Gynecological tumors are malignancies with both high morbidity and mortality. To date, only a few chemotherapeutic agents have shown efficacy against these cancer types (only ovarian cancer responds to several agents, especially platinum-based combinations). Within this context, the discovery of immune checkpoint inhibitors has led to numerous clinical studies being carried out that have also demonstrated their activity in these cancer types. More recently, following the development of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy in hematological malignancies, this strategy was also tested in solid tumors, including gynecological cancers. In this article, we focus on the molecular basis of gynecological tumors that makes them potential candidates for immunotherapy. We also provide an overview of the main immunotherapy studies divided by tumor type and report on CAR technology and the studies currently underway in the area of gynecological malignancies.

Background/Objectives: Radiomics is a powerful and emerging tool in oncology, with many potential applications in predicting therapy response and prognosis. To assess the current state of radiomics in melanoma, we conducted a systematic review of its various clinical uses. Methods: We searched three databases: PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus. Each study was classified based on multiple variables, including patient number, metastasis number, therapy, imaging modality, clinical endpoints and analysis methods. The risk of bias in the systematic review was assessed with QUADAS-2, and the certainty of evidence in the meta-analysis with GRADE. Results: Forty studies involving 4673 patients and 24,561 lesions were included in the analysis. Metastatic disease was the most frequently studied clinical setting (85%). Immunotherapy was the most commonly investigated treatment, featured in half of the studies. Computed tomography (CT) was the preferred imaging modality, appearing in 17 studies (42.5%). Radiomic features were most often extracted using three-dimensional (3D) analysis (72.5%). Across 24 studies investigating the prediction of treatment response and survival, only 9 provided sufficient data (Area Under the Curve, AUC, and standard error, SE) for inclusion. A random-effects model estimated a pooled AUC of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.74 to 0.92), indicating strong discriminative performance of the radiomic models included. Low to moderate heterogeneity was observed (I² = 28.6%, p = 0.4741). No evidence of publication bias was detected (p = 0.470). Conclusions: Radiomics is increasingly being explored in the context of melanoma, particularly in advanced disease settings and in relation to immunotherapy. Most studies rely on CT imaging and 3D feature extraction, while molecular integration remains limited. Despite promising findings with strong discriminative performance in predicting therapy response, further prospective, standardized studies with higher methodological rigor are needed to validate radiomic biomarkers and integrate them into clinical decision-making.

(1) Background: Mucosal melanoma (MM) is a rare tumor, accounting for about 1% of all diagnosed melanomas. The etiology and pathogenesis of this tumor are unknown. It is characterized by an aggressive phenotype with poor prognosis and a low response rate to approved treatments. (2) Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical features, treatments and outcomes of patients diagnosed with MM from different sub-sites (head and neck, gynecological and gastro-intestinal region) between 2013 and 2023 at our Institute. Survival times were estimated with the Kaplan–Meier method. Multivariate Cox regression was used to test the independence of significant factors in univariate analysis. (3) Results: Twenty-five patients were included in this study; the disease was equally distributed among females and males. The median age at diagnosis was 74 years old. The majority had MM originating from the head and neck (56%), particularly from the nasal cavity. BRAF V600 mutations were detected in 16% of the study population, limited to gastro-intestinal and gynecological MM. At diagnosis, at least half the patients (52%) had the disease located also at distant sites. The median overall survival (OS) in the whole study population was 22 months, with a longer OS for patients diagnosed at an early stage (38 months, p < 0.001). Longer OSs were reported for head and neck MM compared to other anatomic regions (0.06). Surgery of the primary tumor and radiotherapy were performed in 64% and 36% of the study population, respectively. Radiotherapy was performed only in head and neck MM. At multivariate analysis, the single factor that showed a reduced hazard ratio for death was radiotherapy. (4) Conclusions: The overall survival of MM from different sub-sites treated at our Italian Institution was 22 months, with better outcomes for early-stage disease and head and neck MM. Performing radiotherapy may have a protective effect on OS for head and neck MM. New treatment strategies are urgently needed to improve the outcome in this disease.

Background: When monotherapy with PD-1 inhibitors in metastatic melanoma fails, there are currently no standard second-line choices. In case of the unavailability of clinical trials, ipilimumab represents a possible alternative treatment. Methods: We collected data of 44 patients who received ipilimumab after the failure of PD-1 inhibitors from July 2017 to May 2023 at our Institute. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and post-progression survival (PPS) based on BRAF or NRAS mutation status, sex, and the presence of brain metastases were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Cox regression was used to evaluate independence in multivariate analysis. The objective response rate (ORR) was estimated based on RECIST 1.1. Results: Among the 44 patients enrolled in this study, 28 BRAF-wildtype, 9 BRAF-mutated, and 7 NRAS-mutated patients were identified. OS analysis showed a significant difference between wildtype and BRAF- or NRAS-mutated patients: 23.2 months vs 5.3 and 4.59, respectively, p = 0.017. The presence of brain metastases and BRAF or NRAS mutation were independent factors for mortality in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: In case of failure to enroll patients in innovative clinical trials, second-line ipilimumab still represents an effective therapy in patients with metastatic wildtype melanoma and in the absence of brain metastases.

Background: While the benefit of adjuvant therapy is well established in patients with stage IIIB ^– IIID melanoma, its role in stage IIIA disease remains a matter of discussion. This subgroup is generally considered to be at lower risk of recurrence, whereas currently available treatments are associated with potential adverse events, some of which may be severe or irreversible. The presence of a BRAF mutation may assist in identifying patients at increased risk of relapse or those more likely to obtain benefit from adjuvant targeted therapy. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors has recently emerged as a promising therapeutic strategy, demonstrating potential advantages over adjuvant treatment. Nevertheless, it may not represent the optimal approach for all patients and should be carefully evaluated on an individual basis, considering specific tumor characteristics such as mutational status to guide treatment selection. Case presentation: We report the clinical case of a patient with cutaneous melanoma initially diagnosed as stage IIIA, harboring BRAF V600E mutation, who did not receive any adjuvant therapy and developed locoregional recurrence within one year from diagnosis. The patient was subsequently treated with anti-PD-1 neoadjuvant immunotherapy but experienced disease progression at both local and distant sites. Then, targeted therapy was initiated, leading to a rapid clinical and radiological improvement. Conclusion: Despite significant advances in the treatment of stage III melanoma, both in the adjuvant and, more recently, neoadjuvant settings, some patient subgroups require more tailored approaches. In particular, the presence of BRAF V600 mutation may indicate a more aggressive disease and identify patients who could benefit more from targeted therapy or combined immune checkpoint inhibition than from anti-PD-1 monotherapy.