Leptomeningeal disease from melanoma-Poor prognosis despite new therapeutic modalities
- PMID: 33789203
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.02.016
Leptomeningeal disease from melanoma-Poor prognosis despite new therapeutic modalities
Abstract
Objective: The development of leptomeningeal disease (LMD) among melanoma patients is associated with short survival. Unspecific clinical symptoms and imprecise diagnostic criteria often delay diagnosis. Because melanoma patients with LMD have been excluded from most clinical trials, the efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) and targeted therapies (TTs) has not been adequately investigated among these patients.
Methods: We performed a retrospective study in two tertiary-referral skin cancer centres to evaluate the clinical characteristics, diagnostics, treatments, and overall survival (OS) of melanoma patients with LMD between June 2011 and March 2019.
Results: In total, 52 patients were included. The median age at LMD diagnosis was 58 years. Most patients (n = 30, 58%) were men. The median time from the first diagnosis of unresectable disease to the first diagnosis of LMD was 8.5 months (range 0-91.5 months). Most patients (65%, n = 34) were BRAF V600 mutated. Sixteen patients (31%) presented with LMD only, whereas 36 patients (69%) presented with concomitant brain metastases at LMD diagnosis. Eleven patients (21%) showed no evidence of extracranial disease. Forty-four patients (85%) had clinical symptoms at LMD diagnosis. Forty-two patients (81%) had received at least one prior therapy. Forty patients (77%) received at least one treatment after LMD diagnosis, including TT (n = 17), ICB (n = 13), bevacizumab (n = 1), radiotherapy (n = 3), and intrathecal chemotherapy (n = 1); five patients received both TT and ICB. Twelve patients (23%) received no treatment because of rapid progression of LMD. The median OS for the entire cohort was 2.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7-4.1). Among patients receiving systemic therapy, OS was 3.7 months (95% CI 2.4-4.9).
Conclusions: Systemic treatment with TT or ICB seems to improve OS among patients with LMD. However, despite new therapy modalities, the prognosis of LMD remains poor.
Keywords: Brain; Cerebrospinal fluid; Checkpoint inhibitors; Immune checkpoint blockade; Leptomeningeal disease; Leptomeningeal metastasis; Leptomeninges; Melanoma; Targeted therapy.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of interest statement E.C. received travel support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Novartis, outside the submitted work. T.K. received travel support from Novartis, Amgen, Celgene, Lilly, and Pierre-Fabre, outside the submitted work. A.Z. received travel support from Novartis, Genzyme, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, outside the submitted work. F.R. received travel support from Pierre-Fabre, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Novartis, outside the submitted work. S.Kn. received travel support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Amgen, outside the submitted work. E.G. received travel support from Pierre-Fabre, outside the submitted work. A.R. received grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Novartis; grants and non-financial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb; personal fees and non-financial support from Roche; personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme; and non-financial support from Amgen, outside the submitted work. S.U. received grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Novartis; grants and non-financial support from Bristol-Myers Squibb; personal fees and non-financial support from Roche; personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme; and non-financial support from Amgen, outside the submitted work. D.S. received grants and other support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Amgen; personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim; personal fees from InFlarX; personal fees and other support from Roche; grants, personal fees and other support from Novartis; personal fees from Incyte; personal fees and other support from Regeneron; personal fees from 4SC; personal fees from Sanofi; personal fees from NeraCare; personal fees from Pierre-Fabre; personal fees and other support from Merck-EMD; personal fees from Pfizer; personal fees and other support from Philiogen; personal fees from Array, personal fees and other support from MSD Sharp & Dohme, outside the submitted work. E.L.: served as consultant or/and has received honoraria from Amgen, Actelion, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Janssen, Medac, Sanofi, and Sun Pharma; and travel support from Amgen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Pierre-Fabre, Sun Pharma, and Novartis, outside the submitted work. M.G. reports work as a consultant/independent contractor with Roche Pharma, Janssen, Novartis, AbbVie Inc, Novocure Inc, and Daiichi-Sankyo; honorarium from Novartis, UCB Inc, TEVA Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Corp, Novocure Inc, Medac, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp, and Kyowa Kirin Group; grants from Novocure and Medac and travel fees from Novocure Inc and Medac, outside the submitted work. L.Z. served as consultant and/or has received honoraria from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pierre-Fabre, and Sanofi; research funding to institution from Novartis; travel support from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Pierre-Fabre, and Novartis, outside the submitted work. Other authors declare no conflict of interest.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
