape of genetically engineered mouse models with Kras versus Kras/Lkb1-driven lung tumors, we detected impaired tumor-intrinsic IFNγ signaling in Kras/Lkb1-driven tumors that explains the inert immune context. Mechanistic analysis showed that mutant LKB1 led to deficiency in the DNA damage repair process and abnormally activated PARP1. Hyperactivated PARP1 attenuated the IFNγ pathway by physically interacting with and enhancing the poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation of STAT1, compromising its phosphorylation and activation. Abrogation of the PARP1-driven program triggered synthetic lethality in NSCLC on the basis of the LKB1 mutation–mediated DNA repair defect, while also restoring phosphorylated STAT1 to favor an immunologically “hot” TME. Accordingly, PARP1 inhibition restored the disrupted IFNγ signaling and thus mounted an adaptive immune response to synergize with PD-1 blockade in multiple LKB1-deficient murine tumor models. Overall, this study reveals an unexplored interplay between the DNA repair process and adaptive immune response, providing a molecular basis for dual PARP1 and PD-1 inhibition in treating LKB1-mutant NSCLC. Significance: Targeting PARP exerts dual effects to overcome LKB1 loss–driven immunotherapy resistance through triggering DNA damage and adaptive immunity, providing a rationale for dual PARP and PD-1 inhibition in treating LKB1-mutant lung cancers.

Both dabrafenib/trametinib (D/T) and anti-PD-1 monotherapy (PD-1) are approved adjuvant therapies for patients with stage III BRAF V600-mutant melanoma. However, there is still a lack of head-to-head comparative data. We aimed to describe efficacy and toxicity outcomes for these two standard therapies across melanoma centers. This multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted in 15 melanoma centers in Australia, China, Germany, Italy, Japan, UK, and US. We included adult patients with resected stage III BRAF V600-mutant melanoma who received either adjuvant D/T or PD-1 between Jul 2015 and Oct 2022. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival (RFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), recurrence pattern and toxicity. We included 598 patients with stage III BRAF V600-mutant melanoma who received either adjuvant D/T (n = 393 [66%]) or PD-1 (n = 205 [34%]) post definitive surgery between Jul 2015 and Oct 2022. At a median follow-up of 33 months (IQR 21-43), the median RFS was 51.0 months (95% CI 41.0-not reached [NR]) in the D/T group, significantly longer than PD-1 (44.8 months [95% CI 28.5-NR]) (univariate: HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.50-0.87, P = 0.003; multivariate: HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.86, P = 0.007), with comparable OS with PD-1 (multivariate, HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.48-1.70, P = 0.75). Similar findings were observed using a restricted-mean-survival-time model. Among those who experienced recurrence, the proportion of distant metastases was higher in the D/T cohort. D/T had a higher incidence of treatment modification due to adverse events (AEs) than PD-1, but fewer persistent AEs. In patients with stage III BRAF V600-mutant melanoma post definitive surgery, D/T yielded better RFS than PD-1, with higher transient but lower persistent toxicity, and comparable OS. D/T seems to provide a better outcome compared with PD-1, but a longer follow-up and ideally a large prospective trial are needed. Dr. Xue Bai was supported by the Beijing Hospitals Authority Youth Programme (QMS20211101) for her efforts devoted to this study. Dr. Keith T. Flaherty was funded by Adelson Medical Research Foundation for the efforts devoted to this study.