Cytotoxic chemotherapy (CC) is currently used in metastatic melanoma after patients have developed resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and/or Mitogen‐Activated Protein Kinase inhibitors (MAPKi).,We sought to evaluate if a previous treatment by ICI or MAPKi influences clinical outcomes in patients treated by CC in metastatic melanoma.,Eighty‐eight patients with a metastatic melanoma, treated by CC after a previous treatment by ICI or MAPKi between January 2009 and October 2019, were retrospectively analyzed.,Progression‐Free‐Survival (PFS), Overall Survival (OS), Overall Response Rate (ORR), and Disease Control Rate (DCR) were evaluated in patients treated by CC according to their prior treatment by ICI or MAPKi.,Patients treated by CC after ICI tended to have a better median PFS (2.81 months (2.39-5.30) versus 2.40 months (0.91-2.75), p = 0.023), median OS (6.03 months (3.54-11.54) versus 4.44 months (1.54-8.59), p = 0.27), DCR (26.0% vs.,10.5%, p = 0.121) and ORR (22.0% vs.,7.9% p = 0.134) than those previously treated by MAPKi.,A prior treatment by an MAPKi may be associated with a worse response to CC than ICI, and further investigations should be performed to confirm if there is a clinical benefit to propose CC in this setting.,Cytotoxic chemotherapy may be used as a last resort after failure of a prior treatment by targeted therapy or immunotherapy in metastatic melanoma.,The aim of this study was to evaluate if a prior treatment by targeted therapy or immunotherapy may influence clinical outcomes in patients treated by a second line cytotoxic chemotherapy in metastatic melanoma.,We found that patients treated by cytotoxic chemotherapy after prior treatment by targeted therapy, tended to have worse clinical outcomes than patients previously treated by immunotherapy and that prior immunotherapy does not seem to potentiate response to cytotoxic chemotherapy when compared to historical cohorts.
Talimogene laherparepvec is an oncolytic immunotherapy approved in the US, Europe, Australia and Switzerland.,We report the final planned analysis of OPTiM, a randomized open-label phase III trial in patients with unresectable stage IIIB-IVM1c melanoma.,Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive intratumoral talimogene laherparepvec or subcutaneous recombinant GM-CSF.,In addition to overall survival (OS), durable response rate (DRR), objective response rate (ORR), complete responses (CR), and safety are also reported.,All final analyses are considered to be descriptive and treatment responses were assessed by the investigators.,Of 436 patients in the intent-to-treat population, 295 were allocated to talimogene laherparepvec and 141 to GM-CSF.,Median follow-up in the final OS analysis was 49 months.,Median OS was 23.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 19.5-29.6) and 18.9 months (95% CI, 16.0-23.7) in the talimogene laherparepvec and GM-CSF arms, respectively (unstratified hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62-1.00; p = 0.0494 [descriptive]).,DRR was 19.0 and 1.4% (unadjusted odds ratio, 16.6; 95% CI, 4.0-69.2; p < 0.0001); ORR was 31.5 and 6.4%.,Fifty (16.9%) and 1 (0.7%) patient in the talimogene laherparepvec and GM-CSF arms, respectively, achieved CR.,In talimogene laherparepvec-treated patients, median time to CR was 8.6 months; median CR duration was not reached.,Among patients with a CR, 88.5% were estimated to survive at a 5-year landmark analysis.,Talimogene laherparepvec efficacy was more pronounced in stage IIIB-IVM1a melanoma as already described in the primary analysis.,The safety reporting was consistent with the primary OPTiM analysis.,In this final planned OPTiM analysis, talimogene laherparepvec continued to result in improved longer-term efficacy versus GM-CSF and remained well tolerated.,The final analysis also confirms that talimogene laherparepvec was associated with durable CRs that were associated with prolonged survival.,ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00769704.,The online version of this article (10.1186/s40425-019-0623-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.