The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Immunol.
Sec. Cancer Immunity and Immunotherapy
Volume 16 - 2025 |
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1524945
This article is part of the Research Topic Immunology and Immunotherapy of Skin Cancer View all 12 articles
Discontinuation of immune checkpoint inhibitors for reasons other than disease progression and the impact on relapse and survival of advanced melanoma patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis
Provisionally accepted- 1 Department of Medical Oncology, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece, Thessaloniki, Greece
- 2 Center for Dermato-oncology, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany, Tubingen, Germany
- 3 Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biostatistics, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany, Tübingen, Germany
- 4 Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece, Thessaloniki, Greece
- 5 Second Department of Dermatology, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece, Thessaloniki, Greece
- 6 Cluster of Excellence for Individualization of Tumor Therapies through Molecular Imaging and Functional Identification of Therapeutic Target Structures, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
- 7 Department of Dermatology, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
Background: Despite durable responses achieved with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs), data about optimal duration of treatment, especially in the context of adverse events, remain scarce.Objective: To systematically review the evidence concerning the impact of treatment discontinuation with ICIs for reasons other than progressive disease (PD) on relapse rates and survival of melanoma patients.Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in three electronic databases until July 2024.Studies referring to melanoma patients who ceased ICIs electively (i.e. due to complete response (CR), protocol completion or patient/physician's wish) or due to treatment-limiting toxicities (TLTs) were selected. Relapse rates (RRs) post cessation, time to PD, rechallenge and disease control rate (DCR) after 2 nd course were the main outcomes. Random-effects models were preferred, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted to investigate possible sources of heterogeneity.Results: 38 and 35 studies were included in qualitative and quantitative synthesis, respectively. From 2542 patients discontinued treatment with ICIs electively or due to TLTs, 495 experienced progression [number of studies (n)=34, RR 20.9%, 95%CI 17.1 -24.7%, I 2 85%) and higher rates were detected in patients with TLTs compared to elective discontinuation. Mean time to PD was 14.26 months (n=18, mean time 14.26,, I 2 93%) and was numerically higher in patients who ceased for CR compared to patients with TLTs. Treatment duration before cessation was not associated with risk and time to relapse, while mucosal melanomas and non-CR as BOR during treatment led to increased risk for relapse and shorter time to PD compared to other histologic subtypes or CR. Rechallenge with ICI resulted in 57.3% DCR and 28.6% pooled CR rates (n=22, CR rate 28.6%, 95%CI 17.1 -40.2, I 2 68%). Heterogeneity among studies was high, but subgroup analysis based on type of ICI used (anti-CTL4 and anti-PD1 inhibitor or anti-PD1 monotherapy) and type of study (RCTs or observational studies), along with sensitivity analyses did not reveal significant alterations in results.Discontinuation of ICIs in patients without progression is possible. Outcomes to rechallenge with ICIs may differ depending on the reason for discontinuation, but remains a considerable option.
Keywords: Immunotherapy; Immune checkpoint inhibitors, therapy discontinuation, Stage IV, overall survival, Melanoma
Received: 08 Nov 2024; Accepted: 13 Jan 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Lallas, Chatziioannou, Durak, Frey, Serna-Higuita, Rasch, Kyrgidis, Timotheadou, Apalla, Leiter-Stöppke, Flatz, Lallas and Amaral. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Georg Frey, Center for Dermato-oncology, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany, Tubingen, Germany
Marie-Lena Rasch, Center for Dermato-oncology, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany, Tubingen, Germany
Eleni Timotheadou, Department of Medical Oncology, School of Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece, Thessaloniki, Greece
Ulrike Leiter-Stöppke, Center for Dermato-oncology, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany, Tubingen, Germany
Lukas Flatz, Center for Dermato-oncology, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany, Tubingen, Germany
Teresa Amaral, Center for Dermato-oncology, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany, Tubingen, Germany
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.