Isolated limb perfusion for locally advanced melanoma in the immunotherapy era. Issue 6 (June 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Davies, E.J.; Reijers, S.J.M.; Van Akkooi, A.C.J.; Van Houdt, W.J.; Hayes, A.J.
• Is Part Of: European journal of surgical oncology. Volume 48:Issue 6(2022)
• Page Start: 1288
• Page End: 1292
• Publication Date: 2022-06
• Subjects: Melanoma -- Immuno-therapy -- Isolated limb perfusion -- Response; Oncology -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Medical Oncology -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- surgery -- Periodicals; Cancer -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Cancérologie -- Périodiques; Oncologie; Chirurgie (geneeskunde); Electronic journals; Electronic journals -- Sciences; Electronic journals -- Medicine; Electronic journals; 616.994059005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2022.01.027
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0748-7983

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Prior to the advent of effective systemic therapy for melanoma, isolated limb perfusion (ILP) was the most effective local treatment for advanced in-transit melanoma (ITM). However, many patients who are now treated by ILP will have received prior immunotherapy. We sought to compare response rates to ILP in patients who had previously received immunotherapy compared to immunotherapy naive patients. Materials and methods: All patients who underwent ILP for ITM between January 2015 and July 2020 for melanoma were identified retrospectively from two tertiary institutions. Surgical morbidity and oncologic outcomes were compared between immunotherapy naive and immunotherapy pre-treated patients. Results: 97 perfusions were performed for melanoma. Of those, 18 patients had undergone prior immunotherapy. There were no differences in clinicopathological characteristics or perioperative outcomes between cohorts. Surgical morbidity and local toxicity were similar between both cohorts. Patients who underwent immunotherapy prior to ILP had significantly decreased complete response (CR) rates compared with immunotherapy-naïve (6% vs 47%, p = 0.0018) and a significantly decreased overall survival (OS) and distant progression free survival (DPFS) (p = 0.0031 and p = 0.0006 respectively). There was no difference in overall response (OR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), progressive disease (PD) and local progression free survival (LPFS) between cohorts. Conclusion: Oncological outcomes and complete response rates are worse in patients who have received immunotherapy prior to ILP compared with immunotherapy naïve patients. Despite this, ILP is still a valuable second line treatment for local control in patients who have multiple, bulky and/or recurrent ITM post immunotherapy.