TY - JOUR
T1 - A Population-Level Real-World Analysis and Single-Center Validation of Melanoma Brain Metastasis Epidemiology following Dual-Agent Immunotherapy
AU - Bhanja, Debarati
AU - Zhu, Junjia
AU - Wilding, Hannah
AU - Benavides-Vasquez, Jorge
AU - de Macedo Filho, Leonardo
AU - Ozair, Ahmad
AU - Moeckel, Camille
AU - Badani, Aarav
AU - Hong, Jinpyo
AU - Sivik, Jeffrey
AU - Drabick, Joseph J.
AU - Pameijer, Colette R.
AU - Margolin, Kim
AU - Ahluwalia, Manmeet
AU - Mansouri, Alireza
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 American Association for Cancer Research.
PY - 2025/8/1
Y1 - 2025/8/1
N2 - Purpose: Melanoma brain metastases (MBM) are common in advanced melanoma and linked to poor prognosis. Preventing MBM can improve survival and reduce morbidity. Although dual-agent immunotherapy (dIT) improves survival, its role in MBM prevention is unclear. We compared MBM incidence, overall survival (OS), and brain metastasis–free survival (BMFS) between dIT and single-agent immunotherapies. Experimental Design: A real-world multi-institutional database identified patients with melanoma without MBM at immunotherapy initiation. Patients were stratified by anti-CTLA4, anti-PD1, and combination anti-CTLA4/anti-PD1 (dIT) treatment. MBM incidences were measured within 5 years after immunotherapy initiation and compared with risk ratios (RR). In a complementary single-institution cohort, the median OS and BMFS were compared between dIT, anti-CTLA4, and anti-PD1 via log-rank tests and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. Results: TriNetX identified 8,287 patients receiving anti-CTLA (3,205), anti-PD1 (3,218), and dIT (1,864). MBM incidence was significantly lower in dIT (8.6%) and anti-PD1 (7.8%) versus antiCTLA4 (12.2%) cohorts, with RR = 0.72 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.61–0.86] and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.57–0.70), respectively. There was no significant difference in MBM incidence between antiPD1 (7.8%) and dIT (8.6%; RR ¼ 1.13; 95% CI, 0.93–1.36). In the single-institution analysis (n = 119), 2-year OS probabilities were 90%, 80%, and 95%, and 2-year BMFS probabilities were 72.7%, 80%, and 95.7%, in the dIT, anti-CTLA4, and anti-PD1 cohorts, respectively. DIT and anti-PD1 showed improved early-phase protection against MBM development. The number of metastatic sites was significantly associated with MBM development (HR = 2.36; 95% CI, 1.22–4.58; P = 0.01). Conclusions: These findings highlight dIT’s potential role in primary prophylaxis against MBM, with anti-PD1 as the likely workhorse agent. Prospective studies are warranted.
AB - Purpose: Melanoma brain metastases (MBM) are common in advanced melanoma and linked to poor prognosis. Preventing MBM can improve survival and reduce morbidity. Although dual-agent immunotherapy (dIT) improves survival, its role in MBM prevention is unclear. We compared MBM incidence, overall survival (OS), and brain metastasis–free survival (BMFS) between dIT and single-agent immunotherapies. Experimental Design: A real-world multi-institutional database identified patients with melanoma without MBM at immunotherapy initiation. Patients were stratified by anti-CTLA4, anti-PD1, and combination anti-CTLA4/anti-PD1 (dIT) treatment. MBM incidences were measured within 5 years after immunotherapy initiation and compared with risk ratios (RR). In a complementary single-institution cohort, the median OS and BMFS were compared between dIT, anti-CTLA4, and anti-PD1 via log-rank tests and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. Results: TriNetX identified 8,287 patients receiving anti-CTLA (3,205), anti-PD1 (3,218), and dIT (1,864). MBM incidence was significantly lower in dIT (8.6%) and anti-PD1 (7.8%) versus antiCTLA4 (12.2%) cohorts, with RR = 0.72 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.61–0.86] and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.57–0.70), respectively. There was no significant difference in MBM incidence between antiPD1 (7.8%) and dIT (8.6%; RR ¼ 1.13; 95% CI, 0.93–1.36). In the single-institution analysis (n = 119), 2-year OS probabilities were 90%, 80%, and 95%, and 2-year BMFS probabilities were 72.7%, 80%, and 95.7%, in the dIT, anti-CTLA4, and anti-PD1 cohorts, respectively. DIT and anti-PD1 showed improved early-phase protection against MBM development. The number of metastatic sites was significantly associated with MBM development (HR = 2.36; 95% CI, 1.22–4.58; P = 0.01). Conclusions: These findings highlight dIT’s potential role in primary prophylaxis against MBM, with anti-PD1 as the likely workhorse agent. Prospective studies are warranted.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105012884399
UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=105012884399&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-24-2681
DO - 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-24-2681
M3 - Article
C2 - 40455960
AN - SCOPUS:105012884399
SN - 1078-0432
VL - 31
SP - 3276
EP - 3284
JO - Clinical Cancer Research
JF - Clinical Cancer Research
IS - 15
ER -