Advertisement

Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy

, Volume 68, Issue 7, pp 1187–1194 | Cite as

Combination of denosumab and immune checkpoint inhibition: experience in 29 patients with metastatic melanoma and bone metastases

  • Yenny AngelaEmail author
  • Sebastian Haferkamp
  • Carsten Weishaupt
  • Selma Ugurel
  • Jürgen C. Becker
  • Florian Oberndörfer
  • Vesna Alar
  • Imke Satzger
  • Ralf Gutzmer
Original Article

Abstract

Background

PD-1 inhibition (PD-1i) is the standard of care in melanoma and other malignancies. In patients with bone metastases of solid tumors, the monoclonal antibody denosumab directed against RANKL is approved for the prevention of skeletal-related events. However, RANKL is not only relevant in osteoclastogenesis, but also has immunological effects. Hence, we aimed at investigating, whether the combination of PD-1i and denosumab produces synergistic effects in metastatic melanoma treatment.

Methods

We retrospectively collected and analyzed clinical data of metastatic melanoma patients with bone metastases, who received PD-1i and denosumab therapy.

Results

29 patients were identified with a median age of 60.7 years: 20 were male and 9 were female. 20 patients (69%) were in stage IV M1c and 9 (31%) in stage IV M1d; 52% had an increased serum LDH. 24 patients (83%) received PD-1i as first-line therapy and five patients (17%) as second- or third-line therapy. 13 patients received the triple combination nivolumab, ipilimumab and denosumab (N + I+D), 16 patients received PD-1i and denosumab (PD-1i + D). Within a median follow-up time of 19.8 months, 17 patients progressed with a median time to progression of 6 months. The objective response rate was 54% in the N + I + D group and 50% in the PD-1i + D group. Recalcification of bone metastases was radiologically observed in 18 (62%) patients. No unexpected treatment-related adverse events emerged.

Conclusions

The combination therapy of metastatic melanoma with PD-1i and denosumab was feasible without unexpected safety issues and showed a promising efficacy signal. Further investigation in prospective studies is needed.

Keywords

Melanoma Immunotherapy RANK/RANKL Bone metastasis Adverse events 

Abbreviations

AEs

Adverse events

AJCC

American Joint Committee on Cancer

CR

Complete response

CTCAE

Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events

CTLA4

Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4

EMA

European Medicines Agency

FDA

Food and Drug Administration

ICB

Immune checkpoint blockade

LDH

Lactate dehydrogenase

N

Number

N + I+D

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab plus denosumab

NR

Not reached

ORR

Objective rate response

PD

Progressive disease

PD-1i

Programmed cell death protein1 inhibitor/inhibitors

PD-1i + D

PD1 inhibitor plus denosumab

PR

Partial response

RANK

Receptor activator of NF-kB

RANKL

Receptor activator of NF-kB ligand

RECIST

Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors

SD

Stable disease

SmPC

Summary of product characteristics

SREs

Skeletal-related events

Notes

Author contributions

Authors whose names appear on this paper have contributed sufficiently to the scientific work and, therefore, share collective responsibility and accountability for the results. YA and RG planned the project. All authors contributed to the data collection. YA and RG contributed to the interpretation of the results. YA took the lead in writing the manuscript. All authors provided critical feedback and helped to shape the manuscript.

Funding

No specific funding was received for this study.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethics approval

This is a retrospective multicenter study initiated by the German Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group (DeCOG). Human participants (melanoma patients) were involved but only by the retrospective chart review. Ethics approval for the retrospective data collection and anonymous analysis without informed consent of the patients was obtained from the Ethics committee of Hannover Medical School (vote number 1612). This vote states that there are no ethical concerns with regard to the anonymous retrospective analysis of routine clinical care data from own patients and that there is no general need to notify the ethics committee on such studies. The patient who is shown in Fig. 2 provided written informed consent for the use of his CT scans within this publication.

Conflict of interest

Ralf Gutzmer served as speaker to Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Novartis, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Almirall-Hermal, Amgen, Merck Serono, Pierre Fabre, SUN Pharma and received research grants from Novartis, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson. He served as consultant to Roche Pharma, BMS, Novartis, MSD, Almirall-Hermal, LEO-Pharma, Amgen, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Roche Posay, Merck Serono, Regeneron, SUN Pharma and Incyte. Selma Ugurel received research support from BMS, medac, and Merck Serono and serves as speaker/consultant to BMS, MSD, Merck Serono, and Roche, and received travel grants from BMS, Medac, and MSD. Jürgen C. Becker received speaker fees from Amgen, MerckSerono, and Pfizer, advisory board honoraria from Amgen, CureVac, eTheRNA, Lytix, MerckSerono, Novartis, Rigontec, and Takeda as well as research grants from Alcedis, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS and Merck Serono. He also received travel fees from 4SC and Incyte. Carsten Weishaupt served as speaker to Amgen, BMS, Curevac, La Roche Posay, Leo Pharma, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Takeda, TEVA. All other authors declared that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Petrella TM, Robert C, Richtig E, Miller WH, Masucci GV, Lebbe C, Steven N, Middleton MR, Hille D, Zhou W, Ibrahim N, Cebon J (2017) Patient-reported outcomes in KEYNOTE-006, a randomised study of pembrolizumab versus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma. Eur J Cancer 86:115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Robert C, Long GV, Brady B, Dutriaux C, Maio M, Mortier L, Hassel JC, Rutkowski P, McNeil C, Kalinka-Warzocha E, Savage KJ, Hernberg MM, Lebbé C, Charles J, Mihalcioiu C, Chiarion-Sileni V, Mauch C, Cognetti F, Arance A, Schmidt H, Schadendorf D, Gogas H, Lundgren-Eriksson L, Horak C, Sharkey B, Waxman IM, Atkinson V, Ascierto PA (2015) Nivolumab in previously untreated melanoma without BRAF mutation. N Engl J Med 372:320–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wolchok JD, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, Rutkowski P, Grob JJ, Cowey CL, Lao CD, Wagstaff J, Schadendorf D, Ferrucci PF, Smylie M, Dummer R, Hill A, Hogg D, Haanen J, Carlino MS, Bechter O, Maio M, Marquez-Rodas I, Guidoboni M, McArthur G, Lebbé C, Ascierto PA, Long GV, Cebon J, Sosman J, Postow MA, Callahan MK, Walker D, Rollin L, Bhore R, Hodi FS, Larkin J (2017) Overall survival with combined nivolumab and ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N Engl J Med 377:1345–1356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tas F (2012) Metastatic behavior in melanoma: timing, pattern, survival, and influencing factors. J Oncol 2012:647684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Saad F, Lipton A, Cook R, Chen YM, Smith M, Coleman R (2007) Pathologic fractures correlate with reduced survival in patients with malignant bone disease. Cancer 110:1860–1867 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    de Groot AF, Appelman-Dijkstra NM, van der Burg SH, Kroep JR (2018) The anti-tumor effect of RANKL inhibition in malignant solid tumors—a systematic review. Cancer Treat Rev 62:18–28 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jones DH, Nakashima T, Sanchez OH, Kozieradzki I, Komarova SV, Sarosi I, Morony S, Rubin E, Sarao R, Hojilla CV, Komnenovic V, Kong YY, Schreiber M, Dixon SJ, Sims SM, Khokha R, Wada T, Penninger JM (2006) Regulation of cancer cell migration and bone metastasis by RANKL. Nature 440:692–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tan W, Zhang W, Strasner A, Grivennikov S, Cheng JQ, Hoffman RM, Karin M (2011) Tumour-infiltrating regulatory T cells stimulate mammary cancer metastasis through RANKL-RANK signalling. Nature 470:548–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smyth MJ, Yagita H, McArthur GA (2016) Combination Anti-CTLA-4 and Anti-RANKL in metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol 34:e104–e106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ahern E, Harjunpää H, Barkauskas D, Allen S, Takeda K, Yagita H, Wyld D, Dougall WC, Teng MWL, Smyth MJ (2017) Co-administration of RANKL and CTLA4 antibodies enhances lymphocyte-mediated antitumor immunity in mice. Clin Cancer Res 23:5789–5801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ahern E, Harjunpää H, O’Donnell JS, Allen S, Dougall WC, Teng MWL, Smyth MJ (2018) RANKL blockade improves efficacy of PD1-PD-L1 blockade or dual PD1-PD-L1 and CTLA4 blockade in mouse models of cancer. Oncoimmunology 7:e1431088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gershenwald JE, Scolyer RA, Hess KR, Sondak VK, Long GV, Ross MI, Lazar AJ, Faries MB, Kirkwood JM, McArthur GA, Haydu LE, Eggermont A, Flaherty KT, Balch CM, Thompson JF, for members of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Melanoma Expert Panel and the International Melanoma Database and Discovery Platform (2017) Melanoma staging: evidence-based changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin 67:472–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, Dancey J, Arbuck S, Gwyther S, Mooney M, Rubinstein L, Shankar L, Dodd L, Kaplan R, Lacombe D, Verweij J (2008) New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45:228–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pflugfelder A, Kochs C, Blum A, Capellaro M, Czeschik C, Dettenborn T, Dill D, Dippel E, Eigentler T, Feyer P, Follmann M, Frerich B, Ganten MK, Gärtner J, Gutzmer R, Hassel J, Hauschild A, Hohenberger P, Hübner J, Kaatz M, Kleeberg UR, Kölbl O, Kortmann RD, Krause-Bergmann A, Kurschat P, Leiter U, Link H, Loquai C, Löser C, Mackensen A, Meier F, Mohr P, Möhrle M, Nashan D, Reske S, Rose C, Sander C, Satzger I, Schiller M, Schlemmer HP, Strittmatter G, Sunderkötter C, Swoboda L, Trefzer U, Voltz R, Vordermark D, Weichenthal M, Werner A, Wesselmann S, Weyergraf AJ, Wick W, Garbe C, Schadendorf D, German Dermatological Society; DermatologicCooperative Oncology Group (2013) Malignant melanoma S3-guideline “diagnosis, therapy and follow-up of melanoma”. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 6:1–116Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    US Department of Health and Human Services; National Institutes of Health; National Cancer Institute. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). Version 4.0. Available at: https://evs.nci.nihgov/ftp1/CTCAE/CTCAE_4.03_2010-06-14_QuickReference_8.5x11.pdf. Accessed June 27, 2017
  16. 16.
    Long GV, Schachter J, Ribas A, Arance AM, Grob JJ, Mortier L, Daud A, Carlino MS, McNeil CM, Lotem M, Larkin JMG, Lorigan P, Neyns B, Blank CU, Petrella TM, Hamid O, Anderson J, Krepler C, Ibrahim N, Robert C (2018) 4-year survival and outcomes after cessation of pembrolizumab (pembro) after 2-years in patients (pts) with ipilimumab (ipi)-naive advanced melanoma in KEYNOTE-006. J Clin Oncol 36:9503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Khan AA, Morrison A, Hanley DA, Felsenberg D, McCauley LK, O’Ryan F, Reid IR, Ruggiero SL, Taguchi A, Tetradis S, Watts NB, Brandi ML, Peters E, Guise T, Eastell R, Cheung AM, Morin SN, Masri B, Cooper C, Morgan SL, Obermayer-Pietsch B, Langdahl BL, Al Dabagh R, Davison KS, Kendler DL, Sándor GK, Josse RG, Bhandari M, El Rabbany M, Pierroz DD, Sulimani R, Saunders DP, Brown JP, Compston J (2015) International task force on osteonecrosis of the Jaw. J Bone Miner Res 30:3–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hodi FS, Chiarion-Sileni V, Gonzalez R, Grob JJ, Rutkowski P, Cowey CL, Lao CD, Schadendorf D, Wagstaff J, Dummer R, Ferrucci PF, Smylie M, Hill A, Hogg D, Marquez-Rodas I, Jiang J, Rizzo J, Larkin J, Wolchok JD (2018) Nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone versus ipilimumab alone in advanced melanoma (CheckMate 067): 4-year outcomes of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 19:1480–1492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liede A, Hernandez RK, Wade SW, Bo R, Nussbaum NC, Ahern E, Dougall WC, Smyth MJ (2018) An observational study of concomitant immunotherapies and denosumab in patients with advanced melanoma or lung cancer. Oncoimmunology 7:e1480301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Afzal MZ, Shirai K (2018) Immune checkpoint inhibitor (anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1) therapy alone versus immune checkpoint inhibitor (anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1) therapy in combination with anti-RANKL denosumab in malignant melanoma: a retrospective analysis at a tertiary care center. Melanoma Res 28:341–347Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kupas V, Weishaupt C, Siepmann D, Kaserer ML, Eickelmann M, Metze D, Luger TA, Beissert S, Loser K (2011) RANK is expressed in metastatic melanoma and highly upregulated on melanoma-initiating cells. J Invest Dermatol 131:944–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Spranger S, Spaapen RM, Zha Y, Williams J, Meng Y, Ha TT, Gajewski TF (2013) Up-regulation of PD-L1, IDO, and tregs in the melanoma tumor microenvironment is driven by CD8 + T Cells. Sci Transl Med 5:200ra116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sugiyama D, Nishikawa H, Maeda Y, Nishioka M, Tanemura A, Katayama I, Ezoe S, Kanakura Y, Sato E, Fukumori Y, Karbach J, Jäger E, Sakaguchi S (2013) Anti-CCR25 mAb selectively depletes effector-type FoxP3 + CD4 + regulatory T cells, evoking antitumor immune responses in humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110:17945–17950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Walker LS (2013) Treg and CTLA-4: two intertwining pathways to immune tolerance. J Autoimmun 45:49–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ahern E, Smyth MJ, Dougall WC, Teng MWL (2018) Roles of the RANKL-RANK axis in antitumour immunity—implications for therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 15:676–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Anderson DM, Maraskovsky E, Billingsley WL, Dougall WC, Tometsko ME, Roux ER, Teepe MC, DuBose RF, Cosman D, Galibert L (1997) A homologue of the TNF receptor and its ligand enhance T-cell growth and dendritic-cell function. Nature 390:175–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Santini D, Perrone G, Roato I, Godio L, Pantano F, Grasso D, Russo A, Vincenzi B, Fratto ME, Sabbatini R et al (2011) Expression pattern of receptor activator of NFkB (RANK) in a series of primary solid tumors and related metastases. J Cell Physiol 226:780–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Standal T, Seidel C, Hjertner Ø, Plesner T, Sanderson RD, Waage A, Borset M, Sundan A (2002) Osteoprotegerin is bound, internalized, and degraded by multiple myeloma cells. Blood 100:3002–3007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jacobs JF, Nierkens S, Figdor CG, de Vries IJ, Adema GJ (2012) Regulatory T cells in melanoma: the final hurdle to-wards effective immunotherapy? Lancet Oncol 13:e32–e42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bakhru P, Zhu ML, Wang HH, Hong LK, Khan I, Mouchess M, Gulati AS, Starmer J, Hou Y, Sailer D, Lee S, Zhao F, Kirkwood JM, Moschos S, Fong L, Anderson MS, Su MA (2017) Combination central tolerance and peripheral checkpoint blockade unleashes antimelanoma immunity. JCI Insight 2(18):93265CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Skin Cancer Center HannoverMedizinische Hochschule HannoverHannoverGermany
  2. 2.Department of DermatologyUniversity of RegensburgRegensburgGermany
  3. 3.Department of DermatologyUniversity of MünsterMünsterGermany
  4. 4.Department of DermatologyUniversity of Duisburg-EssenEssenGermany
  5. 5.Translational Skin Cancer Research (TSCR), German Cancer Consortium (DKTK)Essen/DüsseldorfGermany

Personalised recommendations