Abstract 429P
Background
Melanoma care is revolutionized with checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) and targeted therapies; however, access to drugs is challenging in Low-Middle income countries (LMICs).
Methods
Histologically proven melanoma cases registered from 2013–2019 were analysed.
Results
There were 443 patients with median age of 54 years; 60% were males with 41% cutaneous, and 57% mucosal melanomas; most common primary sites were anorectal (41%) and extremities (27%); 11% were BRAF mutated. Among the 258 non-metastatic patients, the median follow up was 30 months (0–83 months). Of these, 114 (44%) had prior surgery and 73 (64%) were already metastatic at presentation to us. Of the remaining 144 (56%), 101 underwent resection, 11 were unresectable, and rest 32 did not take treatment. Median EFS of non-metastatic patients was 17 (95% CI: 11-23) months while median OS was 38 months (95% CI: 30-46); 2-years OS predictions was 66% (95% CI: 59-73). Overall metastatic cohort (n=311) comprised of baseline metastatic (n=185) and non-metastatic patients with (73) or without prior therapy (53) who failed with distant metastasis.Commonest metastatic sites were liver (52%) and non-regional nodes (51%). Median follow up in this cohort was 21 (0–74 months); 138 (44.4%) received chemotherapy(taxane, dacarbazine), Interferons, while 29 (9.3%) patients received CPI. The clinical benefit rate was 31%. In baseline metastatic cohort, the median EFS and OS with BSC alone were 3.8 (95% CI: 2.6-5.0) months and 3.5 (95% CI: 2.45-4.63) vs. 5.55 (95% CI: 3-8) months and 11 (95% CI: 9-13.1) months in any systemic therapy group (HR for OS: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.22-0.52; P<0.001). Grade 3/4 toxicity were observed in 16 % with predominance of thrombocytopenia and anemia (both 4%) in chemotherapy and anemia (10%) for CPI. Any therapy received was significant in both cohort;additionally, site, surgery, were significant in non-metastatic cohort.
Conclusions
This real-world data from India reflects the hard reality of access of expensive, standard of care therapies. Interesting finding that any systemic therapy can lead to meaningful clinical benefits at-least in a select group of patients merits exploration if standard options are not feasible, especially in LMICs.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
210P - Prognostic value of sarcopenia in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients: A systematic review
Presenter: Angeline Tancherla
Session: e-Poster Display Session
211P - The impact of low muscle mass to overall survival in bladder cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Presenter: Karunia Japar
Session: e-Poster Display Session
212P - Stage I non-seminoma testicular cancer: Adjuvant management and outcomes
Presenter: Gaik Tin Quah
Session: e-Poster Display Session
213P - Stage I seminoma testicular cancer: Predictors of relapse and outcomes for adjuvant carboplatin vs active surveillance
Presenter: Gaik Tin Quah
Session: e-Poster Display Session
214P - Study of treatment outcome in adults with TFE related RCC
Presenter: Ajaykumar Singh
Session: e-Poster Display Session
215P - Analysis of spatial heterogeneity of responses in metastatic sites with nivolumab in renal cell carcinoma
Presenter: Venkata Pradeep Babu Koyyala
Session: e-Poster Display Session
216P - Clinical profile and treatment outcome of testicular seminoma treated at tertiary care centre in Chennai
Presenter: Sivasubramaniam Kumaravelu
Session: e-Poster Display Session
220P - A cost-effectiveness analysis of systemic therapy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer
Presenter: Winnie Sung
Session: e-Poster Display Session
221P - Patient-reported sexual and urinary function in nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) when treated with apalutamide (APA) vs placebo (PBO) and ongoing androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in SPARTAN
Presenter: Hiroji Uemura
Session: e-Poster Display Session
222P - Tolerability and treatment response to darolutamide (DARO) in patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) in the phase III ARAMIS trial
Presenter: Matthew R. Smith
Session: e-Poster Display Session