Revisiting the optimal neoadjuvant immunotherapy regimen in resectable stage III melanoma based on the interferon gamma signature: A pooled analysis.

Authors

null

Minke W. Lucas

Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Minke W. Lucas , Petros Dimitriadis , Irene L.M. Reijers , Alexander M. Menzies , Elisa A. Rozeman , Judith M. Versluis , Alexander Chan Chi Huang , Sten Cornelissen , Annegien Broeks , Richard A. Scolyer , Tara C. Mitchell , Georgina V. Long , Christian U. Blank

Organizations

Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands, Melanoma Institute Australia, Wollstonecraft, NSW, Australia, Netherlands Cancer Institute- Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, Netherlands, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, Netherlands Cancer Institute (NKI-AVL), Amsterdam, Netherlands, Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital/Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company
BMS and 4SC

Background: Neoadjuvant anti-PD1 has been shown to be superior to adjuvant administration. Combination of neoadjuvant ipilimumab (IPI) + nivolumab (NIVO) induces even higher pathologic response rates (pRR) and event-free survival (EFS), but at the cost of higher toxicity. We previously showed that the interferon gamma (IFN-γ) signature is associated with a higher pRR after neoadjuvant IPI+NIVO. We hypothesized that IFN-γ high patients (pts) might benefit from less toxic anti-PD1 monotherapy (mono), while IFN-γ low pts might need an escalated regimen with IPI 3mg/kg + NIVO 1mg/kg. Methods: In this pooled analysis, pts with macroscopic nodal melanoma who received neoadjuvant NIVO 1mg/kg + IPI 3mg/kg (IPI3/NIVO1), IPI 1mg/kg + NIVO 3mg/kg (IPI1/NIVO3), sequential IPI 3mg/kg and NIVO 3mg/kg (IPI3>NIVO3), or NIVO mono (240mg; IFN-γ high pts only) from the OpACIN-neo, PRADO and DONIMI trials, were analyzed according to their baseline IFN-γ signature. RNA gene expression from baseline tumor biopsies was analyzed using the Nanostring nCounter platform. The IFN-γ scores were calculated using an algorithm and cut-off previously developed at the NKI and prospectively tested in the DONIMI trial. Results: Baseline tumor material was available from 151 pts (Table). Median follow-up was 42 months for the entire cohort and 19 months for NIVO mono pts. Combined IPI+NIVO in IFN-γ high pts induced similar major pathologic response (MPR) rates compared to NIVO mono in IFN-γ high pts (71% vs 80%, p=0.715), and significantly higher MPR rates compared to IPI+NIVO in IFN-γ low pts (71% vs 45%, p=0.003). At 18-months, EFS rates were 87%, 100% and 73% respectively, and overall survival (OS) rates were 98%, 100% and 96%. Notably, IPI3/NIVO1 seemed to induce a higher MPR rate than IPI1/NIVO3 in IFN-γ low pts (64% vs 41%), which was not statistically significant due to small subgroups. At 36 months, EFS was 91% vs 62% and OS was 91% vs 82%. Conclusions: Neoadjuvant NIVO mono seems to have equal outcomes as IPI+NIVO in IFN-γ high pts. IFN-γ low pts may benefit from IPI+NIVO with higher doses of IPI. Incorporating baseline biomarkers like the IFN-γ signature algorithm in neoadjuvant treatment decisions will optimize the risk-benefit ratio for these pts.

IFN-γ scoreNeoadjuvant regimenNo. ptsMPR (%)EFS
18 months
(%, 95% CI)
EFS
36 months
(%, 95% CI)
OS
18 months
(%, 95% CI)
OS
36 months
(%, 95% CI)
HighNIVO 1080100-100-
IPI/NIVO6371*87 (79-96)83 (74-92)98 (95-100)92 (85-99)
IPI1/NIVO3467491 (83-100)85 (75-96)10096 (90-100)
IPI3/NIVO197878 (55-100)78 (55-100)89 (71-100)78 (55-100)
IPI3>NIVO3843*75 (50-100)75 (50-100)10088 (67-100)
LowIPI/NIVO784573 (64-84)68 (58-79)96 (92-100)85 (77-93)
IPI1/NIVO3564170 (59-83)62 (51-77)96 (92-100)82 (73-93)
IPI3/NIVO1116491 (75-100)91 (75-100)91 (75-100)91 (75-100)
IPI3>NIVO3114573 (51-100)73 (51-100)10091 (75-100)

*1 patient not evaluable.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2023 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Discussion Session

Session Title

Melanoma/Skin Cancers

Track

Melanoma/Skin Cancers

Sub Track

Local-Regional Disease

Citation

J Clin Oncol 41, 2023 (suppl 16; abstr 9516)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.9516

Abstract #

9516

Poster Bd #

279

Abstract Disclosures