Immune checkpoint inhibitors and radiosurgery for newly diagnosed melanoma brain metastases
Brain metastases are common in metastatic melanoma and radiosurgery is often utilized for local control. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) play a central role in contemporary melanoma management; however, there is limited data exploring outcomes and potential toxicities for patients treated with CPIs and radiosurgery.
We retrospectively identified all consecutive cases of newly diagnosed melanoma brain metastases (MBM) treated with Gamma Knife radiosurgery at a single institution between 2012 and 2017, and included only patients that initiated CPIs within 8 weeks before or after radiosurgery.
Thirty-eight patients were included with a median follow-up of 31.6 months. Two-year local control was 92%. Median time to out-of-field CNS and extra-CNS progression were 8.4 and 7.9 months, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.4 months and median overall survival (OS) was not reached (NR). Twenty-five patients (66%) received anti-CTLA4 and 13 patients (34%) received anti-PD-1+/-anti-CTLA4. Compared with anti-CTLA4, patients that received anti-PD-1+/-anti-CTLA4 had significant improvements in time to out-of-field CNS progression (p = 0.049), extra-CNS progression (p = 0.015), and PFS (p = 0.043), with median time to out-of-field CNS progression of NR vs. 3.1 months, median time to extra-CNS progression of NR vs. 4.4 months, and median PFS of 20.3 vs. 2.4 months. Six patients (16%) developed grade ≥ 2 CNS toxicities (grade 2: 3, grade 3: 3, grade 4/5: 0).
Excellent outcomes were observed in patients that initiated CPIs within 8 weeks of undergoing radiosurgery for newly diagnosed MBM. There appears to be an advantage to anti-PD-1 or combination therapy compared to anti-CTLA4.
KeywordsMelanoma Brain metastases Radiosurgery Immune checkpoint inhibitors Anti-PD-1 Anti-CTLA4
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
Karl Lewis: Consultant: Roche, Genentech. David Raben: Consultant: Astra Zeneca; Advisory Boards: Merck and EMD Serono and Genentech. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
- 1.Sperduto PW, Kased N, Roberge D, Xu Z, Shanley R, Luo X, Sneed PK, Chao ST, Weil RJ, Suh J (2011) Summary report on the graded prognostic assessment: an accurate and facile diagnosis-specific tool to estimate survival for patients with brain metastases. J Clin Oncol 30:419–425CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 2.Sperduto PW, Jiang W, Brown PD, Braunstein S, Sneed P, Wattson DA, Shih HA, Bangdiwala A, Shanley R, Lockney NA (2017) Estimating survival in melanoma patients with brain metastases: an update of the graded prognostic assessment for melanoma using molecular markers (Melanoma-molGPA). Int J Rad Oncol· Biol· Phys 99:812–816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Long GV, Stroyakovskiy D, Gogas H, Levchenko E, De Braud F, Larkin J, Garbe C, Jouary T, Hauschild A, Grob J-J (2015) Dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib and placebo for Val600 BRAF-mutant melanoma: a multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet 386:444–451CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Hodi FS, O’day SJ, McDermott DF, Weber RW, Sosman JA, Haanen JB, Gonzalez R, Robert C, Schadendorf D, Hassel JC (2010) Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 2010: 711–723Google Scholar
- 9.Ribas A, Puzanov I, Dummer R, Schadendorf D, Hamid O, Robert C, Hodi FS, Schachter J, Pavlick AC, Lewis KD (2015) Pembrolizumab versus investigator-choice chemotherapy for ipilimumab-refractory melanoma (KEYNOTE-002): a randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 16:908–918CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Topalian SL, Hodi FS, Brahmer JR, Gettinger SN, Smith DC, McDermott DF, Powderly JD, Carvajal RD, Sosman JA, Atkins MB (2012) Safety, activity, and immune correlates of anti–PD-1 antibody in cancer. N Engl J Med 2012: 2443–2454Google Scholar
- 12.Topalian SL, Sznol M, McDermott DF, Kluger HM, Carvajal RD, Sharfman WH, Brahmer JR, Lawrence DP, Atkins MB, Powderly JD (2014) Survival, durable tumor remission, and long-term safety in patients with advanced melanoma receiving nivolumab. J Clin Oncol 32:1020–1030CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 13.Weber JS, D’Angelo SP, Minor D, Hodi FS, Gutzmer R, Neyns B, Hoeller C, Khushalani NI, Miller WH, Lao CD (2015) Nivolumab versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma who progressed after anti-CTLA-4 treatment (CheckMate 037): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 16:375–384CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Goldberg SB, Gettinger SN, Mahajan A, Chiang AC, Herbst RS, Sznol M, Tsiouris AJ, Cohen J, Vortmeyer A, Jilaveanu L (2016) Pembrolizumab for patients with melanoma or non-small-cell lung cancer and untreated brain metastases: early analysis of a non-randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 17:976–983CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 18.Ahmed K, Abuodeh Y, Echevarria M, Arrington J, Stallworth D, Hogue C, Naghavi A, Kim S, Kim Y, Patel B (2016) Clinical outcomes of melanoma brain metastases treated with stereotactic radiosurgery and anti-PD-1 therapy, anti-CTLA-4 therapy, BRAF/MEK inhibitors, BRAF inhibitor, or conventional chemotherapy. Ann Oncol 27:2288–2294CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 25.(2010) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), v4.03. US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer InstituteGoogle Scholar