International Multicenter Study of Clinical Outcomes of Sinonasal Melanoma Shows Survival Benefit for Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Potential Improvements to the Current TNM Staging System
Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE Jazyk angličtina Země Německo Médium electronic-ecollection
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
PubMed
37405239
PubMed Central
PMC10317567
DOI
10.1055/s-0042-1750178
PII: 220273
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- TNM, immune checkpoint blockade, immune checkpoint inhibitors ipilimumab, immunotherapy, sinonasal mucosal melanoma,
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
Objectives Sinonasal mucosal melanoma (SNMM) is an extremely rare and challenging sinonasal malignancy with a poor prognosis. Standard treatment involves complete surgical resection, but the role of adjuvant therapy remains unclear. Crucially, our understanding of its clinical presentation, course, and optimal treatment remains limited, and few advancements in improving its management have been made in the recent past. Methods We conducted an international multicenter retrospective analysis of 505 SNMM cases from 11 institutions across the United States, United Kingdom, Ireland, and continental Europe. Data on clinical presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and clinical outcomes were assessed. Results One-, three-, and five-year recurrence-free and overall survival were 61.4, 30.6, and 22.0%, and 77.6, 49.2, and 38.3%, respectively. Compared with disease confined to the nasal cavity, sinus involvement confers significantly worse survival; based on this, further stratifying the T3 stage was highly prognostic ( p < 0.001) with implications for a potential modification to the current TNM staging system. There was a statistically significant survival benefit for patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy, compared with those who underwent surgery alone (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-0.96, p = 0.021). Immune checkpoint blockade for the management of recurrent or persistent disease, with or without distant metastasis, conferred longer survival (HR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.25-1.00, p = 0.036). Conclusions We present findings from the largest cohort of SNMM reported to date. We demonstrate the potential utility of further stratifying the T3 stage by sinus involvement and present promising data on the benefit of immune checkpoint inhibitors for recurrent, persistent, or metastatic disease with implications for future clinical trials in this field.
Cancer Research UK and UCL Cancer Trials Centre University College London London United Kingdom
Cancer Sciences Unit Faculty of Medicine University of Southampton United Kingdom
Department of Clinical Oncology The Christie NHS Foundation Trust Manchester United Kingdom
Department of ENT Barts Health NHS Trust London United Kingdom
Department of Histopathology University College London Hospitals NHS Trust London United Kingdom
Department of Oncology Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland United States
Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Beaumont Hospital Dublin Ireland
Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Lebanese American University Beirut Lebanon
Department of Otolaryngology University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Pittsburgh United States
Department of Otorhinolaryngology Medical University of Innsbruck Innsbruck Austria
Department of Translational Research University of Pisa Pisa Italy
Disease Team Alignment Head and Neck City of Hope Medical Center Duarte California United States
Division of Dentistry University of Manchester Manchester United Kingdom
Head and Neck Centre University College London Hospitals NHS Trust London United Kingdom
Liverpool Head and Neck Centre University of Liverpool Liverpool United Kingdom
The Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland Dublin Ireland
UCL Cancer Institute University College London London United Kingdom
UCL Division of Surgery and Interventional Science University College London London United Kingdom
Unit of Pathology ASST Sette Laghi University of Insubria Varese Italy
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Lund V J, Chisholm E J, Howard D J, Wei W I. Sinonasal malignant melanoma: an analysis of 115 cases assessing outcomes of surgery, postoperative radiotherapy and endoscopic resection. Rhinology. 2012;50(02):203–210. PubMed
Amit M, Tam S, Abdelmeguid A S. Patterns of treatment failure in patients with sinonasal mucosal melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(06):1723–1729. PubMed
Lund V J. Sinonasal malignant melanoma. Adv Otorhinolaryngol. 2020;84:185–196. PubMed
Miglani A, Patel S H, Kosiorek H E, Hinni M L, Hayden R E, Lal D. Endoscopic resection of sinonasal mucosal melanoma has comparable outcomes to open approaches. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2017;31(03):200–204. PubMed
Hur K, Zhang P, Yu A, Kim-Orden N, Kysh L, Wrobel B. Open versus endoscopic approach for sinonasal melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2019;33(02):162–169. PubMed
Meleti M, Leemans C R, de Bree R, Vescovi P, Sesenna E, van der Waal I. Head and neck mucosal melanoma: experience with 42 patients, with emphasis on the role of postoperative radiotherapy. Head Neck. 2008;30(12):1543–1551. PubMed
Ajmani G S, Liederbach E, Kyrillos A, Wang C H, Pinto J M, Bhayani M K. Adjuvant radiation and survival following surgical resection of sinonasal melanoma. Am J Otolaryngol. 2017;38(06):663–667. PubMed
Gore M R, Zanation A M. Survival in sinonasal melanoma: a meta-analysis. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2012;73(03):157–162. PubMed PMC
Manton T, Tillman B, McHugh J, Bellile E, McLean S, McKean E. Sinonasal melanoma: a single institutional analysis and future directions. J Neurol Surg B Skull Base. 2019;80(05):484–492. PubMed PMC
Ganti A, Raman A, Shay A. Treatment modalities in sinonasal mucosal melanoma: a national cancer database analysis. Laryngoscope. 2020;130(02):275–282. PubMed
Dauer E H, Lewis J E, Rohlinger A L, Weaver A L, Olsen K D. Sinonasal melanoma: a clinicopathologic review of 61 cases. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008;138(03):347–352. PubMed
Khan M N, Kanumuri V V, Raikundalia M D. Sinonasal melanoma: survival and prognostic implications based on site of involvement. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2014;4(02):151–155. PubMed
Roth T N, Gengler C, Huber G F, Holzmann D. Outcome of sinonasal melanoma: clinical experience and review of the literature. Head Neck. 2010;32(10):1385–1392. PubMed
Houette A, Gilain L, Mulliez A, Mom T, Saroul N. Prognostic value of two tumour staging classifications in patients with sinonasal mucosal melanoma. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2016;133(05):313–317. PubMed
Umeda Y, Yoshikawa S, Kiniwa Y. Real-world efficacy of anti-PD-1 antibody or combined anti-PD-1 plus anti-CTLA-4 antibodies, with or without radiotherapy, in advanced mucosal melanoma patients: a retrospective, multicenter study. Eur J Cancer. 2021;157:361–372. PubMed
Working Group on Head and Neck Tumors . Takayasu Y, Kubo N, Shino M. Carbon-ion radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy for head and neck mucosal melanoma: prospective observational study. Cancer Med. 2019;8(17):7227–7235. PubMed PMC
Swegal W, Koyfman S, Scharpf J. Endoscopic and open surgical approaches to locally advanced sinonasal melanoma: comparing the therapeutic benefits. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014;140(09):840–845. PubMed
Castelnuovo P, Lepera D, Turri-Zanoni M. Quality of life following endoscopic endonasal resection of anterior skull base cancers. J Neurosurg. 2013;119(06):1401–1409. PubMed
Turri-Zanoni M, Medicina D, Lombardi D. Sinonasal mucosal melanoma: Molecular profile and therapeutic implications from a series of 32 cases. Head Neck. 2013;35(08):1066–1077. PubMed
Amit M, Tam S, Abdelmeguid A S. Mutation status among patients with sinonasal mucosal melanoma and its impact on survival. Br J Cancer. 2017;116(12):1564–1571. PubMed PMC
Hodi F S, O'Day S J, McDermott D F. Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(08):711–723. PubMed PMC
D'Angelo S P, Larkin J, Sosman J A. Efficacy and safety of nivolumab alone or in combination with ipilimumab in patients with mucosal melanoma: a pooled analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(02):226–235. PubMed PMC
Ribas A, Hamid O, Daud A. Association of pembrolizumab with tumor response and survival among patients with advanced melanoma. JAMA. 2016;315(15):1600–1609. PubMed
Ribas A, Puzanov I, Dummer R. Pembrolizumab versus investigator-choice chemotherapy for ipilimumab-refractory melanoma (KEYNOTE-002): a randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(08):908–918. PubMed PMC
KEYNOTE-006 investigators . Robert C, Schachter J, Long G V. Pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(26):2521–2532. PubMed
Li J, Kan H, Zhao L, Sun Z, Bai C. Immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced or metastatic mucosal melanoma: a systematic review. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2020;12:1.758835920922028E15. PubMed PMC
Rose A AN, Armstrong S M, Hogg D. Biologic subtypes of melanoma predict survival benefit of combination anti-PD1+anti-CTLA4 immune checkpoint inhibitors versus anti-PD1 monotherapy. J Immunother Cancer. 2021;9(01):e001642. PubMed PMC
Kim H J, Chang J S, Roh M R. Effect of radiotherapy combined with pembrolizumab on local tumor control in mucosal melanoma patients. Front Oncol. 2019;9:835. PubMed PMC