Uveal melanoma represents ∼85% of all ocular melanomas and up to 50% of patients develop metastatic disease. Metastases are most frequently localised to the liver and, as few patients are candidates for potentially curative surgery, this is associated with a poor prognosis. There is currently little published evidence for the optimal management and treatment of metastatic uveal melanoma and the lack of effective therapies in this setting has led to the widespread use of systemic treatments for patients with cutaneous melanoma. Uveal and cutaneous melanomas are intrinsically different diseases and so dedicated management strategies and therapies for uveal melanoma are much needed. This review explores the biology of uveal melanoma and how this relates to ongoing trials of targeted therapies in the metastatic disease setting. In addition, we consider the options to optimise patient management and care.

Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common intraocular malignancy and arises from melanocytes in the iris, ciliary body, or choroid. Early diagnosis and local treatment is crucial, as survival correlates with primary tumor size. However, approximately 50% of patients will develop metastatic disease with 6–12 months’ survival from metastatic diagnosis. Genomic analyses have led to the development of gene-expression profiles that effectively predict metastatic progression; unfortunately, no adjuvant therapy has been shown to prolong survival to date. New insights into the molecular biology of UM have found frequent activating mutations in genes encoding for the G-protein α-subunit, GNAQ and GNA11, and improved understanding of the downstream signaling pathways MAPK, PI3K/Akt, and Hippo have afforded an array of new targets for treatment of this disease. Studies are under way with rationally developed regimens targeting these pathways, and novel agents are under development. We review the diagnosis, management, and surveillance of primary UM and the adjuvant therapy trials under way.

Uveal melanoma, a rare subset of melanoma, is the most common primary intraocular malignancy in adults. Despite effective primary therapy, nearly 50% of patients will develop metastatic disease. Outcomes for those with metastatic disease remain dismal due to a lack of effective therapies. The unique biology and immunology of uveal melanoma necessitates the development of dedicated management and treatment approaches. Ongoing efforts seek to optimize the efficacy of targeted therapy and immunotherapy in both the adjuvant and metastatic setting. This review provides a comprehensive, updated overview of disease biology and risk stratification, the management of primary disease, options for adjuvant therapy, and the current status of treatment strategies for metastatic disease.

In patients with previously treated metastatic uveal melanoma, the historical 1 year overall survival rate is 37% with a median overall survival of 7.8 months. We conducted a multicenter, single-arm, open-label phase 2 study of tebentafusp, a soluble T cell receptor bispecific (gp100×CD3), in 127 patients with treatment-refractory metastatic uveal melanoma (NCT02570308). The primary endpoint was the estimation of objective response rate based on RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours) v1.1. Secondary objectives included safety, overall survival, progression-free survival and disease control rate. All patients had at least one treatment-related adverse event, with rash (87%), pyrexia (80%) and pruritus (67%) being the most common. Toxicity was mostly mild to moderate in severity but was greatly reduced in incidence and intensity after the initial three doses. Despite a low overall response rate of 5% (95% CI: 2–10%), the 1 year overall survival rate was 62% (95% CI: 53–70%) with a median overall survival of 16.8 months (95% CI: 12.9–21.3), suggesting benefit beyond traditional radiographic-based response criteria. In an exploratory analysis, early on-treatment reduction in circulating tumour DNA was strongly associated with overall survival, even in patients with radiographic progression. Our findings indicate that tebentafusp has promising clinical activity with an acceptable safety profile in patients with previously treated metastatic uveal melanoma, and data suggesting ctDNA as an early indicator of clinical benefit from tebentafusp need confirmation in a randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Preclinical cancer models harboring CCNE1 amplification were more sensitive to adavosertib treatment, a WEE1 kinase inhibitor, than models without amplification. Thus, we conducted this phase II study to assess the antitumor activity of adavosertib in patients with CCNE1-amplified, advanced refractory solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥ 18 years with measurable disease and refractory solid tumors harboring CCNE1 amplification, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and adequate organ function were studied. Patients received 300 mg of adavosertib once daily on days 1 through 5 and 8 through 12 of a 21-day cycle. The trial followed Bayesian optimal phase II design. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled. The median follow-up duration was 9.9 months. Eight patients had partial responses (PRs), and three had stable disease (SD) ≥ 6 months, with an ORR of 27% (95% CI, 12 to 46), a SD ≥ 6 months/PR rate of 37% (95% CI, 20 to 56), a median progression-free survival duration of 4.1 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 6.4), and a median overall survival duration of 9.9 months (95% CI, 4.8 to 15). Fourteen patients with epithelial ovarian cancer showed an ORR of 36% (95% CI, 13 to 65) and SD ≥ 6 months/PR of 57% (95% CI, 29 to 82), a median progression-free survival duration of 6.3 months (95% CI, 2.4 to 10.2), and a median overall survival duration of 14.9 months (95% CI, 8.9 to 20.9). Common treatment-related toxicities were GI, hematologic toxicities, and fatigue. CONCLUSION: Adavosertib monotherapy demonstrates a manageable toxicity profile and promising clinical activity in refractory solid tumors harboring CCNE1 amplification, especially in epithelial ovarian cancer. Further study of adavosertib, alone or in combination with other therapeutic agents, in CCNE1-amplified epithelial ovarian cancer is warranted.

PURPOSE: This phase I study aimed to define the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of tebentafusp, a first-in-class T-cell receptor/anti-CD3 bispecific protein, using a three-week step-up dosing regimen, and to assess its safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary clinical activity in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM).METHODS: In this open-label, international, phase I/II study, HLA-A*02 or HLA-A*02:01+ patients with mUM received tebentafusp 20 μg once in week 1 and 30 μg once in week 2. Dose escalation (starting at 54 μg) began at week 3 in a standard 3 + 3 design to define RP2D. Expansion-phase patients were treated at the RP2D (20-30-68 μg). Blood and tumor samples were collected for pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics assessment, and treatment efficacy was evaluated for all patients with baseline efficacy data as of December 2017.RESULTS: Between March 2016 and December 2017, 42 eligible patients who failed a median of two previous treatments were enrolled: 19 in the dose escalation cohort and 23 in an initial dose expansion cohort. Of the dose levels investigated, 68 μg was identified as the RP2D. Most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events regardless of attribution were pyrexia (91%), rash (83%), pruritus (83%), nausea (74%), fatigue (71%), and chills (69%). Toxicity attenuated following the first three doses. The overall response rate was 11.9% (95% CI, 4.0 to 25.6). With a median follow-up of 32.4 months, median overall survival was 25.5 months (range, 0.89-31.1 months) and 1-year overall survival rate was 67%. Treatment was associated with increased tumor T-cell infiltration and transient increases in serum inflammatory mediators.CONCLUSION: Using a step-up dosing regimen of tebentafusp allowed a 36% increase in the RP2D compared with weekly fixed dosing, with a manageable side-effect profile and a signal of efficacy in mUM.