Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38610925›Full record

ReviewCancers2024

Neo-Adjuvant Therapy for Metastatic Melanoma.

Anke M J Kuijpers, Alexander C J van Akkooi

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04949113 (Multicenter Phase 3 Trial Comparing Neoadjuvant Ipilimumab Plus Nivolumab Versus Standard Adjuvant Nivolumab in Macroscopic Stage III Melanoma - NADINA), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04949113 phase3active not recruitingnot on this map

Multicenter Phase 3 Trial Comparing Neoadjuvant Ipilimumab Plus Nivolumab Versus Standard Adjuvant Nivolumab in Macroscopic Stage III Melanoma - NADINA

TypeinterventionalSponsorThe Netherlands Cancer InstituteRan2021 to 2028Enrolled423ConditionsMalignant Melanoma Stage IIIArmsNeoadjuvant ipilimumab + nivolumab, Adjuvant nivolumab
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Anke M J KuijpersDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Alexander C J van AkkooiMelanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia.
Oncode Institute · NLRoyal Prince Alfred Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Melanoma treatment is leading the neo-adjuvant systemic (NAS) therapy field. It is hypothesized that having the entire tumor in situ, with all of the heterogeneous tumor antigens, allows the patient's immune system to have a broader response to the tumor in all its shapes and forms. This translates into a higher clinical efficacy. Another benefit of NAS therapy potentially includes identifying patients who have a favorable response, which could offer an opportunity for the de-escalation of the extent of surgery and the need for adjuvant radiotherapy and/or adjuvant systemic therapy, as well as tailoring the follow-up in terms of the frequency of visits and cross-sectional imaging. In this paper, we will review the rationale for NAS therapy in resectable metastatic melanoma and the results obtained so far, both for immunotherapy and for BRAF/MEKi therapy, and discuss the response assessment and interpretation, toxicity and surgical considerations. All the trials that have been reported up to now have been investigator-initiated phase I/II trials with either single-agent anti-PD-1, combination anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 or BRAF/MEK inhibition. The results have been good but are especially encouraging for immunotherapies, showing high durable recurrence-free survival rates. Combination immunotherapy seems superior, with a higher rate of pathologic responses, particularly in patients with a major pathologic response (MPR = pathologic complete response [pCR] + near-pCR [max 10% viable tumor cells]) of 60% vs. 25-30%. The SWOG S1801 trial has recently shown a 23% improvement in event-free survival (EFS) after 2 years for pembrolizumab when giving 3 doses as NAS therapy and 15 as adjuvant versus 18 as adjuvant only. The community is keen to see the first results (expected in 2024) of the phase 3 NADINA trial (NCT04949113), which randomized patients between surgery + adjuvant anti-PD-1 and two NAS therapy courses of a combination of ipilimumab + nivolumab, followed by surgery and a response-driven adjuvant regimen or follow-up. We are on the eve of neo-adjuvant systemic (NAS) therapy, particularly immunotherapy, becoming the novel standard of care for macroscopic stage III melanoma.

Indexed as

immunotherapymelanomaneo-adjuvant

Identifiers

PMID38610925
PMCPMC11010858
OpenAlexW4393097238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.