Georgina V. Long, Inês Pires da Silva, Kristen A. Perry, Jurriaan Romano, Serigne N. Lo, Piyush Grover, Paolo A. Ascierto, Rodabe N. Amaria, Tina J. Hieken, Caroline Robert, Lucie Heinzerling, Shahneen Sandhu, Milton Barros, Tara C. Mitchell, Zeynep Eroglu, Igor V. Samoylenko, Lukas Flatz, Céleste Lebbé, Douglas B. Johnson, Piotr Rutkowski, Eva Muñoz-Couselo, Omid Hamid, Claudia Trojaniello, Domenico Mallardo, Matthew S. Block, Naima Hammoudi, Naima Benannoune, Dirk Tomsitz, Yang Wang, Cigdem Dinckal, Angelina Kuzmenko, Andrea Forschner, Matteo S. Carlino, Mathilde Jalving, Michael A. Postow, P. Francesco Ferrucci, Ellen Kapiteijn, Astrid A. M. van der Veldt, Karijn P. M. Suijkerbuijk, Laetitia da Meda, Hannah Burnette, Anna Czarnekca, Inderjit Mehmi, Geke Hospers, Sarah Lochrin, Alexander C. J. van Akkooi, Hussein A. Tawbi
{"title":"Five-year survival with neoadjuvant therapy in melanoma: updated pooled analysis from the International Neoadjuvant Melanoma Consortium (INMC)","authors":"Georgina V. Long, Inês Pires da Silva, Kristen A. Perry, Jurriaan Romano, Serigne N. Lo, Piyush Grover, Paolo A. Ascierto, Rodabe N. Amaria, Tina J. Hieken, Caroline Robert, Lucie Heinzerling, Shahneen Sandhu, Milton Barros, Tara C. Mitchell, Zeynep Eroglu, Igor V. Samoylenko, Lukas Flatz, Céleste Lebbé, Douglas B. Johnson, Piotr Rutkowski, Eva Muñoz-Couselo, Omid Hamid, Claudia Trojaniello, Domenico Mallardo, Matthew S. Block, Naima Hammoudi, Naima Benannoune, Dirk Tomsitz, Yang Wang, Cigdem Dinckal, Angelina Kuzmenko, Andrea Forschner, Matteo S. Carlino, Mathilde Jalving, Michael A. Postow, P. Francesco Ferrucci, Ellen Kapiteijn, Astrid A. M. van der Veldt, Karijn P. M. Suijkerbuijk, Laetitia da Meda, Hannah Burnette, Anna Czarnekca, Inderjit Mehmi, Geke Hospers, Sarah Lochrin, Alexander C. J. van Akkooi, Hussein A. Tawbi","doi":"10.1038/s41591-026-04677-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard of care for resectable stage IIIB–D melanoma, but knowledge gaps remain regarding optimal treatment type, long-term survival, postsurgical management and clinical, histopathological or molecular subgroups. We analyzed 1,038 patients treated with neoadjuvant ICIs (n = 735), BRAF and MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKis; n = 119) or ICI plus any targeted therapy (ICI + TT; n = 184) from 26 international sites in both trial (755, 72.7%) and nontrial (283, 27.3%) settings. ICI regimens included anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) alone (PD-1 alone; n = 242) and anti-PD-1 plus other immuno-oncology agent(s) (PD-1 + IO; n = 489). Outcomes included major pathological response (MPR), recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). An MPR was achieved in 57.8% of patients with ICIs, 51.4% with BRAF/MEKis and 44.6% with ICI + TT. PD-1 + IO elicited higher MPR rates than PD-1 alone (61.4% versus 49.5%). The 5-year RFS rate was 61.0% with PD-1 alone, 73.9% with PD-1 + IO, 37.4% with BRAF/MEKis and 76.4% with ICI + TT; the 5-year OS rates were 83.3%, 87.5%, 69.8% and 83.9%, respectively. ICI-treated patients with MPR had 5-year OS rates of 98.8% with PD-1 alone and 97.9% with PD-1 + IO and gained no benefit from continuing ICIs into the adjuvant setting. Neoadjuvant ICIs were active in BRAF-mutant melanoma (MPR, 46.3%), acral melanoma (38.1%), in-transit metastases (66.7%) and oligometastases (41.2%), although subgroup sizes and relative effectiveness varied. Survival outcomes were excellent with neoadjuvant ICIs, particularly in patients achieving MPR, but poor with BRAF/MEKis and mixed with ICI + TT. Predictive biomarker-driven trials, effective adjuvant strategies and subgroup-specific research are needed for nonresponders.","PeriodicalId":19037,"journal":{"name":"Nature Medicine","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":52.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-026-04677-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Neoadjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are standard of care for resectable stage IIIB–D melanoma, but knowledge gaps remain regarding optimal treatment type, long-term survival, postsurgical management and clinical, histopathological or molecular subgroups. We analyzed 1,038 patients treated with neoadjuvant ICIs (n = 735), BRAF and MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKis; n = 119) or ICI plus any targeted therapy (ICI + TT; n = 184) from 26 international sites in both trial (755, 72.7%) and nontrial (283, 27.3%) settings. ICI regimens included anti-programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) alone (PD-1 alone; n = 242) and anti-PD-1 plus other immuno-oncology agent(s) (PD-1 + IO; n = 489). Outcomes included major pathological response (MPR), recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). An MPR was achieved in 57.8% of patients with ICIs, 51.4% with BRAF/MEKis and 44.6% with ICI + TT. PD-1 + IO elicited higher MPR rates than PD-1 alone (61.4% versus 49.5%). The 5-year RFS rate was 61.0% with PD-1 alone, 73.9% with PD-1 + IO, 37.4% with BRAF/MEKis and 76.4% with ICI + TT; the 5-year OS rates were 83.3%, 87.5%, 69.8% and 83.9%, respectively. ICI-treated patients with MPR had 5-year OS rates of 98.8% with PD-1 alone and 97.9% with PD-1 + IO and gained no benefit from continuing ICIs into the adjuvant setting. Neoadjuvant ICIs were active in BRAF-mutant melanoma (MPR, 46.3%), acral melanoma (38.1%), in-transit metastases (66.7%) and oligometastases (41.2%), although subgroup sizes and relative effectiveness varied. Survival outcomes were excellent with neoadjuvant ICIs, particularly in patients achieving MPR, but poor with BRAF/MEKis and mixed with ICI + TT. Predictive biomarker-driven trials, effective adjuvant strategies and subgroup-specific research are needed for nonresponders.
期刊介绍:
Nature Medicine is a monthly journal publishing original peer-reviewed research in all areas of medicine. The publication focuses on originality, timeliness, interdisciplinary interest, and the impact on improving human health. In addition to research articles, Nature Medicine also publishes commissioned content such as News, Reviews, and Perspectives. This content aims to provide context for the latest advances in translational and clinical research, reaching a wide audience of M.D. and Ph.D. readers. All editorial decisions for the journal are made by a team of full-time professional editors.
Nature Medicine consider all types of clinical research, including:
-Case-reports and small case series
-Clinical trials, whether phase 1, 2, 3 or 4
-Observational studies
-Meta-analyses
-Biomarker studies
-Public and global health studies
Nature Medicine is also committed to facilitating communication between translational and clinical researchers. As such, we consider “hybrid” studies with preclinical and translational findings reported alongside data from clinical studies.