Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display session: Basic science, Endocrine tumours, Gastrointestinal tumours - colorectal & non-colorectal, Head and neck cancer (excluding thyroid), Melanoma and other skin tumours, Neuroendocrine tumours, Thyroid cancer, Tumour biology & pathology

4491 - Advanced melanoma treatment patterns in the modern era: United Kingdom (UK) real world retrospective chart review study

Date

21 Oct 2018

Session

Poster display session: Basic science, Endocrine tumours, Gastrointestinal tumours - colorectal & non-colorectal, Head and neck cancer (excluding thyroid), Melanoma and other skin tumours, Neuroendocrine tumours, Thyroid cancer, Tumour biology & pathology

Topics

Cancer Prevention

Tumour Site

Melanoma

Presenters

Joseph Sacco

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2018) 29 (suppl_8): viii442-viii466. 10.1093/annonc/mdy289

Authors

J.J. Sacco1, P.G. Corrie2, O. Oladipo3, M. Payne4, J. Larkin5, T. Talbot6, J. Wagstaff7, S. Cheetham2, D. Stein8, M. Soni8, C. Coombs9, A. Amadi10, M. Wang11, J. Ellis11

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medical Oncology, Clatterbridge Cancer Center, CH63 3JY - Bebington/GB
  • 2 Medical Oncology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, CB2 0QQ - Cambridge/GB
  • 3 Medical Oncology, Belfast City Hospital, BT9 7AB - Belfast/GB
  • 4 Medical Oncology, Churchill Hospital, Oxford/GB
  • 5 Medical Oncology, Royal Marsden Hospital, London/GB
  • 6 Medical Oncology, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Cornwall/GB
  • 7 Medical Oncology, Singleton Hospital, Swansea/GB
  • 8 Real-world Evidence, Evidera, W6 8DL - London/GB
  • 9 Real-world Evidence, Evidera, Bethesda/US
  • 10 Outcomes Research, Bristol-Myers Squibb, London/GB
  • 11 Medical Affairs, Bristol-Myers Squibb, London/GB
More

Resources

Abstract 4491

Background

In 2016, all licensed single agent and combination BRAF-targeted therapies (BT) and checkpoint inhibitors (CI) were approved for advanced melanoma in the UK. An evaluation of treatment choices in routine clinical practice was undertaken.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted in 7 UK cancer centres, which included patients ≥18 years old with advanced melanoma who started 1st-line (1L) therapy and received at least 1 dose between July 2016 and June 2017. Patients taking part in clinical trials were not eligible. Patient demographics, disease characteristics, and 1L and subsequent therapy lines were recorded. Interim analyses were descriptive.

Results

280 patients were followed for median 9 (range: <1-19) months; 80%, 19%, and 1% patients received 1, 2, or 3 therapy lines. 92% of patients had BRAF testing, 26% had NRAS testing, and <1% of tumours were tested for PDL1. BRAF and NRAS mutation rates were 41% and 7%, respectively. 73% of patients received CIs 1L: 46% pembrolizumab (Pem), 26% nivolumab+ipilimumab (N+I), 1% ipilimumab (Ipi), <1% nivolumab (N); 27% patients received BT 1L: 20% dabrafenib+trametinib (D+T), 7% dabrafenib (D). 38% of BRAF mutant patients received 1L CI. Most common reasons for therapy selection were biomarker status (42%) and perceived benefit (27%). Two-thirds of patients discontinued 1L therapy (BT: 76%, CI: 62%), 79% within 6 months of starting. Most common reasons for stopping were adverse events for N+I (59%) and progressive disease for BT and Pem (54% each). 40% of patients who discontinued BT received 2nd-line (2L) therapy 71% N+I, 29% Pem, <1% vemurafenib. 17% of patients who discontinued Pem received 2L therapy: 57% Ipi, 21% BT (7% D+T, 14% D), 14% other, and 7% trial agents. 41% of patients who discontinued N+I received 2L therapy: 63% BT (58% D+T, 5% D), 21% Pem, 8% other, and 8% trial agents.

Conclusions

The most common 1L therapy was CI. BRAF mutation status, however, influenced treatment choice, with two-thirds of BRAF mutant melanoma patients receiving BT 1L. More than double the number of patients receiving BT and N+I 1L received 2L therapy compared with patients receiving Pem 1L. Further exploration of these data will be presented.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Funding

Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Editorial Acknowledgement

Disclosure

J.J. Sacco: Lead investigator: Clatterbridge hospital which is a site participating in this chart review study which received funding from BMS. P.G. Corrie: Lead investigator from Addenbrooke's hospital which is a site participating in this chart review study which received funding from BMS. O. Oladipo: Lead investigator from Belfast City hospital which is a site participating in this chart review study which received funding from BMS. M. Payne: Lead investigator from Churchill hospital which is a site participating in this chart review study which received funding from BMS. J. Larkin, T. Talbot: Lead investigator from Royal Marsden hospital which is a site participating in this chart review study which received funding from BMS. J. Wagstaff: Lead investigator from Singleton hospital which is a site participating in this chart review study which received funding from BMS. S. Cheetham: Data manager from Addenbrooke's hospital which is a site participating in this chart review study which received funding from BMS. D. Stein, M. Soni, C. Coombs: Employee of Evidera. Evidera received funding from BMS for development of this abstract. A. Amadi, M. Wang, J. Ellis: Employee of BMS.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.