Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2025 Jul 1;282(1):100-107.
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006255. Epub 2024 Feb 29.

Survival and Quality of Life After Isolated Hepatic Perfusion With Melphalan as a Treatment for Uveal Melanoma Liver Metastases: Final Results From the Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial SCANDIUM

Roger Olofsson Bagge  1   2   3 , Axel Nelson  4 , Amir Shafazand  3   5 , Charlotta All-Eriksson  6 , Christian Cahlin  7 , Nils Elander  8 , Anders Gustavsson  9   10 , Hildur Helgadottir  11 , Jens Folke Kiilgaard  12 , Sara Kinhult  13 , Ingrid Ljuslinder  14 , Jan Mattsson  2 , Magnus Rizell  7 , Malin Sternby Eilard  7 , Gustav J Ullenhag  15   16 , Jonas A Nilsson  1   17 , Lars Ny  4 , Per Lindnér  7
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Survival and Quality of Life After Isolated Hepatic Perfusion With Melphalan as a Treatment for Uveal Melanoma Liver Metastases: Final Results From the Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial SCANDIUM

Roger Olofsson Bagge et al. Ann Surg. .

Abstract

Objective: To investigate overall survival (OS) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of first-line isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) compared to best alternative care for patients with uveal melanoma liver metastases.

Background: Approximately half of the patients with uveal melanoma develop metastatic disease, most commonly in the liver, and systemic treatment options are limited. IHP is a locoregional therapy with high response rates but with an unclear effect on OS.

Methods: In this phase III randomized controlled multicenter trial (the SCANDIUM trial), patients with previously untreated isolated uveal melanoma liver metastases were included between 2013 and 2021, with at least 24 months of follow-up. The planned accrual was 90 patients randomized 1:1 to receive a one-time treatment with IHP or best alternative care. Crossover to IHP was not allowed. The primary endpoint was the 24-month OS rate, with the hypothesis of a treatment effect leading to a 50% OS rate in the IHP group compared to 20% in the control group. HRQOL was measured by the EuroQol 5-domains 3-levels (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire over 12 months.

Results: The intention-to-treat population included 87 patients randomized to the IHP group [43 patients; 41 (89%) received IHP] or the control group (44 patients). The control group received chemotherapy (49%), immunotherapy (39%), or localized interventions (9%). In the intention-to-treat population, the median progression-free survival was 7.4 months in the IHP group compared with 3.3 months in the control group, with a hazard ratio of 0.21 (95% CI, 0.12-0.36). The 24-month OS rate was 46.5% in the IHP group versus 29.5% in the control group ( P =0.12). The median OS was 21.7 months versus 17.6 months, with a hazard ratio of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.37-1.10). EQ-5D-3L showed a sustained high health status for the IHP group over 12 months, compared to a deteriorating trend in the control group.

Conclusions: For patients with liver metastases from uveal melanoma, IHP offers high response rates translating to a benefit in progression-free survival including a trend of better HRQOL compared to the control group. However, the primary endpoint of OS at 24 months was not met.

Keywords: isolated hepatic perfusion; liver metastases; locoregional treatment; melphalan; uveal melanoma.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

R.O.B. has received institutional research grants from Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) and SkyLineDx, speaker honoraria from Roche and Pfizer, and has served on advisory boards for Amgen, BD/BARD, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi Genzyme, and is a shareholder in SATMEG Ventures AB. L.N. has received institutional research grants from Merck and Syndax Pharmaceuticals, speaker honoraria from BMS, Johnson&Johnson, Leo Pharma, MSD, Novartis, and Pfizer, has served on advisory boards for BMS, MSD, Novartis, Pierre Fabre, Sanofi Genzyme, and Zealth, and is a shareholder in SATMEG Ventures AB. H.H. has received speaker honoraria from BMS, MSD, and Pierre Fabre and has served on advisory boards for MSD and Novartis. I.L.J. has served on advisory boards for MSD and BMS. J.N. is a shareholder in SATMEG Ventures AB. G.U. has during the past 2 years received honoraria for teaching activities by BMS, MSD, Pierre Fabre, and Novartis and consulting/advising by Incyte, BMS, Novartis, MSD, Alligator Bioscience, LIDDS, and SeqCure Immunology AB and is a stock owner in ESSITY and Oncopeptides. P.L. has served on advisory boards for Pierre Fabre. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
CONSORT flow diagram. *Three patients were inappropriately enrolled in the IHP arm, 2 patients due to >50% of the liver being occupied with metastases and 1 patient due to the presence of systemic metastases. **Liver metastases not verified by biopsy. #Two patients did not receive IHP since their tumor burden was estimated to be >50% after laparotomy and perioperative evaluation, so these 2 patients then crossed over to the control group.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival (A), hepatic progression-free survival (B), and overall survival (C) for patients receiving isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) compared to the control group.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival (A), hepatic progression-free survival (B), and overall survival (C) for patients receiving isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) compared to patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors or chemotherapy in the control group (per-protocol analysis).
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Patient-reported health status measured using the EQ-5D-3L questionnaire comparing patients receiving isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) compared to the control group over 12 months. (A) EuroQoL VAS score (B) EQ5D using the UK value set and (C) accumulated QALYs using the UK value set adjusted for baseline levels.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Diener-West M, Earle JD, Fine SL, et al. The COMS randomized trial of iodine 125 brachytherapy for choroidal melanoma, III: initial mortality findings. COMS Report No. 18. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119:969–982. - PubMed
    1. Rantala ES, Kivela TT, Hernberg MM. Impact of staging on survival outcomes: a nationwide real-world cohort study of metastatic uveal melanoma. Melanoma Res. 2021;31:224–231. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pelster MS, Gruschkus SK, Bassett R, et al. Nivolumab and ipilimumab in metastatic uveal melanoma: results from a single-arm phase II study. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:599–607. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Piulats JM, Espinosa E, de la Cruz Merino L, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab for treatment-naive metastatic uveal melanoma: an open-label, multicenter, phase II trial by the Spanish Multidisciplinary Melanoma Group (GEM-1402). J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:586–598. - PubMed
    1. Nathan P, Hassel JC, Rutkowski P, et al. Overall survival benefit with tebentafusp in metastatic uveal melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2021;385:1196–1206. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances