Lo, Serigne

9524 Background: Unresectable melanoma in-transit metastases (ITM) can pose a significant clinical challenge. Our recently published data comparing first-line treatments for ITM, isolated limb infusion or perfusion (ILI/ILP), immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and intralesional talimogene laherparepvec (TVEC), found superior outcomes with TVEC. However, TVEC was used more often in patients with lower disease burden and earlier stage (IIIB vs. IIIC/D). Therefore, we sought to better investigate these differences with a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis. Methods: A multi-institutional, international IRB- approved retrospective analysis was conducted for unresectable melanoma ITM from 2016-2022. PSM analysis comparing first-line ILI/ILP, ICI, and TVEC for was performed. Patients were matched for stage, number of ITM, anatomical site, CLND status, gender and age. Kaplan-Meier curves (OS, PFS, DMFS) and Cumulative incidence function (MSS) were used to visualize time-to-event outcomes in the PSM cohort, though both methods do not account for the matched structure. Results: 274 patients were identified, 120 female/154 male; 96 treated with ILI/ILP, 111 with ICI, and 67 with TVEC. Median follow-up was 40 months (range, 1-80). PSM was performed and identified 36 TVEC–ICI pairs and 27 TVEC–ILI pairs. These were combined resulting in a final cohort of 108 observations (45 TVEC, 36 ICI and 27 ILI). The groups were well balanced. No statistical difference was found for metastasis-free survival (DMFS), progression-free survival (PFS), melanoma-specific survival (MSS), and overall survival (OS) between treatment modalities. TVEC was associated with significant improvement in local PFS (median was 2.2 years (y) for ILI/ILP, 1.5y for ICI and not reached for TVEC, p=0.048). While not statistically significant, a clinical benefit was seen in PFS being longer for TVEC (2.1y for TVEC vs. 1.2y for ILI/ILP and 1.1y for ICI; p=0.2) and OS (not reached vs 2.9y for ILI/ILP and 5.2y for ICI; p=0.2). On mixed effect Cox regression proportional hazard model using the matched data set, there were no significant differences in any of the survival and recurrence outcomes. Conclusions: When patients are propensity-matched, there were no significant differences in first-line treatment modalities for unresectable melanoma ITM. Treatment with TVEC did result in clinically meaningful improved overall and local PFS and OS. This supports that selection of ITM therapy should incorporate an individualized approach, incorporating disease distribution, stage, burden, treatment side effects and patient priorities.

9535 Background: MUM carries a poor prognosis with few effective treatments, especially for HLA-A*02:01-negative pts. While a subset of MUM pts responds to immune checkpoint inhibitors, the comparative efficacy of IPI+PD1 versus PD1 monotherapy is unclear. This study compares objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety between these regimens in MUM. Methods: MUM pts treated with PD1 or IPI+PD1 at 15 major melanoma centres (from Australia, Europe, United States and Israel) were included. Demographics, patient and disease characteristics, and clinical outcomes were examined. Univariate and multivariate (MVA) analyses were performed to identify clinical predictors of response and survival. Results: Of 412 MUM pts treated, 150 (36%) had PD1 and 262 (64%) received PD1+IPI. Compared to the PD1 group, PD1+IPI-treated pts were younger (64 vs. 70 years; p<0.001), had higher rate of elevated LDH (44% vs. 31%; p=0.037), and more frequently had prior treatment with tebentafusp (6.5% vs. 1.3%; p=0.031). Median follow-up from commencement of PD1+/-IPI was 4.9 years (95% CI 4.7 – 6.1). ORR was higher in IPI+PD1 group (18%) vs. PD1 (9%) (p=0.008), particularly in males (p=0.009), patients with liver metastases (p=0.018) and with lung metastases (p=0.011), with elevated LDH (p=0.047) and with no prior treatment with tebentafusp (p=0.007). PFS and OS at 1 and 2 years were numerically higher with IPI+PD1 (1- and 2-year PFS: 23% and 15%; 1- and 2-year OS: 63% and 39%) vs. PD1 (1- and 2-year PFS: 17% and 11%; 1- and 2-year OS: 54% and 36%), but these differences were not statistically significant (p>0.05). On MVA, adjusting for predefined variables (age, gender, ECOG PS, LDH, presence/absence of liver/lung metastases, prior treatment with tebentafusp), IPI+PD1 was associated with higher ORR (OR 2.71, 1.30 – 6.05; p=0.01) but not with PFS or OS compared to PD1. Presence of liver metastases (ORR [OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.13 - 0.64], PFS [HR 1.61; 95% CI 1.11 - 2.34], OS [HR 2.02; 95% CI 1.32 - 3.10]), ECOG PS≥2 (PFS [HR 1.82; 95% CI 1.07 - 3.10], OS [HR 2.24; 95% CI 1.25-4.01]), elevated LDH (PFS [HR 1.66; 95% CI 1.30 - 2.11], OS [HR 2.39; 95% CI 1.84-3.10]) and prior tebentafusp treatment (OS [HR 2.36; 95% CI 1.21-4.59]) were also independent predictors of response and/or survival. A higher percentage of pts experienced grade ≥3 immune-related adverse events (irAEs) in the IPI+PD1 group compared to the PD1 group (34% vs 13%, p<0.0001). Most pts ceased treatment due to progression (234, 57%), and more pts stopped due to toxicity in the IPI+PD1 vs. PD1 group (25% vs. 9%, p<0.0001). Conclusions: In pts with MUM, IPI+PD1 demonstrated a higher ORR but did not improve survival compared with PD1 alone. IPI+PD1 was more toxic, leading to early treatment discontinuation in one-quarter of pts. These findings may help guide treatment selection in MUM.

9578 Background: Anti-PD1 immunotherapy has shown improved clinical outcomes in patients (pts) with advanced cSCC, and recently, in the neoadjuvant setting for resectable disease. Pathological (path) response is predictive of recurrence in melanoma and recent NeoIT trials suggests the same in cSCC; however, an analysis of clinical outcomes in pts with resectable cSCC treated with intended anti-PD1-based NeoIT in larger datasets remains unknown. Methods: Pts with resectable cSCC treated with intended anti-PD1-based NeoIT from 17 cancer centres globally were included. Baseline patient and disease characteristics, treatment regimen, path response and recurrence-free survival (RFS) or progression-free survival (PFS) were collected and examined. Results: 134 pts with resectable cSCC were treated with intended anti-PD1-based NeoIT. Median age was 75 years old (range, 39-97), 72% (n=97) were male. One fifth (22%, n=29) were immunocompromised and 43% (n=58) had ECOG PS of ≥1. Of 125 (93%) pts with known primary cSCC, 82% (n=102) were from the head & neck. Most pts (79%, n=106) were stage III/IV. The majority had anti-PD1 monotherapy (91%, n=122) and 9% (n=12) had anti-PD1+/-investigational agent. Median follow-up from commencement of NeoIT was 10 months (95% CI, 9 - 12). Nearly half of the pts (49%, n=66) underwent surgery; 37 (56%) pts had major pathological response (MPR; ≤10% viable tumour cells at the surgical specimen; 31 [47%] had complete path response [0% of viable tumour cells] and 6 [9%] had near complete path response [1-10% of viable tumour cells]), 6 (9%) had partial path response (pPR; >10% and ≤50% of viable tumour cells), and 23 (35%) had path non-response (pNR; >50% of viable tumour cells). Of the 66 pts who underwent surgery, 11% (n=7) had recurrence (5 loco-regional and 2 distant recurrence), all non-MPR pts (1 pPR and 6 pNR). 12-months RFS was improved with MPR vs non-MPR (100% vs 79%, p=0.004). 52% (n=34) pts had adjuvant treatment (23 anti-PD1 alone, 7 anti-PD1+/-investigational agent, 2 platinum and 2 cetuximab). Within non-MPR pts, 12 had adjuvant treatment (3 recurred; 25%), while 17 did not have adjuvant treatment (4 recurred; 24%). Fifty-one percent (n=68) of pts did not have surgery; 9 (13%) due to progressive disease (PD) and 53 (78%) due to clinical response. Of the 53 pts with a clinical response, 5 (9%) subsequently progressed. Fourteen (10%) pts have died, 6 (4%) related to cSCC; 2 had surgery (non-MPR) and 4 did not have surgery (all due to PD). Conclusions: Anti-PD1-based NeoIT is an active regimen in resectable stage II-IV cSCC and is associated with high clinical response and MPR rates. No pts with MPR from NeoIT has recurred to date, however, 9% of pts who did not have surgery due to clinical response eventually progressed. These findings highlight the importance of further research to investigate the role of surgery in this subgroup of patients.

AbstractBackgroundIsolated limb infusion and perfusion (ILI/ILP) has been a mainstay treatment for unresectable melanoma in‐transit metastases (ITM), but increased use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and intralesional therapy (talimogene laherparepvec [TVEC]) introduced several different management options. This study compares first‐line ILI/ILP, ICI, and TVEC.MethodsRetrospective review from 12 international institutions included patients treated from 1990 to 2022 with first‐line ILI/ILP, ICI, or TVEC for unresectable melanoma ITM.ResultsA total of 551 patients were treated, with ILI/ILP (n = 356), ICI (n = 125), and TVEC (n = 70) with median follow‐up of 5.5 years. Tumor burden was highest with ILI/ILP and lowest with TVEC (p = .002). Breslow thickness was lowest with TVEC (p = .007). TVEC was mostly used in stage IIIB disease versus IIIC for ILI/ILP and ICI (p = .01). Using ICI as the reference category, TVEC had the highest odds of a complete response (CR) (odds ratio, 1.96; p = .029) and a longer local progression‐free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.40; p = .003). ILI/ILP had shorter local PFS (HR, 1.72; p = .012), PFS (HR, 1.79; p < .001), distant metastasis‐free survival (DMFS) (HR, 1.75; p = .014), overall survival (HR, 1.82; p = .009), and melanoma‐specific survival (HR, 2.29; p = .004). Stage IIIB disease had longer DMFS (HR, 0.24; p < .001) compared to IIIC/D.ConclusionsTVEC as first‐line therapy for unresectable melanoma ITM was associated with superior CR rates and local PFS. Notably, TVEC was used in patients with a lower Breslow thickness, disease stage, and tumor burden. Therefore, when compared to ILI/ILP and ICI, TVEC should be considered as first‐line therapy for unresectable stage IIIB melanoma ITM with minimal tumor burden and lower Breslow thickness.

9574 Background: Surgery remains the gold standard for resectable melanoma in-transit metastases (ITM). Unresectable ITM is a heterogenous disease with multiple treatment (tx) options including systemic therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), regional therapies such as isolated limb infusion or perfusion (ILI/P), and intratumoral therapies such as talimogene laherparepvec (IT). Until now, there has been no direct comparison of these first-line tx for unresectable ITM. Methods: A retrospective chart review of patients (pts) with ITM treated first-line with IT, ILI/P, or ICI was performed at 11 institutions. Pts with unresectable ITM, synchronous nodal or distant metastatic disease were excluded. Results: 560 pts (54% women) were identified, 86 received IT, 353 received ILI/P, and 121 received ICI from 1990-2022. ICI pts were youngest, IT pts were oldest (p<0.001). Limb was the most common site of ITM. There was no difference in largest ITM size, but number of lesions (burden of disease (BOD)) was highest in ILI/P pts and lowest in IT pts (p=0.003). Toxicity (tox) requiring <90 days (p<0.001) or > 90 days (p=0.034) of pharmacologic tx as well as tox requiring hospitalization (p<0.001) was greatest in ICI pts. Lymphedema was more likely in ILI/P pts (p=0.016). Median follow-up was much longer for ILI/P pts at 8.0 yrs compared to 2.5 yrs for IT pts and 3.1 yrs for ICI pts. Overall response rate (ORR) was 82.2% in ILI/P pts, significantly higher than IT (72.1%, p=0.047) or ICI pts (63.6%, p<0.001). Overall survival was similar between modalities (p=0.167); however, ILI/P pts had worse progression-free survival (PFS) (p<0.0001) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) (p=0.003). On multivariable analysis of MSS by number of ITM present, MSS remained worst if ILI/P was used for low BOD, ≤3 ITM (p=0.005), but no difference was seen between tx modalities for higher BOD, >3 ITM (p=0.211). Conclusions: ICI was used more often in younger pts with less BOD, IT in older pts with less BOD, and ILI/P in older pts with high BOD. Short and long-term tox was greater in ICI. ILI/P had the best ORR, but ICI and IT resulted in greater overall MSS. Multidisciplinary consideration of risks and benefits of each modality should guide ITM tx selection. [Table: see text]