Abstract
Purpose of Review
In this article, we will briefly review the current treatment landscape for metastatic melanoma and provide a comprehensive update on emerging novel treatment strategies.
Recent Findings
Over the past decade, remarkable advances in immunotherapy and targeted therapy have greatly improved outcomes for patients with advanced melanoma. Although a subset of patients is able to achieve durable responses, the majority experience eventual disease progression on existing therapies. Trials evaluating novel combinatorial strategies, checkpoint inhibitors, immune agonists, T cell–based therapies, intratumoral agents, and others are ongoing.
Summary
While strides have been made in the treatment of advanced melanoma, further research is needed to identify alternative immune and molecular targets in order to overcome resistance and achieve better clinical outcomes.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction and Current Treatment Landscape
Melanoma is the sixth most common fatal malignancy in the USA [1]. According to the American Cancer Society, an estimated 91,270 new cases of melanoma were diagnosed in 2018 with an estimated 9320 deaths [2]. Outcomes for patients with metastatic melanoma have improved dramatically over the past decade, but the majority ultimately succumb to their disease, with 5-year overall survival rates of 30% to 40% [3, 4]. In this review, we discuss the current treatment landscape and provide an update on emerging novel treatment strategies, with a focus on therapies being studied in the phase II and III settings.
Immune Checkpoint Inhibition
Antibodies targeting the checkpoint proteins cytotoxic T lymphocyte–associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed death 1 (PD-1), first developed for the treatment of advanced melanoma, have dramatically altered the therapeutic landscape of oncology. Ipilimumab, a monoclonal anti-CTLA-4 antibody, was the first immune checkpoint inhibitor approved by the FDA in 2011 following phase III studies demonstrating a survival benefit over dacarbazine in advanced melanoma. The anti-PD-1 antibodies nivolumab and pembrolizumab were subsequently approved in 2014 and 2015, respectively, based on pivotal studies that showed further improvements in overall response and survival compared to both chemotherapy and ipilimumab [5•, 6, 7].
Given that CTLA-4 and PD-1 downregulate different stages of T cell activation, combination checkpoint inhibition was hypothesized to yield increased antitumor immune responses. In CheckMate 067, the objective response rate was 58% in advanced melanoma patients receiving combined nivolumab plus ipilimumab, compared to 44% for those receiving nivolumab alone and 19% for those receiving ipilimumab alone. Similarly, median PFS and OS were numerically highest in the combination arm, a survival benefit that persisted with longer follow-up. Four-year overall survival rates were 53% and 46% in the combination and nivolumab monotherapy arms, respectively [8•]. Long-term follow-up from KEYNOTE-029 was recently presented at the 2019 Society for Melanoma Research annual conference [9]. Standard-dose pembrolizumab plus reduced-dose ipilimumab at 1 mg/kg resulted in an objective response rate (ORR) of 62% (27% complete response (CR)), with 84% of responses ongoing at 3 years. After a median follow-up of 36.8 months, the median PFS and OS are not yet reached (3-year PFS rate of 59% and 3-year OS rate of 73%).
The longest survival data exist for ipilimumab and nivolumab and indicate durable benefit. In a pooled analysis of patients with advanced melanoma treated with ipilimumab, survival plateaued at 20% beginning around year 3, with follow-up extending up to 10 years [10]. In patients with advanced melanoma who received nivolumab monotherapy in the initial phase I study, 34% remained alive 5 years after starting treatment [11].
Targeted Therapy
Dysregulation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway is present in almost all melanomas. Activating mutations in BRAF are found in approximately 50% of cutaneous melanomas (80–90% V600E mutation, 10–20% V600K mutation), in particular those arising in non-chronically sun-damaged skin [12]. The BRAF inhibitors vemurafenib and dabrafenib were approved for the treatment of BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma in 2011 and 2013, respectively, following demonstration of a survival benefit when compared to dacarbazine [13]. However, inhibition of BRAF alone was associated with limited response durations of 6 months to 7 months and the development of secondary RAS-driven malignancies such as cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas due to a relief of ERK-mediated negative feedback [14].
Concurrent inhibition of MEK and BRAF overcame several of these limitations and led to improvements in ORR, PFS, and OS compared to BRAF inhibitor monotherapy. Dual-MAPK pathway inhibition is now considered a standard treatment option for patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma, with now three FDA-approved BRAF/MEK inhibitor combinations [7]. The newest regimen, encorafenib and binimetinib, demonstrated improved response and survival compared to vemurafenib alone and encorafenib alone in the three-arm phase III COLUMBUS trial [15•]. Although direct comparisons cannot be made with earlier studies of dabrafenib plus trametinib (COMBI-d) or vemurafenib plus cobimetinib (coBRIM), unprecedented survival figures (median PFS 14.9 months and median OS 33.6 months) were reported in the encorafenib plus binimetinib arm [16, 17]. Additionally, treatment was associated with lower rates of pyrexia and photosensitivity than what was previously observed in the COMBI-d and coBRIM studies. Although the trial was not powered to compare the two BRAF monotherapy arms, encorafenib was associated with superior response rates and longer survival times compared to vemurafenib, consistent with in vitro data showing a longer dissociation half-life and increased antitumor activity for encorafenib [18].
Although durable responses with targeted therapy may be less common than with immunotherapy, recent follow-up data demonstrates that a subset of patients can derive long-term clinical benefit. The 5-year landmark analysis of the phase II trial of dabrafenib plus trametinib in BRAF/MEK inhibitor-naïve patients with metastatic melanoma reported stable 4-year and 5-year PFS and OS rates of 13% and 30%, respectively [19•]. Although these findings need to be replicated in larger phase III studies, the available data seem to indicate a durable plateau in survival.
Oncolytic Therapy
Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) was the first oncolytic viral therapy approved for the treatment of cancer in the USA. T-VEC consists of a modified herpes simplex virus 1 that expresses granulocyte macrophage–colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) in the tumor and recruits antigen-presenting cells [20]. In patients with advanced melanoma who have predominantly injectable cutaneous, subcutaneous, and nodal disease with limited visceral involvement, the durable response rate was significantly higher with T-VEC compared to GM-CSF. The difference in OS was not statistically significant in the overall study population, but there was a survival benefit among patients with stage III and IV disease limited to skin, subcutaneous lesions, and lymph nodes [20, 21].
More intriguing data comes from the use of T-VEC in conjunction with immune checkpoint inhibition. The combination of T-VEC and ipilimumab demonstrated a significantly higher response rate compared to ipilimumab alone (ORR 39% vs 18%, p = 0.002), with responses in uninjected visceral lesions observed in 52% of patients in the combination arm compared to only 23% of patients in the ipilimumab arm, suggesting an enhanced systemic antitumor response [22•]. Similarly, the combination of T-VEC plus pembrolizumab has resulted in promising preliminary response rates (MASTERKEY-265) [23].
Enhancing the Efficacy of Targeted Therapy
Combination BRAF/MEK and Checkpoint Inhibition
The combination of BRAF/MEK and PD-1 axis inhibition offers a promising therapeutic strategy. The MAPK axis is involved in normal T cell receptor signaling [24]. Selective MAPK inhibition has been shown to promote tumor recognition by the immune system through an increase in activated CD8+ T cell infiltrate, melanoma major histocompatibility complex (MHC) expression, and melanoma antigen presentation [25,26,27]. More recent data demonstrated that MEK inhibition induces the accumulation of antigen-specific CD8+ T cell effectors in tumors by preventing T cell exhaustion and death. Further release of T cell inhibition by combining MEK inhibition with anti-PD-L1 therapy resulted in synergistic and durable inhibition of tumor growth in a mouse colorectal carcinoma model [28]. Other preclinical models have shown a similar enhancement in antitumor activity with combined BRAF/MEK and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibition, including tumor types that are considered immunologically cold such as triple-negative breast cancer [29,30,31].
Clinically, the combination of cobimetinib and atezolizumab (anti-PD-L1 Ab) led to an ORR of 45% and a median PFS of 12.0 months in 22 patients with metastatic melanoma [32]. Preliminary data from a phase Ib study of vemurafenib, cobimetinib, and atezolizumab in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma similarly demonstrates impressive clinical activity with an unconfirmed ORR of 85.3% [32]. A phase II study evaluating cobimetinib plus vemurafenib followed by atezolizumab is currently ongoing (NCT02902029). In the phase III COMBI-i study of the anti-PD-1 Ab spartalizumab (PR001) combined with dabrafenib and trametinib in treatment-naïve patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic disease, 9/9 patients in the initial safety run-in had confirmed responses [33]. An additional 7/7 evaluable patients in the biomarker portion of the study had unconfirmed partial responses. Preliminary analyses of paired baseline and on-treatment biopsies show a substantial increase in tumor-infiltrating CD8+ cells with treatment. The combination of pembrolizumab, dabrafenib, and trametinib (KEYNOTE-022) produced numerically longer 12-month PFS (59% vs 45%) and OS (80% vs 73%) rates compared to BRAF/MEK inhibition alone, but more severe treatment-related adverse events also occurred with higher frequency (58% vs 27%) in the combination arm [19•]. The IMPemBra trial compared pembrolizumab monotherapy with a combination of pembrolizumab and intermittent dabrafenib plus trametinib to assess the optimal duration of combination therapy due to concern for toxicity associated with continuous use. Comparable efficacy with reduced toxicities and discontinuation rates was observed when BRAF/MEK inhibitors were administered for 1 week prior to each dose of pembrolizumab (2 weeks vs 3 weeks of therapy) [34].
There are several ongoing trials evaluating BRAF and MEK inhibition in combination with checkpoint inhibition. Concurrent and sequential pembrolizumab and dabrafenib plus trametinib are also being evaluated in the neoadjuvant setting in patients with BRAF-mutant resectable stage III melanoma (NCT02858921). The question of whether to use initial checkpoint inhibition or targeted therapy in BRAF-mutant melanoma is being evaluated by an NCI phase III trial that randomizes patients to upfront either ipilimumab plus nivolumab or dabrafenib plus trametinib, followed by crossover at the time of disease progression (NCT02224781).
Targeted Therapy Beyond BRAF and MEK
Oncogenic mutations in NRAS, NF1 (a negative regulator of RAS signaling), and KIT represent other recurrent genomic subtypes of melanoma. Given the presence of multiple RAS effector pathways, targeting NRAS and NF1 poses greater therapeutic challenges. Downstream MEK inhibition with binimetinib produced partial responses in 6 (20%) of 30 patients with NRAS-mutant melanoma in an open-label phase II study [35]. The subsequent phase III NEMO trial randomized 402 patients with NRAS-mutant disease to either binimetinib or dacarbazine [36]. Treatment with binimetinib was associated with prolonged PFS (2.8 months vs 1.5 months) and improved ORR (15% vs 7%), with no significant difference in OS (11 months vs 10 months) due in part to receipt of subsequent immunotherapy in 45% of patients. Given that oncogenic RAS signaling may upregulate PD-L1 expression via post-transcriptional stabilization of PD-L1 mRNA, combined MEK and checkpoint inhibition may be a valid therapeutic approach in RAS-mutant melanoma.
Mutations in KIT, while less commonly seen in non-acral cutaneous melanomas, are observed in 15% to 20% of acral and mucosal melanomas. A number of prospective trials have assessed the efficacy of imatinib and other tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) such as dasatinib and nilotinib in patients with KIT-altered melanoma. Overall response rates range from 15 to 30%, with nearly all responses observed in the subgroup of melanomas harboring exon 11 or 13 KIT mutations [37,38,39,40]. While some patients experience durable responses, the median time to progression of 3–4 months is quite short compared to what is achieved with TKIs in chronic myeloid leukemia and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). The combination of KIT inhibition with immunotherapy is an area of active investigation. Preclinical data in GIST has shown that TKIs promote antitumor immunity and may have synergistic activity with immune checkpoint blockade [41]. Initial results from a phase I trial of imatinib plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced malignancies (NCT01738139) show partial responses in two patients, one with GIST and the other with KIT-mutant melanoma [42]. A phase I/II trial of imatinib plus pembrolizumab was initiated in patients with locally advanced or metastatic KIT-altered melanoma (NCT02812693) but was discontinued due to poor accrual.
Resistance to MAPK-targeted therapy is mediated by multiple mechanisms including reactivation of the MAPK pathway and upregulation of alternative signaling pathways, e.g., PI3K/AK [43]. The antitumor activity of BRAF and MEK-targeted therapy is mediated in part by induction of apoptosis through upregulation of BIM and suppression of BCL-2 and MCL-1, supporting combination therapy with anti-apoptotic agents. Navitoclax is a BH3 mimetic that inhibits BCL-2, BCL-xL, and BCL-w. The combination of navitoclax and a MEK inhibitor enhanced cell death in BRAF-mutant melanoma cell lines and xenograft models compared to either agent alone [44]. Similarly, the addition of navitoclax to the BRAF inhibitor PLX-4720 led to greater reduction in BRAF-mutant cell viability and xenograft tumor regression [27]. An ongoing phase II study of dabrafenib, trametinib, and navitoclax is enrolling patients with BRAF-mutant unresectable or metastatic melanoma naïve to BRAF/MEK inhibition (NCT01989585).
Novel Immunologic Strategies
The challenges of both primary and secondary resistance to the approved immunological checkpoint inhibitors have led to the identification and therapeutic targeting of additional novel immunological pathways (Table 1).
Novel Immunological Checkpoint Inhibitors
Inhibitory checkpoint molecules beyond CTLA4 and PD-1/PD-L1 have demonstrated significant activity in preclinical models. One of the more clinically advanced of these novel targets in melanoma is LAG3. LAG3 is a member of the Ig superfamily that is present on T cells, B cells, dendritic cells, and NK cells [45]. LAG3 exerts an inhibitory effect on effector T cell proliferation and enhances regulatory T cell function [45, 46]. T cells in the melanoma tumor microenvironment have high LAG3 expression [47, 48]. PD-L1-positive melanomas have also shown dramatic increases of LAG3 expression [49, 50].
Relatlimab (BMS-986016), LAG525, and MK-4280 are anti-LAG3 antibodies currently in clinical development. Relatlimab was the first in class antibody and is the furthest in development for melanoma. In the phase I expansion cohort of heavily pretreated patients with advanced melanoma refractory to or relapsed on anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy, the ORR to relatlimab in combination with nivolumab was 12.5% in evaluable patients (n = 48; NCT01968109) [51]. A phase II/III trial evaluating relatlimab in combination with nivolumab versus nivolumab single agent is ongoing (NCT03470922). LAG525 is currently undergoing phase I/II clinical trials as monotherapy or in combination with anti-PD-1 (NCT02460224). MK-4280 is being studied in a phase I study as a monotherapy or in combination with pembrolizumab (NCT02720068) [52].
Additional checkpoint inhibitors are also in clinical development, including agents targeting T-cell immunoglobulin and mucin-domain containing-3 (TIM3), TIGIT, PVRIG, VISTA, and others. TIM3 is an inhibitory receptor expressed on a variety of immune cells including cytotoxic T cells, regulatory T cells, and dendritic cells. TIM3 has been demonstrated to be expressed in melanoma tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) [53, 54]. TIM3 blockade has been shown to reverse T cell exhaustion and dysfunction in animal models of advanced melanoma [46, 54, 55]. There are several anti-TIM3 antagonists in early-phase development for multiple tumor types, including LY3321367 (NCT03099109), TSR-022 (NCT03680508), Sym023 (NCT03489343), BGB-A425 (NCT03744468), and others.
T cell immunoglobulin and ITIM domain (TIGIT) is a receptor expressed primarily by T cells, regulatory T cells, and NK cells, with immunosuppressive effects mediated through the decreased release of pro-inflammatory cytokines and increased release of IL-10 [56]. TIGIT is highly expressed in melanoma cells as well as dendritic cells and monocytes within the melanoma tumor microenvironment [57, 58]. Several early-phase trials are underway of anti-TIGIT antibodies in multiple tumor types, including BMS-986207 (NCT02913313), ASP8374 (NCT03260322), OMP-313M32 (NCT03119428), and others.
PVR-related immunoglobulin (PVRIG) is involved in TIGIT inhibitory effects and can also bind another ligand, PVRL2 (CD112), subsequently exerting its own suppressive effects [59]. COM701, a PVRIG antagonist, has demonstrated enhanced CD8 T cell proliferation in vitro while also having a synergistic effect on T cell activation when combined with either anti-PD-1 or anti-TIGIT antibody [60]. COM701 is currently being tested in a phase I clinical trial both as monotherapy and in combination with nivolumab in multiple tumor types (NCT03667716).
V domain Ig-containing suppressor of T cell activation (VISTA) functions as another potent negative regulator of T cells [61]. Preclinical studies of anti-VISTA antibodies have demonstrated increased T cell infiltration within the tumor microenvironment, increased IFN-γ production from CD8 T cells, and decreased tumor infiltration of myeloid cells [61, 62]. CA-170, an orally available inhibitor of both PD-L1/PD-L2 and VISTA, is currently in phase I testing in multiple tumor types (NCT02812875).
Novel Immune Agonist Therapies
The targeting of negative immunological regulatory pathways alone may not be sufficient for optimal cancer control, and the activation of co-stimulatory pathways alone or in combination with checkpoint blockade to enhance an immune response may also be required. The co-stimulatory targets investigated most fully in melanoma thus far include 4-1BB (CD137) and CD40.
4-1BB (CD137) is an important regulator of immune response. When 4-1BB binds its ligand, 4-1BBL, it triggers proliferation and prolonged survival of CD8+ effector T cells and NK cells [63]. Preclinical models showed agonistic antibodies against 4-1BB triggered a potent antitumor T cell response [64]. Utomilumab (PF-05082566) is a fully human IgG2 monoclonal agonist antibody targeting CD137 that has been studied in various phase I clinical trials including a phase 1b study in combination with pembrolizumab (NCT02179918) [65]. There are several ongoing phase I/II combination studies of utomilumab, including in combination with PF-04518600 (anti-OX40) (NCT02315066); with avelumab (anti-PD-L1), PF-04518600, or PD 0360324 (M-CSF mAb) (NCT02554812); and with avelumab, PF-04518600, cisplatin, or radiation (NCT03217747). Urelumab (BMS-663513) is a fully human IgG4 monoclonal agonist antibody against CD137. Phase I studies have demonstrated it to be well tolerated at MTD of 0.1 mg/kg every 3 weeks and resulting in increased expression of IFN-γ and CD8+ T cells in post-treatment biopsies (NCT00309023; NCT00612664; NCT01471210) [66, 67]. Subsequent phase I/II studies evaluating urelumab in combination with nivolumab in metastatic melanoma patients showed an objective response rate of 50% (10/20) in PD-L1+ melanomas and 47% (8/17) in PD-L1− melanomas (NCT02534506) [68].
CD40 is an immune co-stimulatory receptor expressed by antigen-presenting cells. Upon binding to its ligand (CD154) on activated helper T cells, CD40 mediates increased MHC surface expression on dendritic cells, production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, and B cell proliferation, all of which lead to increased priming and activation of CD8+ T cells [69, 70]. Several CD40 agonist antibodies have been developed (e.g., CP-870,893, dacetuzumab, ADC-1013, APX005M) with evidence of antitumor activity in CD40+ B cell malignancies and solid tumors including melanoma [71]. A phase I trial of the CD40 agonist CP-870,893 plus tremelimumab enrolled 24 patients with metastatic melanoma previously untreated with checkpoint blockade. In the 22 evaluable patients, the ORR was 27.3% (2 CR, 4 partial response (PR)) [72]. Notably, 4 of 5 patients who received anti-PD-1 therapy at the time of disease progression are long-term survivors (> 3 years), suggesting that combined CD40 agonist and anti-CTLA-4 therapy may prime and reinvigorate a T cell response that can be subsequently unleashed. Indeed, analysis of peripheral blood T lymphocytes demonstrated enrichment for an activated T cell phenotype (Tbet− Eomes± and CD45RA− CD27+); paired biopsies from 2 patients demonstrated increased tumor CD8 infiltration and PD-L1 expression in post-treatment biopsies compared to baseline biopsies. Preliminary data from the ongoing phase Ib/II study (NCT03123783) of APX005M and nivolumab in metastatic melanoma patients who have progressed on anti-PD-1 therapy was recently presented at the 2019 AACR Annual Meeting [73]. Of the 12 enrolled patients, 2 achieved confirmed partial responses and 3 achieved stable disease (2 with prolonged stable disease (SD) lasting > 8 months). APX005M is also being evaluated in combination with nivolumab and cabiralizumab (anti-colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R) antibody) in a phase I study (NCT03502330) and as an intratumoral injection in combination with pembrolizumab in a phase I/II trial (NCT02706353).
There are multiple co-stimulatory targets in addition to 4-1BB and CD40, including GITR, OX40, CD27, CD70, and others, which are currently being studied both preclinically and clinically in melanoma and other tumor types. Glucocorticoid-induced TNF receptor (GITR) is a co-stimulatory TNF receptor super family member. When GITR binds its ligand, it exerts a dual effect, triggering the downregulation of regulatory T cells and upregulating CD8+ effector cells while also extending their survival [74, 75]. There are multiple anti-GITR agents being studied in clinical trials, including TRX518 (NCT01239134), INCAGN01876 (NCT03126110), GWN323 (NCT02740270), and others.
Much like GITR, OX40 is a T cell co-stimulatory receptor and is primarily expressed on activated T cells and antigen-presenting cells [76]. However, OX40 is only present on T cells after activation [77]. In cutaneous melanoma, an increase in OX40 expression on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes has been associated with an improved prognosis [78]. There are a number of OX40 agonists currently in phase I testing, including MEDI0562 (NCT02705482), 9B12, a murine IgG mAb agonist of OX40 (NCT01644968) [79], PF-04518600 (NCT02315066), and others.
CD27 is a glycoprotein that belongs to the TNF family and is expressed on T cells, NK cells, and regulatory T cells [80]. Its ligand, CD70, is expressed on dendritic cells and activated T and B lymphocytes. When bound to CD70, CD27 enhances CD8+ T cell activation, survival, and effector function and triggers the differentiation of CD4+ T cells into Th1 CD4+ T cells that secrete IFN-γ [81,82,83]. Several agents have initiated clinical testing, including varlilumab (CDX-1127), an anti-CD27-mAb, (NCT02335918) [84], and ARGX-110, an anti-CD70-mAb (NCT01813539).
Novel Intratumoral Immunotherapeutic Agents
A number of novel intratumoral agents are being investigated alone and in combination with checkpoint inhibition in melanoma and other solid tumors. Of these, the Toll-like receptor 9 (TLR9) agonist tilsotolimod (IMO-2125) is the furthest in development for melanoma.
TLRs are a family of specialized receptors that stimulate immune responses to pathogen-associated molecular patterns. Among these, TLR9 has been shown to induce potent antitumor responses [85]. Upon binding to unmethylated CpG dinucleotides, a motif in bacterial and viral DNA, TLR9 stimulates a robust innate and adaptive immune response, ultimately leading to a strong CD4+ and CD8+ T cell response that may augment the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibition [86]. Tilsotolimod is a potent TLR9 agonist with demonstrated clinical activity in patients with advanced melanoma refractory to PD-(L)1 inhibition. On-treatment tumor biopsies from patients treated with tilsotolimod in combination with either ipilimumab or pembrolizumab in a phase I dose escalation study (NCT02644967) demonstrated maturation of myeloid DC1 subsets and an IFN-α response gene signature in both injected and uninjected tumors [87]. Additionally, higher CD4+ and CD8+ T cell proliferation rates were observed in tumor biopsies from responding patients. Preliminary data from the first 15 patients treated with IMO-2125 and ipilimumab in the phase II component of the same study showed a 47% ORR and 67% disease control rate, with 1 CR, 6 PR, and 3 SD [88]. These promising response rates provided the impetus for the randomized phase III study (ILLUMINATE 301) comparing ipilimumab 3 mg/kg with or without intratumoral IMO-2125 (8 mg) in patients with advanced cutaneous or mucosal melanoma refractory to anti-PD(L)1 therapy (NCT03445533). A number of other intratumoral TLR9 agonists are being evaluated in ongoing phase I/II trials in metastatic melanoma (NCT02680184, NCT03684785). For example, the combination of SD-101 (Dynavax), a synthetic CpG oligonucleotide, and pembrolizumab produced an ORR of 78% in 9 patients naïve to anti-PD-1 therapy with estimated 12-month PFS and OS rates of 88% and 89%, respectively [86]. The response rate was lower at 15% among 13 patients previously treated with anti-PD-1 therapy.
PV-10 is a small-molecule fluorescein derivative solution of rose bengal (10%) that triggers rapid cell death upon release from lysosomes. Following promising phase I data, a multicenter, international phase II trial of PV-10 was conducted in 80 patients with refractory cutaneous and subcutaneous metastatic melanoma [89]. Twenty-five percent of patients achieved complete responses, and 26% achieved partial responses in their injected lesions, accounting for an ORR of 51%. Among the 42 patients with designated bystander lesions, 26% and 7% also experienced complete and partial responses, respectively, in their uninjected lesions [90]. Although the study did not formally assess visceral disease, 4 out of 19 patients with stage IV disease had stable disease or partial response in their visceral lesions. This, along with the observed response in bystander lesions, may reflect the generation of a systemic antitumor immune response and suggest a potential role for PV-10 in combination with checkpoint blockade in patients with advanced melanoma. Preliminary results of a phase Ib study of PV-10 plus pembrolizumab (NCT02557321) showed acceptable safety and tolerability with a higher target lesion response rate compared to single-agent PV-10 [91]. An ongoing phase III study (active, not recruiting) is comparing PV-10 to investigator’s choice of dacarbazine, temozolomide, or T-VEC in patients with locally advanced cutaneous melanoma who are not candidates for targeted therapy or immune checkpoint inhibition (NCT02288897).
IL-12 is a pro-inflammatory cytokine that can induce intratumoral inflammation and recruitment of T cells. Systemic IL-12 therapy has been associated with limited benefit and significant toxicity [92]. Intratumoral injection of plasmid IL-12 followed by electroporation (IT-pIL12-EP) was developed as a way to deliver IL-12 in a targeted manner and minimize toxicity. Following phase I data demonstrating safety in patients with metastatic melanoma, a single-arm phase II trial was carried out in patients with stage III–IV melanoma [93]. Preliminary data in 29 patients demonstrated an ORR of 33% with a CR rate of 11%. Sixty-two percent of patients also experienced regression of non-injected lesions [94]. Two additional studies have been initiated to address the combination of IT-pIL12-EP and checkpoint inhibition. Preliminary results from a phase II study (NCT02493361) evaluating IT-pIL12-EP plus pembrolizumab showed an ORR of 40% among melanoma patients predicted to be nonresponsive to anti-PD-1 therapy (tumor samples with < 25% PD-1hi CTLA-4+ tumor-infiltrating T cells) [95]. The ongoing phase II PISCES study is evaluating this combination in advanced melanoma patients who experienced disease progression on either pembrolizumab or nivolumab (NCT03132675).
A number of other intratumoral agents are in development, including STING agonists, novel oncogenic viral therapies, and novel chemotherapy formulations. The stimulator of interferon genes (STING) is a receptor involved in activating the innate immune system by stimulating type 1 IFN-1 and DC activation [96]. In B16 melanoma murine studies, a single intratumoral dose of DMXAA (STING agonist) led to complete tumor regression in almost all the mice [96]. STING agonists are being evaluated in multiple phase I/II studies alone and in combination with checkpoint inhibitors (NCT02675439, NCT03010176, NCT03249792). INT230-6 is a formulation of cisplatin and vinblastine with amphiphilic penetration enhancer for selective high payload delivery into tumor cells (NCT03058289). RPL-001-16 is a modified HSV1 virus being evaluated alone and in combination with nivolumab in advanced tumors with phase II cohorts including cutaneous and ocular melanoma (NCT03767348).
Modulating the Immune Microenvironment
The tumor microenvironment consists of fibroblasts, stromal cells, extracellular matrix, vasculature, and immune cells that promote tumor growth and invasion [97]. These tumor-promoting functions include increased angiogenesis, immune evasion, and inhibition of apoptosis, among others. Various therapeutic targets that modulate the microenvironment have been identified.
Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) plays a multifaceted role in the tumor microenvironment; it inhibits effector T cells and NK cells and activates Tregs and MDSCs [92, 98]. Studies have demonstrated that IDO1 is upregulated in several malignancies [99]. In melanoma specifically, an interconnected relationship between the expression of IDO, PD-L1, and CTLA-4 was established and was associated with negative outcomes, independent of disease stage, suggesting a potential treatment target [100]. Epacadostat, an IDO inhibitor, was found to be well tolerated in phase I testing with SD of greater than 16 weeks observed in 7 of 52 patients [101]. A phase I/II trial evaluating epacadostat with ipilimumab in subjects with unresectable or metastatic melanoma found an ORR of 75% (9/12) with one patient achieving a complete response [102]. The combination of pembrolizumab plus epacadostat produced a promising ORR of 56% in 54 evaluable patients in the phase I/II ECHO-202/KEYNOTE-037 study. Among treatment-naïve patients who received the recommended phase II dose of epacadostat 100 mg BID, the ORR was 60% [103]. Unfortunately, the pivotal phase III ECHO-301/KEYNOTE-252 study failed to demonstrate any survival benefit with the combination over pembrolizumab alone in 706 patients with unresectable advanced melanoma [104]. Combination therapy did not produce a significantly longer overall survival, median PFS, or ORR. A phase I/II trial evaluating indoximod, another IDO inhibitor, in combination with ipilimumab, nivolumab, and pembrolizumab in melanoma is currently ongoing (NCT02073123). Preliminary results from this trial showed an ORR of 55.7% (39/70) with a CR rate of 18.6% (13/70). Median PFS was 12.4 months [105]. There are several other IDO inhibitors in phase I testing with no data available at this time (NCT03208959, NCT03164603, NCT03047928, NCT02658890).
The adenosine pathway is a major factor in the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. This pathway is mediated by ectonucleases CD39 and CD73 and the adenosine receptors, e.g., A1R, A2AR, and A2BR [106, 107]. Even though they are constitutively expressed on various cells, their expression drastically increases in response to pro-inflammatory cytokines and in hypoxic environments. Most importantly, CD39 and CD73 are expressed on Tregs. In melanoma, an increased expression of CD73 was found to correlate with a more aggressive, invasive phenotype and was found in 54% of melanoma metastasis [108, 109]. Other studies have found that CD39 was overexpressed earlier in tumor development, indicating its potential role in influencing the differentiation of melanocytes into malignant cells. Preclinical models have found that anti-CD73 and anti-CD39 antibody treatment inhibits metastasis formation and improves antitumor immunity [110, 111]. There are two anti-CD73 agents currently in early-phase testing. BMS-986179 is an anti-CD73 mAb being evaluated in a phase I/IIa clinical trial as a single agent or in combination with nivolumab (NCT02754141). Preliminary data have demonstrated tolerability in both cohorts and efficient inhibition of CD73 activity. Out of 59 patients, 7 had a PR and 10 had SD [112]. MEDI99447 is an anti-CD73 mAb that is currently being tested in phase I trial as monotherapy or in combination with MEDI4736 (anti-PD-L1) (NCT02503774).
When adenosine binds to the A2A receptor on effector T cells, it inhibits proliferation and production of cytokines and limits overall cytotoxicity [113]. It also stimulates the increased expression of negative regulatory mediators such as PD-1, CTLA-4, and LAG3 [107, 108]. In Tregs, the overall effect is stabilization with increased expression of FOXP3 [114]. In DC, it prevents maturation and results in increased production of IL-10, TGF beta, and IDO, all of which have known immunosuppressive effects. There are several A2AR antagonists currently in development in the early phase and in multiple malignancies. A phase I clinical trial evaluating CPI-444, an A2AR antagonist, as monotherapy or in combination with atezolizumab is ongoing (NCT02655822). Preliminary results of the RCC and NSCLC cohorts demonstrated that though the majority of patients were PD-1/PD-L1 resistant/refractory (75% in RCC, 68% in NSCLC), the disease control rates were 86% and 50%, respectively [115]. CPI-006, a type 2 humanized IgG1 antibody inhibiting enzymatic activity of CD73, is being evaluated in a phase I trial as single agent or in combination with either pembrolizumab or CPI-444 (NCT03454451). Another phase I/II study of A2AR antagonist NIR178 (PBF-509) in patients with NSCLC is also showing promising results (NCT02403193). AZD4635, another anti-A2AR antagonist, is also being evaluated in a phase I trial as a single agent or in combination with durvalumab (anti-PD-L1) in advanced solid malignancies (NCT02740985).
CSF1R signaling regulates macrophage proliferation and differentiation and may polarize tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) into the immunosuppressive, pro-tumorigenic M2 phenotype. Induction of CSF1 expression and consequent recruitment of M2 macrophages by IFN-γ and TNF-α constitute a negative feedback mechanism that suppresses T cell activity [116]. There is an ongoing phase Ib/II basket trial of lacnotuzumab (anti-CSF1 Ab) combined with spartalizumab (anti-PD-1 Ab) in patients with advanced melanoma and endometrial, pancreatic, and triple-negative breast cancer [117].
AXL is highly overexpressed on various cells in the TME and exerts immunosuppressive effects through several pathways [118, 119]. It has also been shown to mediate acquired drug resistance to MAPK and PI3K/AKT pathway–targeted therapy by enabling alternative growth pathway signaling [118]. BGB324, a novel AXL inhibitor, is being studied in an ongoing phase I/II trial in combination with pembrolizumab or dabrafenib and trametinib in comparison to standard treatment alone for advanced melanoma patients (NCT02872259). An antibody drug conjugate targeting AXL (BA3011) is also being developed in a phase I/II trial with expansion cohorts in melanoma, NSCLC, and pancreatic cancer (NCT03425279).
Other Agents and Cytokines
Lenvatinib is a multi-tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity against VEGF receptors VEGFR1, VEGFR2, and VEGFR3; FGF receptors FGFR1, FGFR2, FGFR3, and FGFR4; platelet-derived growth factor alpha; KIT; and RET which are implicated in tumor angiogenesis and cell proliferation [120, 121]. Phase I studies in multiple malignancies including melanoma have previously demonstrated clinical activity. Prominent toxicities included high blood pressure, proteinuria, and fatigue [122, 123]. Lenvatinib has been further studied in thyroid, renal cell, and hepatocellular cancer and has led to FDA approval in these settings. Clinical trials combining lenvatinib with pembrolizumab have been studied in the KEYNOTE-146 phase 1b/2 basket study. In preliminary results of 21 patients with metastatic melanoma, the ORR at 24 weeks was 47.6% and the median PFS was 5.5 months. The 12-month PFS rate was 34.7%, and the median DOR was 12.5 months. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 67% with the most common adverse events being fatigue, decreased appetite, diarrhea, hypertension, dysphonia, nausea, arthralgia, and proteinuria. There are several ongoing studies assessing this combination in patients with advanced melanoma including a phase II study in patients who were previously exposed to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy (NCT03776136) and a randomized, placebo-controlled phase III study comparing pembrolizumab and lenvatinib to pembrolizumab alone as first-line therapy (NCT03820986).
Axitinib is a tyrosine-kinase inhibitor targeting VEGFR1–VEGFR3, c-KIT, and platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) [124]. Axitinib has been combined with both chemotherapy and immune therapy in patients with melanoma. Based on a phase II study of axitinib in patients with melanoma which demonstrated an ORR of 18.8%, another phase II study combining axitinib with carboplatin and paclitaxel was initiated [125]. Out of 36 evaluable patients, 8 patients had PR and an additional 20 patients had SD. The median PFS was 8.7 months with a median OS of 14.0 months. Overall, the combination was well tolerated with hypertension, anemia, and neutropenia being the most common grade 3 adverse events [126]. Axitinib is also being studied in combination with immune agents. A phase Ib study combining axitinib with JS001, a humanized anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, in patients with metastatic mucosal melanoma is currently being performed in China. Initial results from 24 evaluable patients, published in abstract form, demonstrated that the combination was well tolerated with mostly grade 1–2 toxicities. Although there were no complete responses, 12 patients achieved a partial response and an additional 9 patients had stable disease with 10 out the 12 responders ongoing at the time of publication [127]. The encouraging results of this study, although in early phase and in a unique population, demonstrate the potential for further benefit in the combination of immune and targeted therapies.
Histone acetylation and deacetylation play a key role in regulating gene transcription. Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors have emerged as a potential anticancer therapeutic in various malignancies [128,129,130]. The combination of entinostat, a selective class I HDAC inhibitor, and pembrolizumab showed promising activity in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma who had experienced disease progression on or after anti-PD-1 therapy. Findings from the phase Ib/II ENCORE 601 trial in 53 enrolled patients with anti-PD-1 refractory disease demonstrated 9 patients achieved PRs, and 1 patient had a CR, for an ORR of 19% [131]. An additional 7 patients had SD lasting > 6 months, leading to a clinical benefit rate of 32%. Responses were durable with a 12.5-month median duration of response. HBI-8000 is another HDAC inhibitor being evaluated in combination with nivolumab in patients with metastatic melanoma, RCC, and NSCLC (NCT02718066).
Avadomide (CC-122) is a novel small-molecule agent that modulates cereblon E3 ligase, leading to ubiquitination of several hematopoietic transcription factors [132]. Avadomide has demonstrated antitumor activity in DLBCL and multiple myeloma [133]. In a first-in-human phase I clinical trial in patients with advanced solid tumors, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and multiple myeloma, avadomide demonstrated acceptable toxicity and resulted in 3 objective responses in the NHL patients [134]. Based on these results, a phase II study combining avadomide with nivolumab in patients with melanoma was initiated (NCT03834623).
Imprime PGG is a soluble IV β-glucan pathogen–associated molecular pattern that stimulates production of several cytokines including IFN, leading to activation of the innate immune system [135]. In several phase II clinical trials, Imprime PGG led to promising response rates in NSCLC, colorectal cancer, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia [136, 137]. The combination of Imprime PGG and pembrolizumab is being evaluated in a phase II study in patients with advanced melanoma who have progressed on prior checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Preliminary biomarker data shows enhanced tumor infiltration by activated myeloid cells and T cells, suggesting a mechanism by which Imprime PGG may enhance the efficacy of checkpoint blockade [138].
Based on the known efficacy of cytokines in a small subset of melanoma patients, there has been significant interest in pegylated forms of IL-2 and IFN alpha in combination with checkpoint inhibition [139]. NKTR-214 is a pegylated variant of IL-2 with improved tolerability and preferential binding to IL-2Rβγ, leading to greater activation and expansion of effector T cells and NK cells over regulatory T cells in the tumor microenvironment. Initial data from the dose-escalation phase of the PIVOT-02 study of NKTR-214 in combination with nivolumab demonstrated an ORR of 63% in 11 treatment-naïve patients with advanced melanoma, but updated figures for 38 evaluable melanoma patients showed a lower ORR of 53% [140]. Whether the combination proves superior to anti-PD-1 monotherapy is being evaluated in an ongoing randomized, phase III study in the first-line setting (NCT03635983). In a phase Ib/II study of pembrolizumab plus pegylated IFN (PEG-IFN) in PD-1-naïve patients with advanced melanoma, combination therapy produced an ORR of 60.5% [141]. Median PFS and OS were 11.0 months and unreached, respectively, after a median follow-up of 25 months. The toxicity profile appeared acceptable, with 48.8% of patients experiencing a grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse event.
T Cell–Based Therapies
Adoptive cell therapy (ACT) with TILs consists of the identification of antitumor T cells, their ex vivo expansion, and transfer back into the patient after a lympho-depleting regimen. Previous work by Rosenberg and colleagues [142] demonstrated that lymphocytes extracted from freshly resected melanomas could be expanded in vitro and used to induce responses in patients with metastatic melanoma. Subsequent studies combined TILs with lympho-depleting conditioning and high-dose IL-2. These and subsequent studies demonstrated objective response rates up to 72%, with 10–20% of patients achieving complete remission, leading to widespread interest and further study of TILs [143, 144].
In a pilot study combining vemurafenib and TILs, 7 out of 11 patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma had an objective clinical response, 2 of whom had a durable response lasting over 3 years [145]. In a phase I study of 14 patients who received an induction course of ipilimumab combined with TILs, 5 patients had an objective response, with 4 patients achieving a durable response lasting over 1 year [146]. Currently, there are more than 20 clinical trials being performed worldwide evaluating TIL therapy in combination with checkpoint inhibition in melanoma.
Recognition of the critical role of antigen-presenting cells in driving antitumor immunity led to the development of a new class of agents termed immune-mobilizing monoclonal T cell receptor against cancer (ImmTAC), bispecific antibodies that combine antigen recognition and T cell activation through CD3-specific antibody fragments. IMCgp100 is a bispecific antibody that that redirects T cells by binding to CD3 while also binding to gp100 on melanoma cells [147]. In a phase I study that included 31 patients with advanced melanoma, partial responses were observed in 4 out of 26 patients, with an additional 12 patients having stable disease [148]. A subsequent phase I/II study in uveal melanoma patients using an intra-patient dose escalation schedule showed minor responses (> 10% tumor reduction) in 4 out of 17 patients, with an additional 12 patients achieving stable disease [149]. There is an ongoing phase I/II trial studying the combination of IMCgp100 plus durvalumab and tremelimumab in patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma (NCT02535078). There is also an ongoing phase I study assessing the safety of a second ImmTAC agent targeting NY-ESO-1 and/or LAGE-1A.
Another method of enhancing T cell activity involves the adoptive transfer of genetically modified T cells encoding MHC class–restricted T cell receptors. A recent phase I/II study examining adoptive CD4 T cell therapy with an MHC class II–restricted receptor recognizing MAGE-A3 in solid tumors has published preliminary results in 17 patients, with 1 complete response and partial responses in 3 patients [150].
Vaccines
The ability to predict unique cancer neoantigens using whole exome and RNA sequencing data with machine learning approaches has led to the development of personalized cancer vaccines. A phase I trial demonstrated the safety and feasibility of a personalized vaccine targeting up to 20 predicted personal tumor neoantigens in advanced melanoma patients. Of 6 vaccinated patients, 4 had a CR that persisted at 25 months [151]. Current vaccines under investigation include phase I studies of RO7198457 (Genentech), as monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab (NCT03289962), and GEN-009 (Genocea Biosciences), as monotherapy and in combination with nivolumab (NCT03633110).
Dendritic cells prime and activate T cells through MHC I antigen presentation [152]. Vaccination with ex vivo tumor antigen–loaded autologous dendritic cells offers another therapeutic strategy. A phase I trial evaluated the use of myeloid DCs that were activated and loaded with HLA-A*02:01-restricted melanoma peptides gp100 and tyrosinase ex vivo. Treatment was well tolerated, and 5 out of 14 vaccinated patients derived long-term survival benefits with overall survivals ranging from 22 to 40 months [153]. Ongoing studies include a phase II trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of dasatinib (70 mg BID) in combination with an autologous type 1 polarized dendritic cell vaccine (NCT01876212). There is also a phase I/II clinical trial evaluating intratumoral injection of dendritic cell vaccines in combination with pembrolizumab (NCT03325101).
Conclusion
Despite tremendous advances in the treatment of metastatic melanoma, only a subset of patients achieves long-term remission. Efforts to enhance the efficacy of existing immunotherapies and targeted agents, as well as to identify novel therapeutic targets, are ongoing and critical to further improving survival outcomes for patients with advanced melanoma.
References
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance
Losina E, Walensky RP, Geller A, Beddingfield FC 3rd, Wolf LL, Gilchrest BA, et al. Visual screening for malignant melanoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Arch Dermatol. 2007;143:21–8.
Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer Statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67:7–30.
Gershenwald JE, Scolyer RA, Hess KR, Sondak VK, Long GV, Ross MI, et al. Melanoma staging: evidence-based changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67:472–92.
Houghton AN, Polsky D. Focus on melanoma. Cancer Cell. 2002;2:275–8.
• Schachter J, Ribas A, Long GV, et al. Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab for advanced melanoma: final overall survival results of a multicentre, randomised, open-label phase 3 study (KEYNOTE-006). Lancet (Lond, Engl). 2017;390:1853–62 This randomized, phase III study demonstrated improved overall survival for pembrolizumab compared to ipilimumab in the treatment of advanced melanoma regardless of dosing schedule. The 24-month overall survival rate was 55% in both the 2-week and 3-week groups and 43% in the ipilimumab group.
Long GV, Atkinson V, Ascierto PA, et al. Nivolumab improved survival vs dacarbazine in patients with untreated advanced melanoma. J Transl Med. 2015;13:O6–O.
Robert C, Schachter J, Long GV, Arance A, Grob JJ, Mortier L, et al. Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:2521–32.
• Hodi FS, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone versus ipilimumab alone in advanced melanoma (CheckMate 067): 4-year outcomes of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19:1480–92 This randomized, double-blind, phase III study demonstrated significant survival benefit with the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab than either agent alone in patients with advanced melanoma. Three-year survival rates were 58% in the nivolumab plus ipilimumab group, 52% in the nivolumab group, and 34% in the ipilimumab group.
Long GV, Atkinson V, Cebon JS. Long-term follow-up of standard-dose pembrolizumab plus reduced-dose ipilimumab in 153 patients with advanced melanoma: KEYNOTE-029 1B. Presented at 2019 Society for Melanoma Research Congress. 2019.
Schadendorf D, Hodi FS, Robert C, Weber JS, Margolin K, Hamid O, et al. Pooled analysis of long-term survival data from phase II and phase III trials of ipilimumab in unresectable or metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:1889–94.
Hodi FS, Kluger H, Sznol M, et al. Abstract CT001: durable, long-term survival in previously treated patients with advanced melanoma (MEL) who received nivolumab (NIVO) monotherapy in a phase I trial. Cancer Res. 2016;76:CT001.
Hauschild A, Grob JJ, Demidov LV, et al. Dabrafenib in BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma: a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet (Lond, Engl). 2012;380:358–65.
Chapman PB, Hauschild A, Robert C, Haanen JB, Ascierto P, Larkin J, et al. Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2507–16.
Larkin J, Ascierto PA, Dréno B, Atkinson V, Liszkay G, Maio M, et al. Combined vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAF-mutated melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1867–76.
• Dummer R, Ascierto PA, Gogas HJ, et al. Overall survival in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma receiving encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib or encorafenib (COLUMBUS): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19:1315–27 This is the fourth randomized, open-label phase III study demonstrating improved response and survival with combined BRAF and MEK inhibition compared to BRAF inhibition alone. Patients achieved unprecedented survival figures (median PFS 14.9 months and median OS 33.6 months).
Larkin J, Ascierto PA, Dreno B, et al. Combined vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAF-mutated melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1867–76.
Long GV, Flaherty KT, Stroyakovskiy D, et al. Dabrafenib plus trametinib versus dabrafenib monotherapy in patients with metastatic BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma: long-term survival and safety analysis of a phase 3 study. Annals Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol. 2017;28:1631–9.
Delord JP, Robert C, Nyakas M, McArthur G, Kudchakar R, Mahipal A, et al. Phase I dose-escalation and -expansion study of the BRAF inhibitor encorafenib (LGX818) in metastatic BRAF-mutant melanoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:5339–48.
• Ascierto PA, Di Giacomo AM, Svane I, et al. 1244OKEYNOTE-022 part 3: phase II randomized study of 1L dabrafenib (D) and trametinib (T) plus pembrolizumab (Pembro) or placebo (PBO) for BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma. Ann Oncol. 2018;29 This randomized, double-blind phase II study demonstrated improved PFS and DoR with the combination of pembrolizumab and BRAF/MEK inhibition. However, this combination was associated with significantly higher serious adverse events (58% vs 27%).
Andtbacka RH, Kaufman HL, Collichio F, Amatruda T, Senzer N, Chesney J, et al. Talimogene laherparepvec improves durable response rate in patients with advanced melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:2780–8.
Harrington KJ, Andtbacka RH, Collichio F, Downey G, Chen L, Szabo Z, et al. Efficacy and safety of talimogene laherparepvec versus granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor in patients with stage IIIB/C and IVM1a melanoma: subanalysis of the phase III OPTiM trial. Onco Targets Ther. 2016;9:7081–93.
• Chesney J, Puzanov I, Collichio F, et al. Randomized, open-label phase II study evaluating the efficacy and safety of talimogene laherparepvec in combination with ipilimumab versus ipilimumab alone in patients with advanced, unresectable melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:1658–67 This randomized, open-label phase II study was the first randomized trial to evaluate the addition of an oncolytic virus to a checkpoint inhibitor with an improved response rate (39% vs 19%) and a higher number of patients achieving responses in visceral lesions (52% vs 23%).
Long GV, Dummer R, Ribas A, et al. Efficacy analysis of MASTERKEY-265 phase 1b study of talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) and pembrolizumab (pembro) for unresectable stage IIIB-IV melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:9568.
Gupta S, Weiss A, Kumar G, Wang S, Nel A. The T-cell antigen receptor utilizes Lck, Raf-1, and MEK-1 for activating mitogen-activated protein kinase. Evidence for the existence of a second protein kinase C-dependent pathway in an Lck-negative Jurkat cell mutant. J Biol Chem. 1994;269:17349–57.
Boni A, Cogdill AP, Dang P, Udayakumar D, Njauw CN, Sloss CM, et al. Selective BRAFV600E inhibition enhances T-cell recognition of melanoma without affecting lymphocyte function. Cancer Res. 2010;70:5213–9.
Donia M, Fagone P, Nicoletti F, Andersen RS, Høgdall E, Straten PT, et al. BRAF inhibition improves tumor recognition by the immune system: potential implications for combinatorial therapies against melanoma involving adoptive T-cell transfer. Oncoimmunology. 2012;1:1476–83.
Frederick DT, Piris A, Cogdill AP, Cooper ZA, Lezcano C, Ferrone CR, et al. BRAF inhibition is associated with enhanced melanoma antigen expression and a more favorable tumor microenvironment in patients with metastatic melanoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:1225–31.
Ebert PJR, Cheung J, Yang Y, McNamara E, Hong R, Moskalenko M, et al. MAP kinase inhibition promotes T cell and anti-tumor activity in combination with PD-L1 checkpoint blockade. Immunity. 2016;44:609–21.
Liu L, Mayes PA, Eastman S, Shi H, Yadavilli S, Zhang T, et al. The BRAF and MEK inhibitors dabrafenib and trametinib: effects on immune function and in combination with immunomodulatory antibodies targeting PD-1, PD-L1, and CTLA-4. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21:1639–51.
Hu-Lieskovan S, Mok S, Homet Moreno B, et al. Improved antitumor activity of immunotherapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors in BRAF(V600E) melanoma. Sci Transl Med. 2015;7:279ra41.
Loi S, Dushyanthen S, Beavis PA, Salgado R, Denkert C, Savas P, et al. RAS/MAPK activation is associated with reduced tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in triple-negative breast cancer: therapeutic cooperation between MEK and PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:1499–509.
Miller WH, Kim TM, Lee CB, et al. Atezolizumab (A) + cobimetinib (C) in metastatic melanoma (mel): updated safety and clinical activity. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:3057.
Dummer R, Schadendorf D, Nathan P, et al. Abstract CT182: the anti-PD-1 antibody spartalizumab (PDR001) in combination with dabrafenib and trametinib in previously untreated patients with advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma: first efficacy, safety, and biomarker findings from the part 2 biomarker cohort of COMBi-i. Cancer Res. 2018;78:CT182.
Blank CU, Rozeman EA, Mallo H, et al. LBA46Phase II study comparing pembrolizumab (PEM) with intermittent/short-term dual MAPK pathway inhibition plus PEM in patients harboring the BRAFV600 mutation (IMPemBra). Ann Oncol. 2018;29.
Ascierto PA, Schadendorf D, Berking C, Agarwala SS, van Herpen C, Queirolo P, et al. MEK162 for patients with advanced melanoma harbouring NRAS or Val600 BRAF mutations: a non-randomised, open-label phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:249–56.
Dummer R, Schadendorf D, Ascierto PA, Arance A, Dutriaux C, di Giacomo AM, et al. Binimetinib versus dacarbazine in patients with advanced NRAS-mutant melanoma (NEMO): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18:435–45.
Carvajal RD, Antonescu CR, Wolchok JD, Chapman PB, Roman RA, Teitcher J, et al. KIT as a therapeutic target in metastatic melanoma. JAMA. 2011;305:2327–34.
Carvajal RD, Lawrence DP, Weber JS, Gajewski TF, Gonzalez R, Lutzky J, et al. Phase II study of nilotinib in melanoma harboring KIT alterations following progression to prior KIT inhibition. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21:2289–96.
Guo J, Si L, Kong Y, Flaherty KT, Xu X, Zhu Y, et al. Phase II, open-label, single-arm trial of imatinib mesylate in patients with metastatic melanoma harboring c-Kit mutation or amplification. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2904–9.
Hodi FS, Corless CL, Giobbie-Hurder A, Fletcher JA, Zhu M, Marino-Enriquez A, et al. Imatinib for melanomas harboring mutationally activated or amplified KIT arising on mucosal, acral, and chronically sun-damaged skin. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:3182–90.
Balachandran VP, Cavnar MJ, Zeng S, Bamboat ZM, Ocuin LM, Obaid H, et al. Imatinib potentiates antitumor T cell responses in gastrointestinal stromal tumor through the inhibition of Ido. Nat Med. 2011;17:1094–100.
Reilley MJ, Bailey A, Subbiah V, et al. Phase I clinical trial of combination imatinib and ipilimumab in patients with advanced malignancies. J Immunother Cancer. 2017;5:35.
Liu F, Yang X, Geng M, Huang M. Targeting ERK, an Achilles’ heel of the MAPK pathway, in cancer therapy. Acta Pharm Sin B. 2018;8:552–62.
Cragg MS, Jansen ES, Cook M, Harris C, Strasser A, Scott CL. Treatment of B-RAF mutant human tumor cells with a MEK inhibitor requires Bim and is enhanced by a BH3 mimetic. J Clin Invest. 2008;118:3651–9.
He Y, Rivard CJ, Rozeboom L, Yu H, Ellison K, Kowalewski A, et al. Lymphocyte-activation gene-3, an important immune checkpoint in cancer. Cancer Sci. 2016;107:1193–7.
Anderson AC, Joller N, Kuchroo VK. Lag-3, Tim-3, and TIGIT: co-inhibitory receptors with specialized functions in immune regulation. Immunity. 2016;44:989–1004.
Baitsch L, Baumgaertner P, Devevre E, et al. Exhaustion of tumor-specific CD8(+) T cells in metastases from melanoma patients. J Clin Invest. 2011;121:2350–60.
Camisaschi C, Casati C, Rini F, et al. LAG-3 expression defines a subset of CD4(+)CD25(high)Foxp3(+) regulatory T cells that are expanded at tumor sites. J Immunol. 2010;184:6545–51.
Taube JM, Young GD, McMiller TL, Chen S, Salas JT, Pritchard TS, et al. Differential expression of immune-regulatory genes associated with PD-L1 display in melanoma: implications for PD-1 pathway blockade. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21:3969–76.
Perez RP, Riese MJ, Lewis KD, et al. Epacadostat plus nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors: preliminary phase I/II results of ECHO-204. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:3003.
Ascierto PA, Melero I, Bhatia S, et al. Initial efficacy of anti-lymphocyte activation gene-3 (anti-LAG-3; BMS-986016) in combination with nivolumab (nivo) in pts with melanoma (MEL) previously treated with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:9520.
Andrews LP, Marciscano AE, Drake CG, Vignali DAA. LAG3 (CD223) as a cancer immunotherapy target. Immunol Rev. 2017;276:80–96.
Monney L, Sabatos CA, Gaglia JL, Ryu A, Waldner H, Chernova T, et al. Th1-specific cell surface protein Tim-3 regulates macrophage activation and severity of an autoimmune disease. Nature. 2002;415:536–41.
Fourcade J, Sun Z, Benallaoua M, Guillaume P, Luescher IF, Sander C, et al. Upregulation of Tim-3 and PD-1 expression is associated with tumor antigen-specific CD8+ T cell dysfunction in melanoma patients. J Exp Med. 2010;207:2175–86.
Sakuishi K, Ngiow SF, Sullivan JM, et al. TIM3(+)FOXP3(+) regulatory T cells are tissue-specific promoters of T-cell dysfunction in cancer. Oncoimmunology. 2013;2:e23849.
Zhu C, Anderson AC, Schubart A, Xiong H, Imitola J, Khoury SJ, et al. The Tim-3 ligand galectin-9 negatively regulates T helper type 1 immunity. Nat Immunol. 2005;6:1245–52.
Chauvin JM, Pagliano O, Fourcade J, Sun Z, Wang H, Sander C, et al. TIGIT and PD-1 impair tumor antigen-specific CD8(+) T cells in melanoma patients. J Clin Invest. 2015;125:2046–58.
Johnston RJ, Yu X, Grogan JL. The checkpoint inhibitor TIGIT limits antitumor and antiviral CD8(+) T cell responses. Oncoimmunology. 2015;4:e1036214.
Stamm H, Wellbrock J, Fiedler W. Interaction of PVR/PVRL2 with TIGIT/DNAM-1 as a novel immune checkpoint axis and therapeutic target in cancer. Mamm Genome Off J Int Mamm Genome Soc. 2018;29:694–702.
Liang S, Levy O, Ganguly S, et al. Discovery of COM701, a therapeutic antibody targeting the novel immune checkpoint PVRIG, for the treatment of cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:3074.
Lines JL, Pantazi E, Mak J, Sempere LF, Wang L, O'Connell S, et al. VISTA is an immune checkpoint molecule for human T cells. Cancer Res. 2014;74:1924–32.
Le Mercier I, Chen W, Lines JL, et al. VISTA regulates the development of protective antitumor immunity. Cancer Res. 2014;74:1933–44.
Marin-Acevedo JA, Dholaria B, Soyano AE, Knutson KL, Chumsri S, Lou Y. Next generation of immune checkpoint therapy in cancer: new developments and challenges. J Hematol Oncol. 2018;11:39.
Takeda K, Kojima Y, Uno T, et al. Combination therapy of established tumors by antibodies targeting immune activating and suppressing molecules. J Immunol. 2010;184:5493–501.
Tolcher AW, Sznol M, Hu-Lieskovan S, Papadopoulos KP, Patnaik A, Rasco DW, et al. Phase Ib study of utomilumab (PF-05082566), a 4-1BB/CD137 agonist, in combination with pembrolizumab (MK-3475) in patients with advanced solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:5349–57.
Sznol M, Hodi FS, Margolin K, et al. Phase I study of BMS-663513, a fully human anti-CD137 agonist monoclonal antibody, in patients (pts) with advanced cancer (CA). J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3007.
Segal NH, Logan TF, Hodi FS, McDermott D, Melero I, Hamid O, et al. Results from an integrated safety analysis of urelumab, an agonist anti-CD137 monoclonal antibody. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:1929–36.
Post A. SITC 2016: phase I/II data combining urelumab with nivolumab suggest increased antitumor effect in patients with melanoma. 2016.
Jackaman C, Cornwall S, Graham PT, Nelson DJ. CD40-activated B cells contribute to mesothelioma tumor regression. Immunol Cell Biol. 2011;89:255–67.
Rakhmilevich AL, Alderson KL, Sondel PM. T-cell-independent antitumor effects of CD40 ligation. Int Rev Immunol. 2012;31:267–78.
Vonderheide RH, Glennie MJ. Agonistic CD40 antibodies and cancer therapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:1035–43.
Bajor DL, Mick R, Riese MJ, et al. Long-term outcomes of a phase I study of agonist CD40 antibody and CTLA-4 blockade in patients with metastatic melanoma. Oncoimmunology. 2018;7:e1468956–e.
Phase Ib/II clinical trial of CD40 agonistic antibody APX005M in combination with nivolumab (nivo) in subjects with metastatic melanoma (M) or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Abstract #CT089, AACR 2019 Annual Meeting. 2019.
Knee DA, Hewes B, Brogdon JL. Rationale for anti-GITR cancer immunotherapy. Eur J Cancer. 2016;67:1–10.
Dempke WCM, Fenchel K, Uciechowski P, Dale SP. Second- and third-generation drugs for immuno-oncology treatment—the more the better? Eur J Cancer. 2017;74:55–72.
Willoughby J, Griffiths J, Tews I, Cragg MS. OX40: structure and function—what questions remain? Mol Immunol. 2017;83:13–22.
Aspeslagh S, Postel-Vinay S, Rusakiewicz S, Soria JC, Zitvogel L, Marabelle A. Rationale for anti-OX40 cancer immunotherapy. Eur J Cancer. 2016;52:50–66.
Ladanyi A, Somlai B, Gilde K, Fejos Z, Gaudi I, Timar J. T-cell activation marker expression on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes as prognostic factor in cutaneous malignant melanoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:521–30.
Curti BD, Kovacsovics-Bankowski M, Morris N, Walker E, Chisholm L, Floyd K, et al. OX40 is a potent immune-stimulating target in late-stage cancer patients. Cancer Res. 2013;73:7189–98.
Kroemer A, Xiao X, Vu MD, Gao W, Minamimura K, Chen M, et al. OX40 controls functionally different T cell subsets and their resistance to depletion therapy. J Immunol. 2007;179:5584–91.
Buchan SL, Rogel A, Al-Shamkhani A. The immunobiology of CD27 and OX40 and their potential as targets for cancer immunotherapy. Blood. 2018;131:39–48.
Roberts DJ, Franklin NA, Kingeter LM, et al. Control of established melanoma by CD27 stimulation is associated with enhanced effector function and persistence, and reduced PD-1 expression of tumor infiltrating CD8(+) T cells. J Immunother (Hagerstown, Md: 1997). 2010;33:769–79.
Keller AM, Schildknecht A, Xiao Y, van den Broek M, Borst J. Expression of costimulatory ligand CD70 on steady-state dendritic cells breaks CD8+ T cell tolerance and permits effective immunity. Immunity. 2008;29:934–46.
Burris HA, Infante JR, Ansell SM, Nemunaitis JJ, Weiss GR, Villalobos VM, et al. Safety and activity of varlilumab, a novel and first-in-class agonist anti-CD27 antibody, in patients with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:2028–36.
Lu H. TLR agonists for cancer immunotherapy: tipping the balance between the immune stimulatory and inhibitory effects. Front Immunol. 2014;5:83.
Krieg AM. Development of TLR9 agonists for cancer therapy. J Clin Invest. 2007;117:1184–94.
Uemura MI, Haymaker CL, Murthy R, et al. Intratumoral (i.t.) IMO-2125 (IMO), a TLR9 agonist, in combination with ipilimumab (ipi) in PD-(L)1 refractory melanoma (RM). J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:136.
Diab A, Rahimian S, Haymaker CL, et al. A phase 2 study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intratumoral (IT) injection of the TLR9 agonist IMO-2125 (IMO) in combination with ipilimumab (ipi) in PD-1 inhibitor refractory melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:9515.
Thompson JF, Hersey P, Wachter E. Chemoablation of metastatic melanoma using intralesional rose bengal. Melanoma Res. 2008;18:405–11.
Thompson JF, Agarwala SS, Smithers BM, Ross MI, Scoggins CR, Coventry BJ, et al. Phase 2 study of intralesional PV-10 in refractory metastatic melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:2135–42.
Immunotherapy Bridge 2018 and Melanoma Bridge 2018: meeting abstracts. J Transl Med 2019;17:1-18.
Atkins MB, Robertson MJ, Gordon M, Lotze MT, DeCoste M, DuBois J, et al. Phase I evaluation of intravenous recombinant human interleukin 12 in patients with advanced malignancies. Clin Cancer Res. 1997;3:409–17.
Daud AI, DeConti RC, Andrews S, Urbas P, Riker AI, Sondak VK, et al. Phase I trial of interleukin-12 plasmid electroporation in patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:5896–903.
Daud A, Algazi AP, Ashworth MT, et al. Systemic antitumor effect and clinical response in a phase 2 trial of intratumoral electroporation of plasmid interleukin-12 in patients with advanced melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:9025.
Algazi AP, Tsai KK, Rosenblum M, et al. Immune monitoring outcomes of patients with stage III/IV melanoma treated with a combination of pembrolizumab and intratumoral plasmid interleukin 12 (pIL-12). J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:78.
Corrales L, Woo S-R, Gajewski TF. Extremely potent immunotherapeutic activity of a STING agonist in the B16 melanoma model in vivo. J Immunother Cancer. 2013;1:O15.
Balkwill FR, Capasso M, Hagemann T. The tumor microenvironment at a glance. J Cell Sci. 2012;125:5591–6.
Mellor AL, Keskin DB, Johnson T, Chandler P, Munn DH. Cells expressing indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase inhibit T cell responses. J Immunol. 2002;168:3771–6.
Holmgaard RB, Zamarin D, Li Y, Gasmi B, Munn DH, Allison JP, et al. Tumor-expressed IDO recruits and activates MDSCs in a Treg-dependent manner. Cell Rep. 2015;13:412–24.
Chevolet I, Speeckaert R, Schreuer M, et al. Characterization of the in vivo immune network of IDO, tryptophan metabolism, PD-L1, and CTLA-4 in circulating immune cells in melanoma. Oncoimmunology. 2015;4:e982382.
Beatty GL, O’Dwyer PJ, Clark J, et al. First-in-human phase I study of the oral inhibitor of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase-1 epacadostat (INCB024360) in patients with advanced solid malignancies. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:3269–76.
Gibney G, Hamid O, Lutzky J, et al. 511 Updated results from a phase 1/2 study of epacadostat (INCB024360) in combination with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:S106–S7.
Hamid O, Gajewski T, Frankel A. Epacadostat plus pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma: phase 1 and 2 efficacy and safety results from ECHO-202/KEYNOTE-037. In: Proceedings from the 2017 ESMO Congress; September 8-12, 2017; Madrid, Spain. Abstract 1214O.
Long GV, Dummer R, Hamid O, et al. Epacadostat (E) plus pembrolizumab (P) versus pembrolizumab alone in patients (pts) with unresectable or metastatic melanoma: results of the phase 3 ECHO-301/KEYNOTE-252 study. 2018;36:108.
Zakharia Y, Rixe O, Ward JH, et al. Phase 2 trial of the IDO pathway inhibitor indoximod plus checkpoint inhibition for the treatment of patients with advanced melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:9512.
Allard B, Longhi MS, Robson SC, Stagg J. The ectonucleotidases CD39 and CD73: novel checkpoint inhibitor targets. Immunol Rev. 2017;276:121–44.
Antonioli L, Pacher P, Vizi ES, Haskó G. CD39 and CD73 in immunity and inflammation. Trends Mol Med. 2013;19:355–67.
Sadej R, Spychala J, Skladanowski AC. Expression of ecto-5′-nucleotidase (eN, CD73) in cell lines from various stages of human melanoma. Melanoma Res. 2006;16:213–22.
Monteiro I, Vigano S, Faouzi M, et al. CD73 expression and clinical significance in human metastatic melanoma. Oncotarget. 2018;9:26659–69.
Terp MG, Olesen KA, Arnspang EC, et al. Anti-human CD73 monoclonal antibody inhibits metastasis formation in human breast cancer by inducing clustering and internalization of CD73 expressed on the surface of cancer cells. J Immunol. 2013;191:4165–73.
Sun X, Han L, Seth P, Bian S, Li L, Csizmadia E, et al. Disordered purinergic signaling and abnormal cellular metabolism are associated with development of liver cancer in Cd39/ENTPD1 null mice. Hepatology. 2013;57:205–16.
Siu LL, Burris H, Le DT, et al. Abstract CT180: preliminary phase 1 profile of BMS-986179, an anti-CD73 antibody, in combination with nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. Cancer Res. 2018;78:CT180.
Allard D, Turcotte M, Stagg J. Targeting A2 adenosine receptors in cancer. Immunol Cell Biol. 2017;95:333–9.
Leone RD, Emens LA. Targeting adenosine for cancer immunotherapy. J Immunother Cancer. 2018;6:57.
Fong L, Forde PM, Powderly JD, et al. Safety and clinical activity of adenosine A2a receptor (A2aR) antagonist, CPI-444, in anti-PD1/PDL1 treatment-refractory renal cell (RCC) and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:3004.
Neubert NJ, Schmittnaegel M, Bordry N, et al. T cell-induced CSF1 promotes melanoma resistance to PD1 blockade. Sci Transl Med. 2018;10.
Calvo A, Joensuu H, Sebastian M, et al. Phase Ib/II study of lacnotuzumab (MCS110) combined with spartalizumab (PDR001) in patients (pts) with advanced tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:3014.
Schoumacher M, Burbridge M. Key roles of AXL and MER receptor tyrosine kinases in resistance to multiple anticancer therapies. Curr Oncol Rep. 2017;19:19.
Corno C, Gatti L, Lanzi C, Zaffaroni N, Colombo D, Perego P. Role of the receptor tyrosine kinase Axl and its targeting in cancer cells. Curr Med Chem. 2016;23:1496–512.
Matsui J, Funahashi Y, Uenaka T, Watanabe T, Tsuruoka A, Asada M. Multi-kinase inhibitor E7080 suppresses lymph node and lung metastases of human mammary breast tumor MDA-MB-231 via inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor-receptor (VEGF-R) 2 and VEGF-R3 kinase. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:5459–65.
Matsui J, Yamamoto Y, Funahashi Y, Tsuruoka A, Watanabe T, Wakabayashi T, et al. E7080, a novel inhibitor that targets multiple kinases, has potent antitumor activities against stem cell factor producing human small cell lung cancer H146, based on angiogenesis inhibition. Int J Cancer. 2008;122:664–71.
Boss DS, Glen H, Beijnen JH, Keesen M, Morrison R, Tait B, et al. A phase I study of E7080, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumours. Br J Cancer. 2012;106:1598–604.
Hong DS, Kurzrock R, Wheler JJ, Naing A, Falchook GS, Fu S, et al. Phase I dose-escalation study of the multikinase inhibitor lenvatinib in patients with advanced solid tumors and in an expanded cohort of patients with melanoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21:4801–10.
Hutson TE, Lesovoy V, Al-Shukri S, et al. Axitinib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma: a randomised open-label phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:1287–94.
Fruehauf J, Lutzky J, McDermott D, Brown CK, Meric JB, Rosbrook B, et al. Multicenter, phase II study of axitinib, a selective second-generation inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3, in patients with metastatic melanoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:7462–9.
Algazi AP, Cha E, Ortiz-Urda SM, et al. The combination of axitinib followed by paclitaxel/carboplatin yields extended survival in advanced BRAF wild-type melanoma: results of a clinical/correlative prospective phase II clinical trial. Br J Cancer. 2015;112:1326–31.
Guo J, Sheng X, Si L, et al. A phase Ib study of JS001, a humanized IgG4 mAb against programmed death-1 (PD-1) combination with axitinib in patients with metastatic mucosal melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:9528.
Minucci S, Pelicci PG. Histone deacetylase inhibitors and the promise of epigenetic (and more) treatments for cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006;6:38–51.
Zhu P, Martin E, Mengwasser J, Schlag P, Janssen KP, Gottlicher M. Induction of HDAC2 expression upon loss of APC in colorectal tumorigenesis. Cancer Cell. 2004;5:455–63.
Kwon SH, Ahn SH, Kim YK, Bae GU, Yoon JW, Hong S, et al. Apicidin, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, induces apoptosis and Fas/Fas ligand expression in human acute promyelocytic leukemia cells. J Biol Chem. 2002;277:2073–80.
Sullivan RJ, Moschos SJ, Johnson ML. Efficacy and safety of entinostat (ENT) and pembrolizumab (PEMBRO) in patients with melanoma previously treated with anti-PD1 therapy. Abstract #CT072, AACR Annual Meeting 2019; 2019.
Hagner PR, Man HW, Fontanillo C, Wang M, Couto S, Breider M, et al. CC-122, a pleiotropic pathway modifier, mimics an interferon response and has antitumor activity in DLBCL. Blood. 2015;126:779–89.
Grossmann V, Schnittger S, Kohlmann A, Eder C, Roller A, Dicker F, et al. A novel hierarchical prognostic model of AML solely based on molecular mutations. Blood. 2012;120:2963–72.
Rasco DW, Papadopoulos KP, Pourdehnad M, Gandhi AK, Hagner PR, Li Y, et al. A first-in-human study of novel cereblon modulator avadomide (CC-122) in advanced malignancies. Clin Cancer Res. 2019;25:90–8.
Bose N, Ottoson N, Harrison B, et al. Effect of Imprime PGG on innate immune-activating pharmacodynamic changes in a phase I clinical study in healthy human volunteers. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:33.
Zent CS, Call TG, Bowen DA, Conte MJ, LaPlant B, Witzig TE, et al. Early treatment of high risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia with alemtuzumab, rituximab and poly-(1-6)-beta-glucotriosyl-(1-3)- beta-glucopyranose beta-glucan is well tolerated and achieves high complete remission rates. Leuk Lymphoma. 2015;56:2373–8.
Huhn RD, Lowe J, Grady MM, Taitt CC, Braun AH. A phase 3 open-label, randomized, multicenter study of Imprime PGG in combination with cetuximab in patients with KRAS wild type metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:TPS3635–TPS.
Uhlik MT, Harrison B, Gorden K, et al. Abstract LB-129: Imprime PGG, a soluble yeast β-glucan PAMP, in combination with pembrolizumab induces infiltration and activation of both innate and adaptive immune cells within tumor sites in melanoma and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients. Cancer Res. 2018;78:LB–129–LB.
Atkins MB, Kunkel L, Sznol M, Rosenberg SA. High-dose recombinant interleukin-2 therapy in patients with metastatic melanoma: long-term survival update. Cancer J Sci Am. 2000;6(Suppl 1):S11–4.
Diab A, Tannir N, Cho D, et al. Pivot-02: preliminary safety, efficacy and biomarker results from dose escalation of the phase 1/2 study of CD-122-biased agonist NKTR-214 plus nivolumab in patients with locally advanced/metastatic melanoma, renal cell carcinoma and non-small cell lung cancer. J Immunother Cancer. 2017;5:O20.
Davar D, Wang H, Chauvin JM, et al. Phase Ib/II study of pembrolizumab and pegylated-interferon Alfa-2b in advanced melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2018;JCO1800632.
Rosenberg SA, Yang JC, Sherry RM, Kammula US, Hughes MS, Phan GQ, et al. Durable complete responses in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic melanoma using T-cell transfer immunotherapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:4550–7.
Rosenberg SA, Packard BS, Aebersold PM, Solomon D, Topalian SL, Toy ST, et al. Use of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and interleukin-2 in the immunotherapy of patients with metastatic melanoma. A preliminary report. N Engl J Med. 1988;319:1676–80.
Rosenberg SA, Yannelli JR, Yang JC, Topalian SL, Schwartzentruber DJ, Weber JS, et al. Treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma with autologous tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and interleukin 2. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1994;86:1159–66.
Deniger DC, Kwong ML, Pasetto A, et al. A pilot trial of the combination of vemurafenib with adoptive cell therapy in patients with metastatic melanoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:351–62.
Mullinax JE, Hall M, Prabhakaran S, et al. Combination of ipilimumab and adoptive cell therapy with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes for patients with metastatic melanoma. Front Oncol. 2018;8:44.
Bossi G, Buisson S, Oates J, Jakobsen BK, Hassan NJ. ImmTAC-redirected tumour cell killing induces and potentiates antigen cross-presentation by dendritic cells. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2014;63:437–48.
Middleton MR, Steven NM, Evans TJ, et al. Safety, pharmacokinetics and efficacy of IMCgp100, a first-in-class soluble TCR-antiCD3 bispecific t cell redirector with solid tumour activity: results from the FIH study in melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:3016.
Sato T, Nathan PD, Hernandez-Aya LF, et al. Intra-patient escalation dosing strategy with IMCgp100 results in mitigation of T-cell based toxicity and preliminary efficacy in advanced uveal melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:9531.
Lu YC, Parker LL, Lu T, Zheng Z, Toomey MA, White DE, et al. Treatment of patients with metastatic cancer using a major histocompatibility complex class II-restricted T-cell receptor targeting the cancer germline antigen MAGE-A3. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:3322–9.
Ott PA, Hu Z, Keskin DB, Shukla SA, Sun J, Bozym DJ, et al. An immunogenic personal neoantigen vaccine for patients with melanoma. Nature. 2017;547:217–21.
Saxena M, Bhardwaj N. Re-emergence of dendritic cell vaccines for cancer treatment. Trends in Cancer. 2018;4:119–37.
Schreibelt G, Bol KF, Westdorp H, Wimmers F, Aarntzen EH, Duiveman-de Boer T, et al. Effective clinical responses in metastatic melanoma patients after vaccination with primary myeloid dendritic cells. Clin Cancer Res. 2016;22:2155–66.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Lara Ambrosi declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Shaheer Khan declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Richard D. Carvajal is supported by research funding (paid to his institution) by Bristol-Myers Squibb, Immunocore, Incyte Corporation, Merck, Roche/Genentech, Amgen, Novartis, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Bellicum Pharmaceuticals, Plexxikon, Mirati Therapeutics, MacroGenics, Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, Eli Lilly, and Astellas; has received compensation from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Castle Biosciences, Compugen, Foundation Medicine, Immunocore, I-Mab Biopharma, Incyte Corporation, Merck, Roche/Genentech, PureTech Health, Sanofi Genzyme, and Sorrento Therapeutics for service as a consultant; and has received compensation from Aura Biosciences, Chimeron Bio, and Rgenix for participation on clinical/scientific advisory boards.
Jessica Yang declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Melanoma
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ambrosi, L., Khan, S., Carvajal, R.D. et al. Novel Targets for the Treatment of Melanoma. Curr Oncol Rep 21, 97 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-019-0849-4
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-019-0849-4