Meeting NewsVideo

VIDEO: Effective therapies needed for uveal melanoma

NEW YORK — Some clinical trials evaluating standard melanoma immunotherapies have been disappointing for metastatic uveal melanoma, Alexander Shoushtari, MD, assistant attending physician at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, said at HemOnc Today Melanoma and Cutaneous Malignancies.

In his presentation at the meeting, Shoushtari discussed recent trials for uveal melanoma that have targeted proteins like MEK and kinase C, and he also discussed the future landscape of targeted treatments.

“We also talked about, quite frankly, the disappointing data thus far with the so-called standard agents for regular skin melanoma — pembrolizumab (Keytruda, Merck) and nivolumab (Opdvio, Bristol-Myers Squibb) — that don’t work as often as it turns out in uveal melanomas,” Shoushtari said.

In a study by Algazi and colleagues, the overall response rate to treatment with PD-1 and PD-L1 antibodies was 4% and median OS was 8 months among patients with uveal melanoma. Another study by Zimmer and colleagues showed a 0% ORR and median OS of 6.8 months among 53 patients after treatment with ipilimumab (Yervoy, Bristol-Myers Squibb).

However, upcoming clinical trials at various clinical centers will evaluate immunotherapy, combination immunotherapies or adoptive T-cell approaches to address this unmet need, Shoushtari said. Still, the question remains as to why patients with uveal melanoma respond less often to these therapies as patients with cutaneous melanoma, which could be related to mutations.

Disclosures: Shoushtari reports advisor roles with Castle Biosciences, Immunocore and Vaccinex, and institutional support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Immunocore.

NEW YORK — Some clinical trials evaluating standard melanoma immunotherapies have been disappointing for metastatic uveal melanoma, Alexander Shoushtari, MD, assistant attending physician at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, said at HemOnc Today Melanoma and Cutaneous Malignancies.

In his presentation at the meeting, Shoushtari discussed recent trials for uveal melanoma that have targeted proteins like MEK and kinase C, and he also discussed the future landscape of targeted treatments.

“We also talked about, quite frankly, the disappointing data thus far with the so-called standard agents for regular skin melanoma — pembrolizumab (Keytruda, Merck) and nivolumab (Opdvio, Bristol-Myers Squibb) — that don’t work as often as it turns out in uveal melanomas,” Shoushtari said.

In a study by Algazi and colleagues, the overall response rate to treatment with PD-1 and PD-L1 antibodies was 4% and median OS was 8 months among patients with uveal melanoma. Another study by Zimmer and colleagues showed a 0% ORR and median OS of 6.8 months among 53 patients after treatment with ipilimumab (Yervoy, Bristol-Myers Squibb).

However, upcoming clinical trials at various clinical centers will evaluate immunotherapy, combination immunotherapies or adoptive T-cell approaches to address this unmet need, Shoushtari said. Still, the question remains as to why patients with uveal melanoma respond less often to these therapies as patients with cutaneous melanoma, which could be related to mutations.

Disclosures: Shoushtari reports advisor roles with Castle Biosciences, Immunocore and Vaccinex, and institutional support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Immunocore.

    See more from HemOnc Today New York