Markovic, Svetomir N.

CD36 expression in both immune and non-immune cells is known to be directly involved in cancer metastasis. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) secreted by malignant melanocytes play a vital role in developing tumor-promoting microenvironments, but it is unclear whether this is mediated through CD36. To understand the role of CD36 in melanoma, we first analyzed the SKCM dataset for clinical prognosis, evaluated the percentage of CD36 in lymphatic fluid-derived EVs (LEVs), and tested whether melanoma-derived EVs increase CD36 expression and induce M2-macrophage-like characteristics. Furthermore, we performed a multiplex immunofluorescence (MxIF) imaging analysis to evaluate the CD36 expression and its colocalization with various other cells in the lymph node (LN) of patients and control subjects. Our findings show that cutaneous melanoma patients have a worse clinical prognosis with high CD36 levels, and a higher percentage of CD36 in total LEVs were found at baseline in melanoma patients compared to control. We also found that monocytic and endothelial cells treated with melanoma EVs expressed more CD36 than untreated cells. Furthermore, melanoma-derived EVs can regulate immunosuppressive macrophage-like characteristics by upregulating CD36. The spatial imaging data show that cells in tumor-involved sentinel LNs exhibit a higher probability of CD36 expression than cells from control LNs, but this was not statistically significant. Conclusively, our findings demonstrated that CD36 plays a vital role in controlling the immunosuppressive microenvironment in the LN, which can promote the formation of a protumorigenic niche.

e21554 Background: Pregnancy associated melanoma (PAM) occurs in 1% of female patients with melanoma and affects 1 in 2200 pregnancies. Antepartum evaluation of melanoma must incorporate both maternal and fetal factors, and currently there is lack of standardization. Our study aimed to review the incidence of antepartum melanoma at our institution and highlight patterns in management and treatment during this high-risk scenario. Methods: After IRB approval, the Mayo Clinic electronic medical record was searched with key words “melanoma” and “pregnancy”. 25 patients with melanoma during pregnancy were identified from 1987-2023. 6 patients were excluded as skin changes noted during pregnancy were not formally diagnosed as melanoma until after delivery. Abstracted data included demographic information, disease characteristics, staging (per AJCC guidelines at time of diagnosis), and clinical outcomes. Survival data were calculated. Results: 19 patients were included. Diagnosis occurred at an average maternal age of 30 years (range 24-38 years) and a mean gestational age of 20 weeks (range 6-35 weeks). All patients had a term delivery. 4 patients underwent labor induction at 37 weeks for staging/treatment. 60% of patients had a delay in imaging or treatment attributed to pregnancy, including 1 patient who was upstaged with metastatic disease based on postpartum imaging. 82% of stage I-III patients underwent wide local excision during pregnancy; however, 35% of sentinel lymph node sampling was delayed until postpartum. 3 stage II/III patients received adjuvant therapy (interferon or sargramostim) after delivery. Adjuvant immunotherapy was discussed with 2 patients in the postpartum period but ultimately not given due to the time lapse between surgery and delivery. 1 patient with stage IV disease diagnosed at a gestational age of 20 weeks was evaluated with MRI PET scan then treated with vemurafenib monotherapy during pregnancy. Workup and outcomes were reviewed by stage (Table 1). 7 of 19 patients had subsequent pregnancies, and 1 had recurrence of melanoma during a second pregnancy (stage II followed by stage IV). Due to a low number of censoring events, median progression free survival and overall survival were not reached. Conclusions: Melanoma diagnosed during pregnancy can be safely and effectively staged with sentinel lymph node surgery, MRI imaging (PET-MRI vs standard), and CT imaging with shielding without a need for early induction of labor nor a delay in cancer care. Furthermore, we report a patient with stage IV disease treated with vemurafenib during and immunotherapy after pregnancy, indicating that treating stage IV PAM with systemic therapy is a consideration. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background: The prognosis of patients with MM with CNS mets is poor. E6201 is an intravenous (IV) MEK inhibitor with activity against BRAF V600-mutated MM cell lines, including MAPK resistance alteration. A previous phase I trial demonstrated activity of E6201 in BRAF V600E mutated MM with a Maximal Tolerated Dose of 320mg/m2 given IV once a week x 3 weeks q 28 days. 2/23 (8.7%) of patients had a PR, 8/23 (34.8%) had SD. Two patients with MM and brain mets achieved near-CR which led to preclinical studies that demonstrated E6201 is unaffected by P-gp and BCRP transport and achieved higher brain to blood concentration (266%).In this trial, patients with BRAF mutation + MM with brain mets, single agent E6201 given at 320mg/m2 twice weekly x 3 weeks q 28 days was determined to be safe. One patient had CNS SD and a PR in lung mets, and a second patient achieved CNS stable disease and CR in a leg melanotic lesion. The drug was well-tolerated with one reversible AE thrombocytopenia (Gr 2). The final review showed intracranial response of SD in 2/4 (50%) patients and systemic SD in 3/4 (75%) patients. Methods: We are currently accruing to the dose escalation cohort of E6201 with dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily orally (n=up to 22 evaluable patients). E6201 is administered IV at 320mg/m2 twice weekly for 3 weeks every 28 days. Patients must have stage IV melanoma with BRAF mutation with at least one active lesion in the brain. Prior local therapy is allowed if done at least 3 weeks prior to cycle 1. Participants must be on a stable dose of steroids for at least 7 days and have an ECOG <!–=2. The study allows one prior BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy. The primary objectives are to determine the MTD of E6201 when combined with dabrafenib and the response rate of brain mets. The secondary objectives include duration of response, extracranial response, progression free survival, overall survival, and impact of BRAF mutation subtype and safety of the combination. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05388877 References:1.Gampa G, et al. Brain distribution of a novel MEK inhibitor E6201: implications in the treatment of melanoma brain metastases. 2018. Drug Metab Dispos.2.Tibes R et al. Safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of E6201 in patients with advanced solid tumors, including melanoma: results of a phase I study. 2018. Brit J of Cancer. 3.Babiker Gm et al, E6201, an intravenous MEK1 inhibitor, achieves an exceptional response in BRAF V600E mutated metastatic malignant melanoma with brain metastases. 2018. Inv New Drugs4.Gampa G, Kim M, Cook-Rostie N, Laramy JK, Sarkaria JN, Paradiso L, DePalatis L, Elmquist WF. Brain distribution of a novel MEK inhibitor E6201: Implications in the treatment of melanoma brain metastases. 2018. Drug Met Disp.–> Citation Format: Mahesh Seetharam, Roxana Dronca, Arkadiusz Z. Dudek, Garth Nelson, Matthew Block, Skylar Starling, Amber Baskin, Renee Bradshaw, Courtney Nelson, Kylee Andrews, Alisha Birgin, Cristina Watson, Yiyi Yan, Daruka Mahadevan, Svetomir Markovic, Tom Myers, Linda Paradiso, Hani Babiker. Phase 1 trial of MEK1 inhibitor E6201 plus dabrafenib in patients (pts) with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma (MM) with central nervous system (CNS) metastases (mets) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 2 (Late-Breaking, Clinical Trial, and Invited Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(7_Suppl):Abstract nr CT157.

Abstract Purpose: AB160 is a 160-nm nano-immunoconjugate consisting of nab-paclitaxel (ABX) nanoparticles noncovalently coated with bevacizumab (BEV) for targeted delivery into tissues expressing high levels of VEGF. Preclinical data showed that AB160 resulted in greater tumor targeting and tumor inhibition compared with sequential treatment with ABX then BEV. Given individual drug activity, we investigated the safety and toxicity of AB160 in patients with gynecologic cancers. Patients and Methods: A 3+3 phase I trial was conducted with three potential dose levels in patients with previously treated endometrial, cervical, and platinum-resistant ovarian cancer to ascertain the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). AB160 was administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle (ABX 75–175 mg/m2, BEV 30–70 mg/m2). Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed. Results: No dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were seen among the three dose levels tested. Grade 3/4 toxicities included neutropenia, thromboembolic events, and leukopenia. DL2 (ABX 150 mg/m2, BEV 60 mg/m2) was chosen as the RP2D. Seven of the 19 patients with measurable disease (36.8%) had confirmed partial responses (95% confidence interval, 16.3%–61.6%). Pharmacokinetic analyses demonstrated that AB160 allowed 50% higher paclitaxel dosing and that paclitaxel clearance mirrored that of therapeutic antibodies. Conclusions: The safety profile and clinical activity of AB160 supports further clinical testing in patients with gynecologic cancers; the RP2D is DL2 (ABX 150 mg/m2, BEV 60 mg/m2).

Abstract Background: Neuropilin 2 (NRP2) is a co-receptor that enhances signaling of growth factor and cytokine receptors and is expressed in tumor and microenvironment (TME) cells in melanoma and other tumors. Neuropilin 2 expression in tumor cells is associated with more aggressive tumors. Expression in tumor associated macrophages enhances efferocytosis and immunologically silent tumor cell death. Methods: Whole excisional lymph node biopsies were obtained from 10 treatment naïve patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma who subsequently received anti-PD1 treatment. A single 5mm formalin-fixed paraffin embedded tissue section was used to assess a panel of 39 analytes by cyclic multiplex immunofluorescence (MxIF). Fields of view (~1mm2, n=288) were selected from pathologist-annotated regions of the tumor core, tumor-immune interface and adjacent lymphoid tissue. Pixel-based single cell segmentation and a supervised classifier approach was applied to resolve 12 distinct tumor, stromal and immune cell phenotypes and functional states (NRP2 positive or negative) in 1.5 million cells. Results: Tumor recurrence was observed in 6 patients (relapsed), whereas 4 patients were recurrence-free (non-relapsed) during follow up. Among the different cell types, NRP2 expression was more frequent in macrophages (44%), tumor cells (40%), dendritic cells (40%), followed by Tregs (31%) and T helper cells (29%), and less frequent in neutrophils (24%), cytotoxic T cells (23%) and B cells (15%). In colocalization permutation analysis, NRP2 expressing macrophages clustered away from tumor cells in non-relapsed patients while a random spatial distribution of NRP2 expressing macrophages with respect to tumor cells was observed in relapsed patients. In comparing the odds of tumor cell interactions with NRP2-expressing macrophages to those with NRP2 non-expressing macrophages, we found in the tumor:stromal interface (10% tumor cells) that cells from both non-relapsed and relapsed patients were more likely to interact with NRP2 non-expressing macrophages (OR = 0.73, 95% CI = [0.71, 0.75] and OR = 0.56, 95% CI = [0.55, 0.58] for non-relapsed and relapsed patients, respectively). However, in the tumor core (90% tumor cells), tumor cells from relapsed patients had significantly higher odds of interacting with NRP2 expressing macrophages, (OR = 1.15, 95% CI = [1.12, 1.18]), and this was not seen for non-relapsed patients (OR = 0.68, 95% CI = [0.66, 0.71]). In FOVs dominated by tumor cells (75% tumor), tumor cells from relapsed patients had 4.97 times the odds of expressing NRP2 compared to tumor cells from non-relapsed patients (95% CI = [2.23, 11.09], p = 0.0001). Conclusions: These spatial analytics suggest complex interactions among NRP2 expression in tumor and TME of melanoma determining risk for relapse with anti-PD1 treatment. Citation Format: Anastasios Dimou, Raymond M. Moore, Caitlin Ward, Alexey Leontovich, Ruifeng Guo, Chen Wang, Shankar Suman, Betty Dicke, Jill M. Schimke, Noah A. Stueven, Chathu A. Atherton, Wendy Nevala, Svetomir N. Markovic. Spatial analysis of neuropilin 2 expression in the microenvironment of melanoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 2905.

Abstract Spread to regional lymph nodes is the most common site of metastasis from melanoma and almost all solid tumors. Lymphatic metastases begin in the first lymph nodes draining from the primary tumor, i.e., the sentinel lymph nodes (SLN), preceded by the development of the premetastatic niche (PMN) initiated by primary cutaneous melanoma. Melanoma mediators are known to play a critical role in developing the PMN through the immune subversion in SLN. The DCs are a vital component of LN immunity that directly relates to eliciting T-cell functions. Our multiplex immunofluorescence (MxIF) analysis of SLNs indicates significantly decreased levels of DCs and cytotoxic-T cells in both core and interface areas of tumors in recurred patients treated with immunotherapy compared to non-recurred melanoma patients. The goal of this study is to determine whether the lymphatic extracellular vesicles (L-EVs) of melanoma patients regulate DC tolerization in SLN in order to stimulate the development of PMN. To identify whether L-EVs stimulate DC suppression, we extracted L-EVs from the lymphatic fluid of patients with melanoma downstream of primary cutaneous melanomas, compared it with controls (non-malignant post-operative fluid collected from the lymph node dissection field, and evaluated their effect on DC maturation by challenging these L-EVs in monocytic (CD14+) and hematopoietic stem cells (CD34+) cells. We found that L-EVs derived from melanoma patients suppress differentiation of CD11c+HLA-DR+ DCs and their maturation (defined by CD83 and CD86) compared to control L-EVs in CD14+ based DC maturation assay. We also found a reduction of conventional type 1 DC (cDC1) in CD34+-based DC maturation assay those challenged with patients’ L-EVs compared to control. To understand the mechanism of DC suppression in patients' L-EVs, we also conducted a total RNA sequencing analysis of subsets of DCs from maturation experiments to evaluate differently regulated transcriptomic profiles. The gene ontology analysis indicates that patient-derived L-EVs interfere with tRNA processing, oncostatin M & IL-10 signaling, and other immunoregulatory pathways to alter the hematopoietic cell lineage pathways in the DC maturation. Furthermore, the proteomic analysis of L-EVs also indicated several differentially regulated cargo-identified proteins in patient L-EVs, which are associated with immunomodulation, including regulation of DC function compared to control L-EVs. In conclusion, our study revealed that the patient's L-EVs carry differential proteomic cargoes secreted by cutaneous melanoma, which may be involved in regulating DC differentiation and maturation to diminish their functions and support the developing PMN in SLN. Citation Format: Shankar Suman, Wendy K. Nevala, James W. Jakub, Ray Guo, Alexey A. Leontovich, Raymond M. Moore, Chathu L. Atherton, Liyi Geng, Jeffrey E. Johnson, Sarah A. McLaughlin, Svetomir N. Markovic. Melanoma-derived lymphatic extracellular vesicles suppress dendritic cell differentiation and maturation in the sentinel lymph node [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 1503.