Markus Reitmajer, Lena Nanz, Nina Müller, Ulrike Leiter, Teresa Amaral, Valentin Aebischer, Lukas Flatz, Andrea Forschner
{"title":"Comparative real-world outcomes of stage III melanoma patients treated with talimogene laherparepvec or interleukin 2.","authors":"Markus Reitmajer, Lena Nanz, Nina Müller, Ulrike Leiter, Teresa Amaral, Valentin Aebischer, Lukas Flatz, Andrea Forschner","doi":"10.1177/17588359251324035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) and interleukin-2 (IL-2) are both used in the intralesional treatment of melanoma skin metastases. T-VEC received regulatory approval from the European Medicines Agency and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2015, while IL-2 has been used off-label for this purpose for many years. Despite their use in clinical practice, there is a lack of comparative data on the efficacy and safety of these treatments.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of intralesional T-VEC and IL-2 in non-resectable stage III patients with melanoma treated at a single center between January 2016 and September 2024.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified eligible patients using the Central Malignant Melanoma Registry and the local University Hospital Pharmacy database. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated. Furthermore, best response rates and occurrence of adverse events (AEs) were compared between the T-VEC and the IL-2 group. Concomitant systemic treatment was allowed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 62 patients were included, with 37 receiving T-VEC and 25 receiving IL-2 as first-line therapy. Ten patients received both therapies subsequently. The median PFS for the cohort was 5.0 months, and the median OS was 34.0 months. No significant differences in PFS (<i>p</i> = 0.790), OS (<i>p</i> = 0.894), or best response rates (<i>p</i> = 0.468) were found between groups. Common AEs included local injection site reactions and fever, with no severe events leading to discontinuation by a physician.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No significant differences in PFS, OS, or best response rates were observed between IL-2 and T-VEC treatments. The choice of therapy may be influenced by factors such as availability, physician preference, and patient-specific considerations.</p>","PeriodicalId":23053,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology","volume":"17 ","pages":"17588359251324035"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11960150/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17588359251324035","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) and interleukin-2 (IL-2) are both used in the intralesional treatment of melanoma skin metastases. T-VEC received regulatory approval from the European Medicines Agency and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2015, while IL-2 has been used off-label for this purpose for many years. Despite their use in clinical practice, there is a lack of comparative data on the efficacy and safety of these treatments.
Objectives: This retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of intralesional T-VEC and IL-2 in non-resectable stage III patients with melanoma treated at a single center between January 2016 and September 2024.
Methods: We identified eligible patients using the Central Malignant Melanoma Registry and the local University Hospital Pharmacy database. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated. Furthermore, best response rates and occurrence of adverse events (AEs) were compared between the T-VEC and the IL-2 group. Concomitant systemic treatment was allowed.
Results: A total of 62 patients were included, with 37 receiving T-VEC and 25 receiving IL-2 as first-line therapy. Ten patients received both therapies subsequently. The median PFS for the cohort was 5.0 months, and the median OS was 34.0 months. No significant differences in PFS (p = 0.790), OS (p = 0.894), or best response rates (p = 0.468) were found between groups. Common AEs included local injection site reactions and fever, with no severe events leading to discontinuation by a physician.
Conclusion: No significant differences in PFS, OS, or best response rates were observed between IL-2 and T-VEC treatments. The choice of therapy may be influenced by factors such as availability, physician preference, and patient-specific considerations.
期刊介绍:
Therapeutic Advances in Medical Oncology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal delivering the highest quality articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies in the medical treatment of cancer. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at clinicians and researchers in medical oncology, providing a forum in print and online for publishing the highest quality articles in this area. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).