Oligometastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) represents a separate entity with a different biology and prognosis compared to stage IV NSCLC. Challenges range from the very definition of oligometastatic disease to the timing and techniques of local treatments, and their benefit in prolonging patient survival. Most of the international consensus and guidelines agree on the need for shared criteria, such as appropriate stadiation and even tissue biopsy if needed, in order to select patients that could really benefit from personalised strategies. Multidisciplinary evaluation is crucial in order to define if every lesion is amenable to radical local treatment, which appears to be the most important criterion across different guidelines. A distinction must be made depending on the time of oligo-disease detection, separating de novo oligometastatic disease from oligorecurrence, oligoprogression and oligoresidual disease. These separate entities imply a different biology and prognosis, and treatment strategies consequently must be tailored. Locoregional approaches are therefore often contemplated in order to ensure the best outcome for the patient. In non-oncogene-addicted disease, the advent of immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) allows physicians to take into consideration consolidative treatments, but timing, technique and subsequent systemic treatment remain open issues. In oncogene-addicted NSCLC, local treatments are nowadays preferably reserved to cases of oligoprogression, but the advent of new, more potent drugs might challenge that. In this review, we summarised the current knowledge, consensuses and data from retrospective and prospective trials, with the aim of shedding some light on the topic and emphasising the unmet clinical need.

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) represent one of the most promising and rapidly emerging anti-cancer therapies because they combine the cytotoxic effect of the conjugate payload and the high selectivity of the monoclonal antibody, which binds a specific membrane antigen expressed by the tumor cells. In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), ADCs are being investigated targeting human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3), trophoblast cell surface antigen 2 (TROP2), Mesenchymal–epithelial transition factor (c-MET), and carcinoembryonic antigen-related cell adhesion molecule 5 (CEACAM5). To date, Trastuzumab deruxtecan is the only ADC that has been approved by the FDA for the treatment of patients with NSCLC, but several ongoing studies, both using ADCs as monotherapy and combined with other therapies, are investigating the efficacy of new ADCs. In this review, we describe the structures and mechanism of action of different ADCs; we present the evidence derived from the main clinical trials investigating ADCs’ efficacy, focusing also on related toxicity; and, finally, we discuss future perspectives in terms of toxicity management, possible biomarkers, and the identification of resistance mechanisms.

Liquid biopsy (LB) involves the analysis of circulating tumour-derived DNA (ctDNA), providing a minimally invasive method for gathering both quantitative and qualitative information. Genomic analysis of ctDNA through next-generation sequencing (NGS) enables comprehensive genetic profiling of tumours, including non-driver alterations that offer prognostic insights. LB can be applied in both early-stage disease settings, for the diagnosis and monitoring of minimal residual disease (MRD), and advanced disease settings, for monitoring treatment response and understanding the mechanisms behind disease progression and tumour heterogeneity. Currently, LB has limited use in clinical practice, primarily due to its significant costs, limited diagnostic yield, and uncertain prognostic role. The application of artificial intelligence (AI) in the medical field is a promising approach to processing extensive information and applying it to individual cases to enhance therapeutic decision-making and refine risk assessment.

Objectives: To describe the scientific evidence regarding adjuvant treatment for stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma and the unresolved issues in this setting. Methods: This review examines the main studies on adjuvant medical therapies approved over the years by the Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency together with the main evidence related to the treatments referred to in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and European Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines at the time of submission (May 2026) for stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma. A particular focus on immunotherapy (interferon, ipilimumab, and anti-PD-1 antibodies, both as monotherapy and in combination) and targeted therapy with anti-BRAF agents, either as monotherapy or in combination with MEK inhibitors, is given. Besides that, this work also evaluates the role of radiation therapy and addresses some unresolved issues, such as adjuvant therapy in stage IIIA and treatment selection in BRAF-mutated melanoma. Results: Adjuvant therapy for stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma has evolved over the years, starting with interferon and progressing to the use of immunocheckpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy. However, not all treatments that have proven effective in metastatic disease have subsequently played a role in the adjuvant setting. Conclusions: Currently, adjuvant treatment for stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma involves the use of anti-PD-1 antibodies (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) and dabrafenib plus trametinib if the patient has a BRAF V600 mutation. It was not possible to identify the adjuvant therapy of choice for BRAF-mutated melanoma, and several factors must be considered when deciding between immunotherapy and targeted therapy. The role of radiation therapy remains controversial and could be discussed by the multidisciplinary team as part of the adjuvant strategy in selected patients. Likewise, adjuvant therapy for stage IIIA melanoma should be carefully evaluated in light of the risk–benefit ratio.

The role of adjuvant therapy in stage III melanoma is well established in clinical practice. Because stage IIB–IIC melanoma carries a risk of recurrence and melanoma-specific mortality comparable to that of stage III disease, adjuvant approaches have also been developed for patients with thick stage II tumors. Both pembrolizumab and nivolumab have demonstrated efficacy in reducing the risk of local and distant recurrence in patients with high-risk stage II melanoma, whereas evidence supporting the use of BRAF-MEK inhibitors in this setting remains inconclusive. Combinations of immune checkpoint inhibitors, as well as immunotherapy combined with mRNA-based vaccines, are currently under investigation in clinical trials. However, given the non-trivial risk of immune-related adverse events, careful selection of patients with stage II disease who are most likely to derive meaningful benefit from adjuvant therapy is essential. In this context, several clinicopathologic variables and gene expression profiling-based prognostic tools have been proposed to refine risk stratification. To date, however, none of these instruments have been incorporated into routine clinical practice, and no validated predictive biomarkers are available. Accordingly, optimal patient selection for adjuvant therapy remains an important unmet clinical need in early-stage melanoma.