Back to Authors

Kim, Youngchul

0000-0002-2307-0330

Mayo Clinic

Moffitt Cancer Center

Citations 6

A propensity score-matched analysis comparing first-line regional, systemic, and intralesional treatments for melanoma in-transit metastases in a contemporary patient population.
Balsay-Patel, Caitlyn , Dugan, Michelle, Naqvi, Syeda Mahrukh Hussnain , Ollila, D. W., Houdt, Winan J. van, Asher, Nethanel, Snow, Hayden, Farma, Jeffrey M., Vetto, John T. , Saw, Robyn P.M., LO, S, Long, Georgina V., Ny, Lars, Akkooi, Alexander Christopher Jonathan Van, Bagge, Roger Olofsson, Zager, Jonathan S., Long, Georgina V. , Akkooi, Alexander C. J. van , Saw, Robyn P.M. , Lo, Serigne , Long, Georgina V , Lo, Serigne N , Dugan, Michelle M. , Hieken, Tina J. , Houdt, Winan J. van , Asher, Nethanel , Broman, Kristy K. , Farma, Jeffrey M. , Hui, Jane Yuet Ching , Ny, Lars , Kim, Youngchul , Bagge, Roger Olofsson , Zager, Jonathan S.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 28, 2026 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 9524-9524

10.1200/jco.2026.44.16_suppl.9524 Get It

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.
A comparison of isolated limb infusion/perfusion, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and intralesional therapy as first‐line treatment for patients with melanoma in‐transit metastases
DePalo, Danielle K. , Dugan, Michelle M. , Naqvi, Syeda Mahrukh Hussnain , Ollila, David W. , Hieken, Tina J. , Block, Matthew S. , Houdt, Winan J. van , Reijers, Sophie J. M. , Asher, Nethanel , Duncan, Zoey , Anderson, Matilda, Snow, Hayden , Held, Jenny M., Farma, Jeffrey M. , Vetto, John T. , Hui, Jane Yuet Ching , Kolbow, Madison , Saw, Robyn P.M. , Lo, Serigne , Long, Georgina V. , Karapetyan, Lilit , Akkooi, Alexander C. J. van , van Houdt, Winan J , Asher, Nethanel , Hui, Jane Yuet Ching , Kolbow, Madison , Lo, Serigne N , Thompson, John F , Zager, Jonathan S , Hieken, Tina J , Long, Georgina V , Wouters, Michel W.J.M. , Broman, Kristy K. , Gyorki, David E. , Held, Jenny, Thompson, John F. , Kim, Youngchul , Ny, Lars , Bagge, Roger Olofsson , Zager, Jonathan S.

Cancer | November 10, 2024 | Volume: 131 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1002/cncr.35636 Get It

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.
Intralesional therapy, limb infusion/perfusion, and immune checkpoint inhibitors as first-line therapy in surgically unresectable melanoma in-transit metastases.
DePalo, Danielle K. , Naqvi, Syeda Mahrukh Hussnain , Ollila, David W. , Block, Matthew S. , Duncan, Zoey , Anderson, Matilda, Vetto, John T. , Saw, Robyn P.M. , Lo, Serigne , Akkooi, Alexander Christopher Jonathan Van, Akkooi, Alexander C. J. van , Lo, Serigne N , Hieken, Tina J. , Houdt, Winan J. van , Wouters, Michel W.J.M. , Asher, Nethanel , Broman, Kristy K. , Gyorki, David E. , Hui, Jane Yuet Ching , Kim, Youngchul , Bagge, Roger Olofsson , Zager, Jonathan S.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 4, 2023 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: 9574-9574

10.1200/jco.2023.41.16_suppl.9574 Get It

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]
Active surveillance of patients who have sentinel node positive melanoma: An international, multi‐institution evaluation of adoption and early outcomes after the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial II (MSLT‐2)
Broman, Kristy K. , Dossett, Lesly A. , Кириченко, Д. А. , Carr, Michael J. , Sharma, Avinash , Bartlett, Edmund K. , Nijhuis, Amanda A. G. , Kottschade, Lisa A. , Downs, Jennifer , Akkooi, Alexander C. J. van , Ollila, David W. , Frank, Jill S. , Karakousis, Giorgos C. , Nobes, Jenny , Vetto, John T. , Han, Dale , Farma, Jeffrey M. , Deneve, Jeremiah L. , Fleming, Martin D. , Bagge, Roger Olofsson , Lee, Ann Y. , Berman, Russell S. , Chai, Harvey , Kroon, Hidde M. , Teras, Jüri, Teras, Roland M., Hui, Jane Yuet Ching , Been, Lukas B. , Kruijff, Schelto , Naqvi, Syeda Mahrukh Hussnain , Sondak, Vernon K. , Broman, Kristy Kummerow , Kirichenko, Dennis , Bartlett, Edmund K , Hieken, Tina J , Kottschade, Lisa, Song, Yun , Karakousis, Giorgos , Lowe, Michael C , Hui, Jane Yuet Ching , Olofsson Bagge, Roger , Hughes, Tasha M. , Sun, James X. , Thompson, John F. , Hieken, Tina J. , Gyorki, David E. , Stahlie, Emma H. A. , Moncrieff, Marc D. , Perez, Matthew C , Mattsson, Jan , Farrow, Norma E. , Beasley, Georgia M. , Kim, Youngchul , Sarnaik, Amod A. , Zager, Jonathan S.

Cancer | April 7, 2021 | Volume: 127 | Issue: 13 | Pages: 2251-2261

10.1002/cncr.33483 Get It

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.
A phase II study of TAS-102 in combination with ramucirumab in advanced, refractory gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma.
Shah, Neal, Carballido, Estrella M., Imanirad, Iman , Kim, Dae Won , Mehta, Rutika Jitesh , Kim, Richard D. , Shah, Neal, Kim, Youngchul

Journal of Clinical Oncology | May 27, 2019 | Volume: 37 | Issue: 15_suppl | Pages: TPS4149-TPS4149

10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.tps4149 Get It

TPS4149 Background: Patients with advanced gastric cancer experience a 5 year survival rate <10% even with multimodality therapy representing a clear unmet need for improved treatment. In advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma, ramucirumab (a monoclonal antibody against VEGFR2) has demonstrated clinical activity and has been approved as second line therapy in combination with paclitaxel with a response rate of 28% and absolute overall survival benefit of 8 weeks when compared to placebo. However, there are many patients that cannot tolerate paclitaxel due to prior exposure to oxaliplatin causing neuropathy. Therefore, novel combinations with ramucirumab, is highly desirable. TAS-102 is an oral cytotoxic agent with two active components; trifluridine (TFD) which inhibits tumor cell growth by being incorporated into DNA during DNA synthesis and tipiracil (TPI) which inhibits the metabolism of TFD, thereby prolonging its ability to exert effect. TPI also inhibits platelet derived endothelial cell growth factor which plays a key role with VEGF in tumor angiogenesis. The combination of a cytotoxic agent with an antiangiogenic agent has demonstrated a significant anticancer activity in multiple cancers. In a recent Phase III study, TAS-102 significantly prolonged overall survival as compared to best supportive care in patients with GEJ and gastric cancers that had received at least 2 prior lines of treatment. We hypothesize that a combination of TAS-102 and ramucirumab might increase efficacy without causing unmanageable toxicity. Methods: This is a single institutional phase II single arm two-stage design trial using the combination of TAS-102 and ramucirumab in advanced, refractory gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma. Eligible patients include those with histologically confirmed gastric or GEJ adenocarcinoma that have received at least 1 prior line of treatment with performance status 0 or 1 and preserved organ function. Ramucirumab will be administered 8mg/kg every 2 weeks and TAS-102 at doses of 35 mg/m2 twice daily. Each cycle length will be 28 days. The primary endpoint is 6 month OS and secondary endpoints are safety, objective response rate and PFS. Fifteen patients will be enrolled in the first stage. If ≥ 7 of the 15 are alive at 6 months, an additional 10 patients will be enrolled in the second phase. Enrollment is currently ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03686488.