Response to the Rechallenge With Talimogene Laherparepvec (T-VEC) After Ipilimumab/Nivolumab Treatment in Patient With Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma Who Initially Had a Progression on T-VEC With Pembrolizumab. Issue 4 (May 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Afzal, Muhammad Z.; Shirai, Keisuke
• Is Part Of: Journal of immunotherapy. Volume 42:Issue 4(2019:May)
• Publication Date: 2019-05
• Subjects: malignant melanoma -- Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) therapy -- T-VEC rechallenge -- immune modulation; Immunotherapy -- Periodicals; Immunotherapy -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- therapy -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; Electronic journals; 615.37
• DOI: 10.1097/CJI.0000000000000265
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1524-9557

Abstract

Abstract : Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is approved for unresected stage III–IV malignant melanoma. T-VEC has a direct cytotoxic effect and enhances the antitumor immunity of host cells. Immune checkpoints inhibitors also enhance the immunity of host cells by increasing the recruitment of antigen-presenting cells or activation and restoration of T-cell functions. Both type of therapies can potentiate the effect of the other therapy. We are reporting a case of T-VEC rechallenge who initially progressed on T-VEC with pembrolizumab but then responded to T-VEC rechallenge after intervening ipilimumab/nivolumab. An 83-year-old man developed a subungual lesion of the left thumb and found to have AJCC V. 7 stage IIIb melanoma. Few months later, he developed axillary lymphadenopathy and multiple subcutaneous nodules (AJCC V. 7 stage IIIc). The patient was started on intralesional rose Bengal and pembrolizumab. After 4 cycles of pembrolizumab with rose Bengal, a positron-emission tomography/computerized tomography scan showed the progression of disease. He was started on T-VEC intralesional injections with concurrent pembrolizumab, however, after 3 T-VEC injections and 2 more cycles of pembrolizumab, there was the progression of disease. Subsequently, ipilimumab/nivolumab was started and patient responded partially. Ipilimumab/nivolumab was held due to toxicity. Eight weeks from the last dose of ipilimumab/nivolumab, he experienced locoregional progression and was rechallenged with T-VEC monotherapy. The patient showed a significant response after second T-VEC injection and continued to show response 6 months since rechallenge. After, initial progression on T-VEC with pembrolizumab, intervening immune checkpoints inhibitors may favorably modify the antitumor immunity and potentiate antitumor effect of T-VEC rechallenge.