Beasley, Georgia M.

Importance Contemporary guidelines recommend sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for patients with melanoma with predicted risk of SLN metastasis greater than 10% and consideration of SLNB when the risk is 5% to 10%. A gene expression profile (GEP)–based test that can accurately identify patients with a low risk of SLN metastasis would refine selection for SLNB. Objective To establish the predictive capability of the combined clinicopathological factors and GEP (CP-GEP) test to identify patients with primary cutaneous melanoma who can safely forgo SLNB and to investigate the prognostic value of CP-GEP regarding the outcome in patients with cutaneous melanoma after a negative SLNB (not reported herein). Design, Setting, and Participants This prognostic study was conducted from September 2021 to June 2024 at 9 academic medical centers with experienced melanoma surgeons. Included were patients with biopsy-proven invasive cutaneous melanoma with T1 to T3 tumors and clinically negative regional LNs. All patients were deemed candidates for SLNB using standard clinical criteria. GEP was performed on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue from the primary melanoma biopsy. Analyses were performed from December 2024 to August 2025. Intervention CP-GEP testing to determine risk of having a positive SLNB in patients with T1 to T3 cutaneous melanoma who were considered appropriate candidates for the procedure based on standard clinical parameters. Main Outcomes and Measures CP-GEP results were reported as low risk or high risk; the primary outcome measure was negative predictive value (NPV) in low-risk cases. Analyses included NPV assessment by tumor (T) subcategory, primary site, and age. Results A total of 1761 patients (median [IQR] age, 64 [53-72] years; 997 male [56.6%]) underwent SLNB (310 [17.6%] SLN positive) and had a successful CP-GEP test; GEP was successful in 97.7% of samples. A total of 651 patients (37.0%) were considered low risk by CP-GEP. Among low-risk cases, 46 (7.1%) were SLN positive, and NPV was 92.9% (95% CI, 90.7%-94.8%). High-risk cases had a 23.8% (264 of 1110) SLN-positive rate. The percentage of cases with low-risk CP-GEP declined with increasing T category (T1 = 346 of 507 [68.2%]; T2 = 295 of 897 [32.9%]; T3 = 10 of 357 [2.8%]). CP-GEP results were consistent in discriminating SLN-positive rates across primary sites, histologic subtypes, and mitotic count categories. In 2 large subsets, clinical stage IB (n = 1187) and patients 65 years and older (n = 832), 6.5% (95% CI, 4.6%-8.8%) of low-risk clinical stage IB cases and 6.6% (95% CI, 4.2%-9.7%) of all low-risk cases in patients 65 years and older were SLN positive vs 18.3% (95% CI, 15.3%-21.6%) and 20.3% (95% CI, 16.8%-24.2%) for high-risk cases, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance In this multicenter, prospective, blinded, prognostic study, the CP-GEP test reliably identified patients with melanoma with less than 10% SLN metastasis risk. SLN metastasis rates were approximately 3-fold greater for high-risk vs low-risk CP-GEP cases. In appropriately selected patients, the CP-GEP test may add value for shared patient-surgeon decision-making.

Abstract Background: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) provides important staging and prognostic information that guides surveillance and adjuvant systemic therapy decisions for patients with cutaneous melanoma. At most centers, SLNB is indicated for patients with cutaneous melanoma with at least a 5% risk of having nodal metastases, typically melanomas ≥0.8 mm in thickness or selected thinner lesions with high-risk features such as elevated mitotic rate and/or ulceration. However, up to 85% of patients who undergo SLNB have a negative result. Currently, there is an unmet clinical need to better identify patients with a low risk of nodal metastasis who may safely forgo SLNB, but otherwise meet established criteria for undergoing SLNB. Previously, a model using primary tumor gene expression profile (GEP) data combined with clinicopathological features (CP) was developed to identify melanoma patients with a low risk of having a positive SLN. The model has been externally validated in multiple retrospective studies. The aim of the MERLIN_001 observational registry study is to prospectively validate the CP-GEP model in an independent multicenter cohort of primary cutaneous melanoma patients, who undergo lymphatic mapping and SLNB per current clinical guidelines. Methods: A total of 9 centers across the US are included in the study with planned enrollment of 2,340 patients, allowing for a loss of up to 30% due to screen failure, tissue loss, low RNA yield, no gene expression profile or failure to perform the planned SLNB. Patients with clinically node-negative cutaneous melanoma and planned SLNB using current guideline indications are eligible for the study and will be followed for five years. Both patients and investigators are blinded to the results (NCT04759781). FFPE material from the initial melanoma biopsy is collected and the GEP of the primary melanoma is assessed. Subsequently, CP-GEP probability scores are calculated and expressed as a binary classification (Low Risk or High Risk for nodal metastasis), which will be compared to SLNB pathology results. Performance metrics for CP-GEP will be evaluated and will include: SLNB Reduction Rate based on Negative Predictive Value, Positive Predictive Value, Sensitivity and Specificity, and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Finally, the performance of CP-GEP to stratify patients according to risk of recurrence (recurrence-free survival, distant metastasis-free survival, overall survival) will also be assessed, based on five-year outcomes data. Additional analyses will be performed using the data collected throughout the study. Enrollment of patients started in September 2021 and is ongoing. As of January 2023, 890 patients have been enrolled, representing 46% of the targeted number of patients with a successful SLNB and CP-GEP test result. Citation Format: Tina J. Hieken, Michael E. Egger, Christina V. Angeles, Erin E. Burke, Michael C. Lowe, John R. Hyngstrom, Georgia M. Beasley, Edmund K. Bartlett, Vernon K. Sondak. Merlin_001: a prospective registry study of a primary melanoma gene-signature to predict sentinel node (SN) status and determine its prognostic value for more accurate staging of SN-negative melanoma patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr CT053.

Until recently, most patients with sentinel lymph node-positive (SLN+) melanoma underwent a completion lymph node dissection (CLND), as mandated in published trials of adjuvant systemic therapies. Following multicenter selective lymphadenectomy trial-II, most patients with SLN+ melanoma no longer undergo a CLND prior to adjuvant systemic therapy. A retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes in SLN+ melanoma patients treated with adjuvant systemic therapy after July 2017 was performed in 21 international cancer centers. Of 462 patients who received systemic adjuvant therapy, 326 patients received adjuvant anti-PD-1 without prior immediate (IM) CLND, while 60 underwent IM CLND. With median follow-up of 21 months, 24-month relapse-free survival (RFS) was 67% (95% CI 62% to 73%) in the 326 patients. When the patient subgroups who would have been eligible for the two adjuvant anti-PD-1 clinical trials mandating IM CLND were analyzed separately, 24-month RFS rates were 64%, very similar to the RFS rates from those studies. Of these no-CLND patients, those with SLN tumor deposit >1 mm, stage IIIC/D and ulcerated primary had worse RFS. Of the patients who relapsed on adjuvant anti-PD-1, those without IM CLND had a higher rate of relapse in the regional nodal basin than those with IM CLND (46% vs 11%). Therefore, 55% of patients who relapsed without prior CLND underwent surgery including therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND), with 30% relapsing a second time; there was no difference in subsequent relapse between patients who received observation vs secondary adjuvant therapy. Despite the increased frequency of nodal relapses, adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy may be as effective in SLN+ pts who forego IM CLND and salvage surgery with TLND at relapse may be a viable option for these patients.

BackgroundFor patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN)‐positive cutaneous melanoma, the Second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy trial demonstrated equivalent disease‐specific survival (DSS) with active surveillance using nodal ultrasound versus completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Adoption and outcomes of active surveillance in clinical practice and in adjuvant therapy recipients are unknown.MethodsIn a retrospective cohort of SLN‐positive adults treated at 21 institutions in Australia, Europe, and the United States from June 2017 to November 2019, the authors evaluated the impact of active surveillance and adjuvant therapy on all‐site recurrence‐free survival (RFS), isolated nodal RFS, distant metastasis‐free survival (DMFS), and DSS using Kaplan‐Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models.ResultsAmong 6347 SLN biopsies, 1154 (18%) were positive and had initial negative distant staging. In total, 965 patients (84%) received active surveillance, 189 (16%) underwent CLND. Four hundred thirty‐nine patients received adjuvant therapy (surveillance, 38%; CLND, 39%), with the majority (83%) receiving anti–PD‐1 immunotherapy. After a median follow‐up of 11 months, 220 patients developed recurrent disease (surveillance, 19%; CLND, 22%), and 24 died of melanoma (surveillance, 2%; CLND, 4%). Sixty‐eight patients had an isolated nodal recurrence (surveillance, 6%; CLND, 4%). In patients who received adjuvant treatment without undergoing prior CLND, all isolated nodal recurrences were resectable. On risk‐adjusted multivariable analyses, CLND was associated with improved isolated nodal RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15‐0.88), but not all‐site RFS (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45‐1.02). Adjuvant therapy improved all‐site RFS (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.47‐0.57). DSS and DMFS did not differ by nodal management or adjuvant treatment.ConclusionsActive surveillance has been adopted for most SLN‐positive patients. At initial assessment, real‐world outcomes align with randomized trial findings, including in adjuvant therapy recipients.Lay Summary For patients with melanoma of the skin and microscopic spread to lymph nodes, monitoring with ultrasound is an alternative to surgically removing the remaining lymph nodes. The authors studied adoption and real‐world outcomes of ultrasound monitoring in over 1000 patients treated at 21 centers worldwide, finding that most patients now have ultrasounds instead of surgery. Although slightly more patients have cancer return in the lymph nodes with this strategy, typically, it can be removed with delayed surgery. Compared with up‐front surgery, ultrasound monitoring results in the same overall risk of melanoma coming back at any location or of dying from melanoma.

Abstract Purpose: In this prospective trial, we sought to assess the feasibility of concurrent administration of ipilimumab and radiation as adjuvant, neoadjuvant, or definitive therapy in patients with regionally advanced melanoma. Patients and Methods: Twenty-four patients in two cohorts were enrolled and received ipilimumab at 3 mg/kg every 3 weeks for four doses in conjunction with radiation; median dose was 4,000 cGy (interquartile range, 3,550–4,800 cGy). Patients in cohort 1 were treated adjuvantly; patients in cohort 2 were treated either neoadjuvantly or as definitive therapy. Results: Adverse event profiles were consistent with those previously reported with checkpoint inhibition and radiation. For the neoadjuvant/definitive cohort, the objective response rate was 64% (80% confidence interval, 40%–83%), with 4 of 10 evaluable patients achieving a radiographic complete response. An additional 3 patients in this cohort had a partial response and went on to surgical resection. With 2 years of follow-up, the 6-, 12-, and 24-month relapse-free survival for the adjuvant cohort was 85%, 69%, and 62%, respectively. At 2 years, all patients in the neoadjuvant/definitive cohort and 10/13 patients in the adjuvant cohort were still alive. Correlative studies suggested that response in some patients were associated with specific CD4+ T-cell subsets. Conclusions: Overall, concurrent administration of ipilimumab and radiation was feasible, and resulted in a high response rate, converting some patients with unresectable disease into surgical candidates. Additional studies to investigate the combination of radiation and checkpoint inhibitor therapy are warranted.