Dudek, Arkadiusz Z.

Abstract Background: Melanoma brain metastases (MBM) represent a biologically distinct and clinically aggressive subset of melanoma. Comprehensive molecular characterization focused on intracranial disease remains limited. We aimed to define the genomic landscape of MBM and compare these findings with public melanoma datasets. Methods: We retrospectively identified 166 patients with histologically confirmed MBM across Mayo Clinic tri-sites (2011-2025). Molecular testing was performed in 123 patients (74.1%). Comprehensive next-generation sequencing (NGS; ≥300-gene platforms including Tempus, FoundationOne, Caris, NeoGenomics, and MayoComplete Solid Tumor Panel) was available in 41 patients (24.7%). Intermediate-depth profiling using the MayoComplete Melanoma Panel (17 genes) was performed in 21 patients (12.7%), and a targeted 5-gene melanoma driver panel (BRAF, NRAS, KIT, GNAQ, GNA11) in 52 patients (31.3%). cfDNA-based NGS was available in 12 patients (7.2%). Genomic alterations were summarized and benchmarked against TCGA-SKCM and MSK-IMPACT datasets via cBioPortal. We considered assay heterogeneity, as Mayo panels varied in sequencing depth and CNV coverage, and hybrid-capture platforms often under-detect TERT promoter hotspots. Results: Patients had a median age of 67 years, and 63% were male. BRAF mutations occurred in 48.8% (BRAF V600E/K 41.6%; non-V600 7.2%). Additional MAPK alterations included NRAS (17.5%), KIT (5.4%), GNAQ (1.2%), and GNA11 (0.6%). In the comprehensive NGS subset, tumor-suppressor alterations included CDKN2A (17.5%), PTEN (7.8%), NF1 (9.0%), TP53 (8.4%), and TERT promoter mutations (22.9%). Median TMB was 11.55 mut/Mb (IQR 5.0-25.5). Co-alterations included BRAF+CDKN2A (7.2%), BRAF+PTEN (4.2%), NRAS+CDKN2A (4.2%), NRAS+PTEN (1.2%), and CDKN2A+PTEN (3.6%); overall, 18.1% harbored MAPK driver + tumor-suppressor co-alterations. Compared with TCGA and MSK cohorts, MBM showed similar MAPK driver frequencies but fewer MAPK + tumor-suppressor co-alterations and lower CDKN2A, PTEN, and TP53 disruption, alongside a more prevalent of TERT promoter mutations (22.9% vs 7% and 2.1%), which may partly reflect coverage differences. Conclusion: MBM exhibit a distinct genomic profile characterized by reduced tumor-suppressor loss, fewer MAPK-tumor-suppressor co-alterations, and higher prevalence of TERT promoter mutations. While assay heterogeneity limits direct cross-cohort comparisons, these patterns suggest potentially distinct biological features of intracranial melanoma and underscore the need for harmonized, MBM-specific molecular studies to guide therapeutic development. Citation Format: Dina Elantably, Joseph B. Parker, Jakob Hamilton, Ahmed Abdelhakeem, Oluwatayo Adeoye, Saivaishnavi Kamatham, Winston Tan, Arkadiusz Z. Dudek, Anastasios Dimou, Matthew S. Block, Robert McWilliams, Svetomir Markovic, Mahesh Seetharam, Roxana Dronca, Ruqin Chen. Genomic landscape of melanoma brain metastases: Real-world analysis and comparison with public melanoma cohorts [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 2107.

Abstract Background: Digital Drug Assignment (DDA) is a computational reasoning model that scores cancer therapies based on the complete molecular profile of a tumor, and stratifies them by predicted efficacy (Petak et al., 2021). In a prior study of 111 lung cancer patients, DDA-derived high-score molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) were associated with improved clinical outcomes (Dirner et al., 2025). Here, we extend this analysis to the GENIE BPC NSCLC cohort to assess the broader clinical validity of DDA. Methods: From the GENIE BPC NSCLC cohort data available on Synapse, we included 1,078 patients with a single-sample genomic profile, available primary treatment data and survival outcomes (total 2,103 treatment lines, therapies included: afatinib, erlotinib, osimertinib, crizotinib, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, atezolizumab, bevacizumab+chemo, ramucirumab+chemo; and chemotherapy alone). DDA scores were generated for all cases, and the individual score of the administered MTAs (incl. immune checkpoint inhibitors) was used to stratify outcomes into low (<0), intermediate, and high DDA-score (≥1000) tiers. Progression-free survival (PFS, by imaging) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier statistics. Results: Median PFS and OS differed significantly across DDA score tiers, increasing with higher scores (see table). Intermediate-tier drugs had similar mPFS values as chemotherapies (3.9 vs 4.2 months). Six-month PFS and twelve-month OS rates increased with DDA-tiers and were all significantly different by χ2 test. DDA-high therapies provided greater benefit across treatment types than lower-score counterparts. Conclusions: Across a large, real-world NSCLC cohort, DDA effectively distinguished therapies with higher clinical efficacy based on the full molecular profile of each patient. These results reinforce the potential of DDA to enhance personalized treatment selection based on NGS diagnostics in precision oncology. Citation Format: Barbara Vodicska, Eniko Kispeter, Dora Lakatos, Gabor Gy Kalmar, Robert Doczi, Dora Gorog-Tihanyi, Anna Dirner, Reka Szalkai-Denes, William T. Beck, Arkadiusz Z. Dudek, Christophe Le Tourneau, Istvan Petak. Molecularly-informed prediction of treatment efficacy in the GENIE BPC NSCLC cohort using computational reasoning [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2026; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2026 Apr 17-22; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2026;86(7 Suppl):Abstract nr 7.

Leptomeningeal disease (LMD) is a devastating complication of metastatic melanoma, affecting up to 15% of patients with central nervous system involvement. Despite advances in systemic therapy, LMD carries poor prognosis. Patients with LMD are often excluded from clinical trials. Contemporary real-world data on prognostic factors and treatment outcomes in melanoma LMD are limited. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with leptomeningeal metastasis from melanoma between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2025, across Mayo Clinic sites. LMD diagnosis was made by magnetic resonance imaging showing leptomeningeal enhancement and confirmation from cerebrospinal fluid cytology and clinical presentation. Demographic, clinical, treatment, and outcome data were collected. Overall survival (OS) from LMD diagnosis was the primary endpoint. Forty-four patients were identified (median age: 60.0 years, range: 30.5–82.7). Before diagnosis of LMD, systemic therapy for metastatic disease was given to 91% of patients. BRAF mutations were present in 65.9%. After LMD diagnosis, 88.6% were treated for LMD. Median OS was 2.96 months (95% confidence interval: 1.39–4.53). Poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status was independently associated with worse OS (hazard ratio: 2.10, P = 0.036). Any treatment for LMD (hazard ratio: 0.16, P = 0.005) was associated with improved OS. Melanoma-related LMD remains rapidly fatal. Studies of novel treatments are needed to improve outcomes for patients with this diagnosis.

Tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy has emerged as a promising adoptive cell transfer strategy for solid tumours. The recent accelerated approval of lifileucel by the Food and Drug Administration marks a significant milestone in the clinical application of TIL therapy. This review comprehensively examines the historical development, biology, clinical efficacy, safety and limitations of TIL therapy. We explore advancements in TIL manufacturing, including novel culture techniques, genetic modifications and automation, to enhance scalability and effectiveness. Despite promising results, TIL therapy faces challenges such as high-dose interleukin-2 toxicity, complex manufacturing processes and immune evasion mechanisms. Emerging strategies, including checkpoint inhibitor combinations, engineered TIL constructs and metabolic reprogramming, aim to improve TIL therapeutic efficacy. This review provides insights into the evolving landscape of TIL therapy and its potential to enhance current cancer immunotherapy.

9503 Background: Neoadjuvant ± adjuvant immunotherapy improves event-free survival relative to adjuvant immunotherapy alone for patients with high-risk resectable stage III melanoma. However, the optimal regimen balancing efficacy and tolerability is not known. T-cell immunoglobulin and ITIM domain (TIGIT) is a promising immune checkpoint but its therapeutic potential in stage III melanoma is underexplored. Methods: In this phase II trial, patients with resectable, macroscopic stage III melanoma received four 21-day neoadjuvant cycles of 1200mg IV atezolizumab (atezo, anti-PD-L1) + 600mg IV tiragolumab (tira, anti-TIGIT), followed by therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND) and eight 21-day adjuvant cycles of 1200mg IV atezo. Primary endpoints were pathologic response (of all patients initiating neoadjuvant therapy) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) from the time of TLND in patients who were operated on per protocol and received adjuvant therapy. Secondary endpoint was adverse events (AEs); exploratory endpoints included event-free survival (EFS) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). Results: Thirty-four patients, median age 59 years, were accrued and initiated neoadjuvant atezo/tira. 76.5% had >1 metastatic lymph node involved at baseline and 73.5% presented with Stage IIIC disease. All 34 patients were evaluable for AEs, pathologic response and EFS. Four patients were diagnosed with metastatic disease during neoadjuvant treatment, while 30 had TLND per protocol and 28 received adjuvant treatment and were evaluable for RFS and DMFS. Major pathologic responses (MPR, ≤10% viable tumor) were observed in 16/34 patients (47.1%, Table). With 19.9 months median follow-up from registration, 12-month EFS was 72.0% (95% CI 57.9 to 89.5%). With 16 months median follow-up from operation, 12-month RFS was 73.3% (n=28, 95% CI 56.9 to 94.5%), while 12-month DMFS was 86.0% (n=28, 95% CI 72.2 to 100%). In the 16 patients with an MPR, 2 did not receive adjuvant treatment and were followed for 33.3 and 10.8 months without recurrence/death. In the remaining 14 patients, 12-month RFS and 12-month DMFS were both 91.7% (95% CI 77.3 to 100%). 5 patients (14.7%) experienced any grade 3+ AE with 2 (5.9%) at least possibly related to the neoadjuvant regimen. Conclusions: Among patients with high-risk resectable stage III melanoma, neoadjuvant atezo/tira was a promising regimen with a favorable safety profile and warrants further study. Identification of predictive biomarkers will allow for optimization of neoadjuvant therapy for individual patients. Clinical trial information: NCT03554083 . Pathologic response. N=34 Major Pathologic Response 16 (47.1%) Pathologic complete response (no viable tumor) 13 (38.2%) Near-pathologic complete response (0.1−10% viable tumor) 3 (8.8%) Pathologic partial response (>10.0−50% viable tumor) 2 (5.9%) Pathologic non-response (>50% viable tumor) 12 (35.3%) No per protocol operation 4 (11.8%)

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommended surveillance imaging intervals for uveal melanoma (UM) based on the risk of distant metastasis. The objective of this research is to evaluate if patients, treated at our tertiary cancer center, who had scans consistent with these guidelines, had improved overall survival (OS). This was a single-center, retrospective study of UM patients, who developed metastatic disease. Patients were grouped into risk-of-metastasis cohorts (low, medium, and high-risk) based on the UM NCCN guidelines v1.2023. The frequency of scans was reported within annual intervals for 5 years within the low-risk cohort and for 10 years within the medium-risk cohort, and within 6-month intervals for the first 5 years and then annually in years 6–10 within the high-risk cohort. Conditional landmark analyses were used to evaluate the relationship between OS and consistency with guidelines. Scan frequency was evaluated against socioeconomic status. Of the 740 UM patients identified (1997–2020), 110 experienced metastasis and comprised our analysis population (20 low-risk; 67 medium-risk; and 23 high-risk). The median time to death (95% confidence interval) from diagnosis of metastasis was similar between the low, medium, and high-risk cohorts at 1.2 (1.0, 2.0), 2.0 (1.7, 2.6), and 1.6 (1.3, 2.3) years, respectively. For each cohort, the OS results were similar between those who followed guidelines vs. not at each annual landmark time. Living in disadvantaged areas did not impact imaging frequency (all P > 0.05). Imaging at intervals outlined by the NCCN guidelines v1.2023 did not impact OS for patients who developed metastatic UM.

Abstract The Phase 2 IMPRIME 1 study evaluated the combination of the pathogen-associated molecular pattern (PAMP) Imprime with the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) pembrolizumab as second or later line of treatment (2 L+) for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC). Eligible patients with mTNBC received weekly Imprime (4 mg/kg) intravenously in combination with pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks). Primary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DoR), progression free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Exploratory endpoints included correlations between immune cell activation markers in tumor tissues and blood and response to therapy. Of the 42 evaluable patients, six had a response (one complete, five partial), with an ORR of 14.3% by RECIST v1.1. Median PFS was 2.7 months, median OS was 16.4 months, and DCR was 54.8%, with responders achieving a median DoR of 15.2 months. Therapy was generally well tolerated and resulted in an increase of immune activation markers, with higher levels of activation in peripheral blood associated with response and improved survival. The combination of Imprime and pembrolizumab was safe and demonstrated immune activation in tumor tissues and peripheral blood in patients with TNBC. Improved response rates were observed compared to historical studies of ICI monotherapy in similar patient populations. Study number (ClinicalTrials.gov trial registration): NCT02981303.

Goal of this study was to examine the impact of immunotherapy on overall survival (OS) in patients with female genital tract melanoma (GTM). This retrospective cohort study utilized the National Cancer Database to identify individuals with invasive vulvar or vaginal melanoma diagnosed between 2004 and 2019. Kaplan–Meier plots and multivariate Cox regression were used to describe the impact of immunotherapy on OS and to examine predictors of OS among those who received immunotherapy for those with vulvar or vaginal melanoma. Of the 870 patients with vaginal melanoma, 23.6% received immunotherapy. Receiving immunotherapy for treatment of vaginal melanoma was associated with improved OS (median: 21.8 versus 18.9 months; P = 0.01); this association remained after adjustment for other prognostic factors [hazard ratio (HR), 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.62–0.95; P = 0.01]. The survival advantage was more pronounced among those who did not receive primary surgical resection (median: 18.6 versus 12.2 months; P = 0.0009). Among 3123 patients with vulvar melanoma, 15.3% received immunotherapy. Receiving immunotherapy for treatment of vulvar melanoma was associated with an improvement in OS (median: 43.6 versus 57.7 months; P = 0.06; HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.74–1.00; P = 0.04). Survival benefit was more pronounced when restricted to patients with advanced or unknown stage disease (median OS, 31.6 versus 24.2 months; P = 0.002; adjusted HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.61–0.89; P = 0.002) and among the small subset who did not receive primary surgical resection (median: 19.8 versus 9.6 months; P = 0.0005). Immunotherapy was associated with improved OS in patients with female GTM, with some subsets particularly benefitting.

Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer. The median age at diagnosis is 66. While most patients are treated with immunotherapy, the use of targeted therapy is a valid alternative for patients whose tumors harbor a BRAF or c-KIT driver mutation. These agents, while effective, come with a variety of side effects which limit their use, especially in older patients. We sought to assess the efficacy and toxicity of these agents in older melanoma patients. Melanoma patients over 65 treated with BRAF/MEK or c-KIT inhibitors were retrospectively identified, and their data were analyzed for treatment efficacy and toxicity. All data were compared using the Chi-square test for categorical comparisons and the Kruskal–Wallis method for median comparisons. One hundred and sixteen patients were identified. One hundred and six patients were treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors. The assessed response rate (RR) was 83% and was comparable across different subgroups, including advanced line patients and those with a more aggressive disease. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months, and the median overall survival (OS) was 15.7 months. Twenty-seven percent experienced grade 3–4 toxicity leading to a 24% treatment discontinuation rate. Another 10 patients were treated with the c-KIT inhibitor imatinib, for whom the assessed RR was 55%. The median PFS was 4.3 months, and the median OS was 22.6 months. Forty percent needed dose reductions, yet none had to stop treatment due to adverse effects. The use of targeted therapy in older patients is effective yet challenging due to toxicity. Deploying mitigation strategies can help maximizing their usefulness.

e23270 Background: Melanoma is the most lethal form of skin cancer which have seen drastic improvement in patient survival over the last decade. BRAF is the most common driver mutation in melanoma, seen in ≈50% of all patients (≈30% of patients > 65). The use of BRAF & MEK inhibitors yields high response rates, though it is limited by toxicity and development of acquired resistance. Acknowledging these limitations, we aimed at assessing the efficacy and toxicity of these agents in melanoma patients > 65. Methods: We identified electronic medical records of all melanoma patients > 65 that were treated with BRAF & MEK inhibitors at our institution over the years 2017-2023. Data was retrospectively collected including demographics, disease characteristics, treatment given, response patterns and toxicity. Results: 106 patients were identified. The median age was 71 (65-89), 55% were males. The median follow up was 28.9 months. 32 (30%) patients were treated at first line, 58 (55%) at second line and 16 (15%) at third line. 88 (83%) evaluable patients received treatment for unresectable/metastatic disease of which 84% had an objective response (60% partial response, 24% complete response). Response rate (RR) was 82%, 85% and 87% for first, second and third line respectively. RR was 86% for patients with an increased serum lactate dehydrogenase. 33% of patients had active central nervous system (CNS) metastases at treatment initiation, for whom the systemic RR was 80% and the CNS RR was 39%. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months, with a PFS of 6, 8.3 and 13.4 months for first, second and third line respectively. The median PFS was 5.7 months for patients with active CNS disease. The median overall survival (OS) from treatment initiation was 15.7 months (12.5, 14.5, 31.9 for first, second & third line respectively). The median OS for patients with CNS disease was 9.8 months. 16 patients were treated in the adjuvant setting, of which 6 (37%) finished treatment as planned, 3 stopped due to disease progression (19%) and 6 stopped due to toxicity (37%). 88% of patients experienced adverse events (AEs) of any grade, with 27% having grade 3-4 toxicity. There were no grade 5 toxicities reported. 36% of patients experienced one AE, while 52% experienced two or more. 21% of patients stopped treatment due to toxicity, 28% needed a dose reduction and 20% changed to different BRAF/MEK inhibitors. 10% of patients needed systemic corticosteroids to treat AEs. The most common toxicities seen were fever (30%), fatigue (30%), skin rash (22%), elevated liver function tests (20%), arthralgia/myalgia (15%), nausea (14%) and diarrhea (11%). 7% had decrease in cardiac ejection fraction with one grade 3 leading to treatment discontinuation. Conclusions: Treatment with BRAF & MEK inhibitors is challenging in older patients, with a high prevalence of toxicity leading to treatment modifications and discontinuation. Efficacy seems to be the same as in the general population.