Affiliation:
1. Moscow City Oncological Hospital No. 1; Novokuznetsk State Institute for Postgraduate Medical Education – a branch of the Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education
2. Moscow City Oncological Hospital No. 1; Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education
3. Moscow City Oncological Hospital No. 1
4. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)
5. Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
6. Moscow Treatment and Rehabilitation Center
Abstract
Introduction. Melanoma is an aggressive form of skin cancer caused by the transformation of melanocytes into malignant cells. Currently, immunotherapy is one of the most promising treatment methods, but searching the most optimal treatment regimens is still ongoing.Objective. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in patients with metastatic melanoma.Materials and methods. The study included 229 patients (114 men and 115 women) aged 21 to 91 years who received (ICIs) as nivolumab (n = 168; 73,4%) and pembrolizumab (n = 30; 13,1%) monotherapy, and combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab (n = 31; 13,5%). The objective response of the tumor to treatment was recorded in the presence of partial or complete regression of the tumor. The tumor response to treatment was determined in accordance with the iRECIST criteria.Results. Complete regression was observed in 16.7, 15.9 and 8,7% of patients, partial – in 11.1, 11.4 and 17.4%, stabilization was detected in 51.2, 50.0 and 34.8% and progression – in 21.0, 22.7 and 39.1% of patients with first, second and third and more-line setting, respectively. The median response time was 3.14, 5.18 and 3.63 months, the median response duration was 16.21, 8.96 and 30.15 months in first, second and third and more-line setting, respectively. Grade 3–4 immuno-related adverse events (irAEs) were observed in 8 (3.5%) patients.Conclusions. Immunotherapy of metastatic melanoma allows achieving high rates of objective response and disease control (27.5 and 76.9%, respectively). This method of treatment is characterized by an insignificant amount of grade 3–4 irAEs (3.5% according to our data), which indicates an acceptable safety profile.