Real-world treatment practice in patients with advanced melanoma in the era before ipilimumab: results from the IMAGE study

Abstract

The therapeutic landscape for advanced melanoma has recently been transformed by several novel agents (immune checkpoint inhibitors and molecular-targeted agents). The prospective, multi-site, observational study IMAGE (ipilimumab: management of advanced melanoma in real practice) included a retrospective cohort to describe real-world treatment prior to approval of the immune checkpoint inhibitor ipilimumab. This retrospective cohort of patients, who started second-line/subsequent treatment (index therapy) for advanced melanoma within 3 years before ipilimumab approval, was selected randomly by chart review. Collected data included treatment history, patient outcomes, and healthcare resource utilization. All patients had ≥1 year of follow-up data. This analysis included 177 patients from Europe (69%) and North America (31%). The most common index therapies (used alone or in combination) were fotemustine (23%), dacarbazine (21%), temozolomide (14%), and platinum-based chemotherapy (14%). Most patients (89%) discontinued index treatment during the study period; the most common reason was disease progression (59%). Among patients with tumor assessment (153/177; 86%), 2% had complete response, 5% had partial response, and 12% had stable disease on last tumor assessment. At 1-year study follow-up, median progression-free survival was 2.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-2.9) and median overall survival was 8.8 months (95% CI, 6.5-9.7). During follow-up, 95% of the patients had healthcare visits for advanced melanoma, 74% of whom were hospitalized or admitted to a hospice facility. These results provide insights into patient care with advanced melanoma in the era before ipilimumab and may serve as a benchmark for new agents in future real-world studies.

Keywords: Advanced melanoma; ipilimumab; observational study; real-world treatment practice; retrospective.

Figure 1

Progression‐free survival (PFS) at 1‐year study follow‐up. (A) Overall study group (N = 177). (B) European cohort (n = 122). (C) North American cohort (n = 55).

Figure 2

Overall survival (OS) at 1‐year study follow‐up. (A) Overall study group (N = 177). (B) European cohort (n = 122). (C) North American cohort (n = 55). NA (not available) indicates that the upper limit corresponding to 95% CI for median upper limit boundary did not intersect with the survival probability equal to 0.5.