Reinhard, Soren and Utikal, Jochen Sven and Zaremba, Anne and Lodde, Georg and von Wasielewski, Imke and Klespe, Kai Christian and Meier, Friedegund and Haferkamp, Sebastian and Kahler, Katharina C. and Herbst, Rudolf and Gebhardt, Christoffer and Sindrilaru, Anca and Dippel, Edgar and Angela, Yenny and Mohr, Peter and Pfoehler, Claudia and Forschner, Andrea and Kaatz, Martin and Schell, Beatrice and Gesierich, Anja and Loquai, Carmen and Hassel, Jessica C. and Ulrich, Jens and Meiss, Frank and Schley, Gaston and Heinzerling, Lucie M. and Sachse, Michael and Welzel, Julia and Weishaupt, Carsten and Sunderkotter, Cord and Michl, Christiane and Lindhof, Harm-Henning and Kreuter, Alexander and V. Heppt, Markus and Wenk, Saskia and Mauch, Cornelia and Berking, Carola and Nedwed, Annekathrin Silvia and Gutzmer, Ralf and Leiter, Ulrike and Schadendorf, Dirk and Ugurel, Selma and Weichenthal, Michael and Haist, Maximilian and Fleischer, Maria Isabel and Lang, Berenice and Grabbe, Stephan and Stege, Henner (2025) First-line checkpoint inhibitor therapy in metastatic acral lentiginous melanoma compared to other types of cutaneous melanoma: A multicenter study from the prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 220: 115356. ISSN 0959-8049, 1879-0852
Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)Abstract
Background: Melanoma is the main cause of skin cancer-related death. Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) has improved the prognosis in recent years. However, subtypes of melanoma differ in their response. Acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM) has a worse prognosis compared to cutaneous melanoma other than ALM (CM) and is therefore of particular relevance. Aims: To evaluate the efficacy of CPI in first-line treatment of patients with advanced ALM compared CM. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic ALM (n = 45) or CM (n = 328) who received first-line CPI therapy from the multicenter prospective skin cancer registry ADOREG. Study endpoints were best overall response (BOR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: ALM patients had significantly higher rates of ulcerated tumors, loco regional metastases and fewer BRAF-mutated tumors compared to CM patients. Combined CPI was administered in 48.9 % ALM patients and 39.3 % of CM patients, while the remaining patients received PD-1 monotherapy. OS trended to be shorter in patients with ALM (18.1 vs. 43.8 months, p = 0.10) with no significant differences in PFS (7.0 vs. 11.5 months, p = 0.21). In patients with CM, median OS with combined CPI was not reached, whereas the median OS after PD- 1 monotherapy was 37.8 months (p = 0.22). Conversely, in patients with ALM, OS with combined CPI was 17.8 months, compared to 26 months with PD-1 monotherapy (p = 0.15). There were no significant differences in BOR between patients with ALM or CM. Conclusion: Analysis of this real-world cohort of patients with metastatic melanoma showed a trend towards poorer survival outcomes upon first-line treatment with CPI in ALM compared to cutaneous melanoma of other subtypes.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | COMBINED NIVOLUMAB; CTLA-4 BLOCKADE; IPILIMUMAB; SURVIVAL; EFFICACY; MUTATION; Melanoma; Checkpoint inhibition; Response |
| Subjects: | 600 Technology > 610 Medical sciences Medicine |
| Divisions: | Medicine > Lehrstuhl für Dermatologie und Venerologie |
| Depositing User: | Dr. Gernot Deinzer |
| Date Deposited: | 24 Mar 2026 13:52 |
| Last Modified: | 24 Mar 2026 13:52 |
| URI: | https://pred.uni-regensburg.de/id/eprint/68042 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
