PURPOSE: Ipilimumab and nivolumab have each shown treatment benefit for high-risk resected melanoma. The phase III CheckMate 915 trial evaluated adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab alone in patients with resected stage IIIB-D or IV melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, phase III trial, 1,833 patients received nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks (916 patients) or nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks (917 patients) for ≤ 1 year. After random assignment, patients were stratified by tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and stage. Dual primary end points were recurrence-free survival (RFS) in randomly assigned patients and in the tumor PD-L1 expression-level < 1% subgroup. RESULTS: At a minimum follow-up of approximately 23.7 months, there was no significant difference between treatment groups for RFS in the all-randomly assigned patient population (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.09; P = .269) or in patients with PD-L1 expression < 1% (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.14). In all patients, 24-month RFS rates were 64.6% (combination) and 63.2% (nivolumab). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 32.6% of patients in the combination group and 12.8% in the nivolumab group. Treatment-related deaths were reported in 0.4% of patients in the combination group and in no nivolumab-treated patients. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks did not improve RFS versus nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks in patients with stage IIIB-D or stage IV melanoma. Nivolumab showed efficacy consistent with previous adjuvant studies in a population resembling current practice using American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition, reaffirming nivolumab as a standard of care for melanoma adjuvant treatment.

Background: Elderly breast cancer patients are usually excluded from clinical trials. Nevertheless, with the increasing use of trastuzumab, there is a need to address trastuzumab-related cardiotoxicity in this population. Patients and methods: Records for patients ≥70 years treated with trastuzumab since 2005 were reviewed. New York Heart Association classification was used to document symptomatic cardiotoxicity. Asymptomatic cardiotoxicity was defined as an absolute drop ≥10% with a final left ventricular ejection fraction 20%. Results: Forty-five patients, median age 75.9 years (range 70–92), were identified. Three of 24 (12.5%) early breast cancer patients and 5 of 21 (23.8%) with advanced disease experienced asymptomatic cardiotoxicity. Four of 45 patients (8.9%), all with advanced breast cancer, developed symptomatic congestive heart failure. All but one of them recovered in a median time of 5 weeks (range 3–21). Patients with trastuzumab-related cardiotoxicity presented more often with cardiovascular risk factors, such as history of cardiac disease (33% versus 9.1%, P = 0.017) and diabetes (33.3% versus 6.1%, P = 0.010), compared with those without. Conclusions: Elderly breast cancer patients with a history of cardiac disease and/or diabetes treated with trastuzumab have an increased incidence of cardiotoxicity. Continuous cardiac monitoring is especially advised in this population.

A CT-based radiomics signature, based on histogram, shape, and local-regional texture features, showed an association with immune response in advanced solid tumors. Background Reliable predictive imaging markers of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors are needed. Purpose To develop and validate a pretreatment CT-based radiomics signature to predict respons...

PURPOSE: Despite marked advances in the treatment of unresectable or metastatic melanoma, the need for novel therapies remains. Bempegaldesleukin (BEMPEG), a pegylated interleukin-2 (IL-2) cytokine prodrug, demonstrated efficacy in the phase II PIVOT-02 trial. PIVOT IO 001 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03635983 ) is a phase III, randomized, open-label study that builds on the PIVOT-02 results in first-line melanoma. METHODS: Patients with previously untreated, unresectable, or metastatic melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive BEMPEG plus nivolumab (NIVO) or NIVO monotherapy. Primary end points were objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review and overall survival (OS). Secondary and exploratory end points included additional efficacy measures, safety, and pharmacokinetics (PKs) and pharmacodynamics analyses. RESULTS: In 783 patients (n = 391, BEMPEG plus NIVO; n = 392, NIVO monotherapy), the median follow-up was 11.6 months in the intent-to-treat population. The ORR with BEMPEG plus NIVO was 27.7% versus 36.0% with NIVO (two-sided P = .0311). The median PFS with BEMPEG plus NIVO was 4.17 months (95% CI, 3.52 to 5.55) versus 4.99 months (95% CI, 4.14 to 7.82) with NIVO (hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; 97% CI, 0.88 to 1.35; P = .3988). The median OS was 29.67 months (95% CI, 22.14 to not reached [NR]) with BEMPEG plus NIVO versus 28.88 months (95% CI, 21.32 to NR) with NIVO (HR, 0.94; 99.929% CI, 0.59 to 1.48; P = .6361). Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) and serious AE rates were higher with the combination (21.7% and 10.1%, respectively) versus NIVO (11.5% and 5.5%, respectively). BEMPEG PK exposure and absolute lymphocyte count changes after BEMPEG plus NIVO were comparable between PIVOT IO 001 and PIVOT-02. CONCLUSION: The PIVOT IO 001 study did not meet its primary end points of ORR, PFS, and OS. Increased toxicity was observed with BEMPEG plus NIVO versus NIVO.

Purpose: Disease progression during or after anti-PD-1-based treatment is common in advanced melanoma. Sotigalimab is a CD40 agonist antibody with a unique epitope specificity and Fc receptor binding profile optimized for activation of CD40-expressing antigen-presenting cells. Preclinical data indicated that CD40 agonists combined with anti-PD1 could overcome resistance to anti-PD-1. Patients and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase II trial to evaluate the combination of sotigalimab 0.3 mg/kg and nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks in patients with advanced melanoma following confirmed disease progression on a PD-1 inhibitor. The primary objective was to determine the objective response rate (ORR). Results: Thirty-eight subjects were enrolled and evaluable for safety. Thirty-three were evaluable for activity. Five confirmed partial responses (PR) were observed for an ORR of 15%. Two PRs are ongoing at 45.9+ and 26+ months, whereas the other three responders relapsed at 41.1, 18.7, and 18.4 months. The median duration of response was at least 26 months. Two additional patients had stable disease for >6 months. Thirty-four patients (89%) experienced at least one adverse event (AE), and 13% experienced a grade 3 AE related to sotigalimab. The most common AEs were pyrexia, chills, nausea, fatigue, pruritus, elevated liver function, rash, vomiting, headache, arthralgia, asthenia, myalgia, and diarrhea. There were no treatment-related SAEs, deaths, or discontinuation of sotigalimab due to AEs. Conclusions: Sotigalimab plus nivolumab had a favorable safety profile consistent with the toxicity profiles of each agent. The combination resulted in durable and prolonged responses in a subset of patients with anti-PD-1-resistant melanoma, warranting further evaluation in this setting. See related commentary by Wu and Luke, p. 9

PURPOSE: Effective treatment options for melanoma after immune checkpoint blockade failure are limited. RP1 (vusolimogene oderparepvec) is a herpes simplex virus type 1–based oncolytic immunotherapy, here evaluated in combination with nivolumab in anti–PD-1–failed melanoma. METHODS: Patients had advanced melanoma that had confirmed progression on anti–PD-1 (≥8 weeks, last prior treatment). RP1 was administered intratumorally (≤8 doses, ≤10 mL/dose; additional doses allowed) with nivolumab (≤2 years). The objective response rate (ORR) was assessed by independent central review using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. RESULTS: Of 140 patients enrolled, 48.6% had stage IVM1b/c/d disease, 65.7% had primary anti–PD-1 resistance, 56.4% were PD-L1 negative, and 46.4% received prior anti–PD-1 and anti–cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 therapy (43.6% in combination and 2.9% sequentially). Confirmed ORR (95% CI) was 32.9% (95% CI, 25.2% to 41.3%; 15.0% complete response). Responses occurred with similar frequency, depth, duration, and kinetics for injected and noninjected, including visceral lesions. The median (95% CI) duration of response was 33.7 (95% CI, 14.1 to not reached) months. Overall survival rates (95% CI) at 1 and 2 years were 75.3% (95% CI, 66.9% to 81.9%) and 63.3% (95% CI, 53.6% to 71.5%), respectively. Biomarker analysis demonstrated broad immune activation associated with response, including increased CD8 ⁺ T-cell infiltration and PD-L1 expression. Treatment-related adverse event rates were 77.1% grade 1/2, 9.3% grade 3, 3.6% grade 4, and no grade 5 events. CONCLUSION: RP1 combined with nivolumab provided deep and durable systemic responses in patients with anti–PD-1–failed melanoma, including those with poor prognostic factors. The safety profile was favorable, with mostly grade 1/2 adverse events.