SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • melanoma;
  • brain metastases;
  • leptomeningeal disease;
  • prognostic factor

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES
  7. REFERENCES

BACKGROUND:

One of the most common and deadly complications of melanoma is brain metastases. The outcomes of advanced melanoma patients who developed brain metastases were reviewed to identify significant prognostic factors for overall survival (OS).

METHODS:

An institutional database of advanced melanoma patients enrolled on clinical trials in the Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology from 1986 to 2004 was reviewed and patients who developed brain metastases were identified. Date of diagnosis, patient age, pattern of brain involvement, timing relative to extracranial metastases, prior response to systemic therapy, and treatments given for brain metastases were assessed as potential prognostic factors for OS.

RESULTS:

Among 743 melanoma patients enrolled in clinical trials for regional or systemic metastatic disease, 330 (44%) patients developed brain metastases. The median OS after the diagnosis of brain metastases was 4.7 months. Diagnosis before 1996, increased number of parenchymal brain metastases, leptomeningeal involvement, and development of brain metastases after receiving systemic therapy for extracranial metastases were found to be significant prognostic factors for OS. Among patients who received systemic therapy as the initial treatment of brain metastases, patients who previously responded to systemic therapies had longer survival than patients who had not responded.

CONCLUSIONS:

The era, pattern, and timing of melanoma brain metastases were found to be strongly associated with survival. Previous responsiveness to systemic therapies did not predict better outcomes overall, but it did correlate with improved survival for patients with brain metastases who were treated with systemic therapies. These factors may be used in guiding patient management and for stratifying patients in clinical trials. Cancer 2011. © 2010 American Cancer Society.

Melanoma is the most aggressive form of skin cancer. An estimated 68,720 Americans were diagnosed with melanoma, and 8650 died from the disease, in 2009.1 One of the most common and serious complications of melanoma is the development of central nervous system (CNS) involvement. Melanoma is the third most common diagnosis among patients with brain metastases, after lung and breast cancer.2 Up to 75% of patients with metastatic melanoma develop brain metastases during the course of their disease.3 The development of brain metastases is associated with a very poor prognosis, with a median overall survival (OS) of approximately 4 months reported in several studies.4-6 The significance of this problem is underscored by the finding that up to 54% of all deaths in melanoma patients are attributed to the presence of symptomatic brain metastases.7

Despite these poor outcomes, approximately 5% of patients with melanoma brain metastases are long-term survivors. The identification of factors that can predict outcomes may benefit the clinical management of these patients. In addition, prognostic factors may be useful in the design and interpretation of therapeutic trials for patients with melanoma brain metastases. We reviewed the clinical features and outcomes of patients who were enrolled in clinical trials in the Melanoma Medical Oncology department at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center (UT-MDACC) in Houston, Texas who developed brain metastases during the course of their disease to identify prognostic factors for OS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES
  7. REFERENCES

Patients

Under an Institutional Review Board-approved protocol, we performed a retrospective chart review of chemotherapy-naive melanoma patients who were enrolled in clinical trials in the Department of Melanoma Medical Oncology at the UT-MDACC from 1986 through 2004. As part of the trial protocols, patients underwent evaluation of the brain by computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) throughout their treatment course and as part of their follow-up. We identified those patients who had brain metastases at any time during their disease course. For these patients, we reviewed primary tumor characteristics, timing and patterns of brain metastases, therapies received, and OS.

Statistical Analysis

For statistical analysis, we used the methods of Kaplan and Meier8 to estimate the median OS. For the analysis of OS, death was the only event. Patients who were lost to follow-up or who were alive at the time of last follow-up were censored at the date of their last follow-up. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to test the statistical significance of several potential prognostic factors for OS. This modeling was performed in univariate fashion. Dummy variables were created to represent those variables that have >2 levels. From this model, we estimated the hazard ratio (HR) for each prognostic factor with a 95% confidence interval. Multivariate analysis was performed on those factors that had a univariate P value of <.05.

RESULTS

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES
  7. REFERENCES

The records of 743 chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced melanoma who were enrolled on 12 clinical trials were identified and reviewed.9-20 These included 2 trials of neoadjuvant therapy for regional metastases, 1 trial of adjuvant therapy, and 9 trials for metastatic melanoma. We identified 330 (44%) patients who developed brain metastases at some point during the course of their disease. The characteristics of the primary tumors of these patients are summarized in Table 1. The majority of the patients had a cutaneous melanoma, and the most common primary tumor site was the trunk/abdomen (43%). The median Breslow thickness of the 216 cases with available information was 2.4 mm. Although greater than half of the assessable primary tumors measured >2 mm in depth, 18% of patients who developed brain metastases had primary tumors that measured <1 mm deep.

Table 1. Primary Tumor Characteristics of Melanoma Patients With CNS Involvement
Primary Tumor CharacteristicNo. of Patients/ No. of Patients Evaluable%
  1. CNS indicates central nervous system.

Primary tumor site
 Head or neck60/33018.2
 Trunk/abdomen143/33043.3
 Limbs64/33019.4
 Ocular2/3300.6
 Unknown61/33018.5
Breslow thickness, mm
 Median2.4 
 <139/21618.0
 1.0-256/21626.0
Clark level
 MedianIV 
 I0/1800
 II14/1807.8
 III70/18038.9
 IV96/18053.3

The median survival from the time of diagnosis of melanoma brain metastases was 4.65 months (Fig. 1A). To determine whether outcomes after the diagnosis of brain metastases had changed significantly over time, we compared survival among patients diagnosed before and after the midpoint of the inclusion dates for this patient cohort (January 1, 1996) (Fig. 1B). Patients diagnosed after this date (n = 123) had slightly longer survival compared with patients diagnosed before that date (n = 207) (median OS, 5.92 months vs 4.14 months; HR, 0.75 [P = .01]) (Table 2). Survival after a diagnosis of brain metastases did not appear to differ significantly between patients diagnosed after the age of 65 years (n = 27) compared with those diagnosed at age ≤65 years (n = 303) (HR, 1.01; P = .97) (Table 2).5

thumbnail image

Figure 1. Overall survival is shown after the diagnosis of melanoma brain metastases. (A) Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival after the diagnosis of melanoma brain metastases is shown for all patients. (B) Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival is shown for patients diagnosed with melanoma brain metastases before January 1, 1996 (solid line; n = 207) versus those diagnosed on or after January 1, 1996 (dotted line; n = 123) (P = .01 by the log-rank test). This date was selected because it was the midpoint of the inclusion dates for this patient cohort.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Table 2. Factors Associated With Overall Survival: Univariate Model
VariableNo. of Patients (Deaths)Median Survival, MonthsUnivariate PHR95% CI for HR
  • HR indicates hazard ratio; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; mets, metastases; LMD, leptomeningeal disease.

  • a

    Univariate Cox model comparing LMD only versus >3 mets: P = .03; HR, 2.02; 95% CI for HR, 1.08–3.76.

Brain mets diagnosis date
 Before 01/01/1996207 (206)4.141.00
 After 01/01/1996123 (118)5.92.010.750.60–0.94
Age at diagnosis of brain mets, y
 ≤65303 (298)4.701.00
 >6527 (26)4.41.971.010.67–1.50
No. of brain mets
 1-3199 (194)5.921.00
 >3118 (117)3.52.00011.571.25–1.98
 LMD onlya11 (11)1.22.00023.171.72–5.85
LMD
 LMD absent306 (300)4.871.00
 LMD present24 (24)1.78.00042.121.40–3.23
Timing vs extracranial mets
 Before/at extracranial mets83 (81)7.931.00
 After extracranial mets247 (243)3.72<.00011.781.38–2.30
Response to prior systemic therapy
 Responders139 (138)5.361.00
 Nonresponders168 (166)4.13.191.160.93–1.46

We examined the pattern of brain involvement in these patients and its impact on patient outcomes. Patients with 1 to 3 parenchymal brain metastases (n = 199) had a median OS of 5.92 months from the time of diagnosis of brain involvement. This was significantly longer that patients with >3 parenchymal brain metastases (n = 118), who had a median OS of 3.52 months (HR, 1.57; P = .0001) (Fig. 2A) (Table 2). Even worse outcomes were observed in patients with leptomeningeal involvement (LMD). Patients with LMD only (n = 11) were found to have a median OS of 1.22 months, which was shorter than that for patients with 1 to 3 (HR, 3.17; P = .0002) or >3 (HR, 2.02; P = .03) parenchymal brain metastases. Overall, patients with LMD (n = 24) had a median OS of 1.78 months from the time of diagnosis of CNS involvement compared with 4.87 months for patients without LMD (n = 306) (HR, 2.12; P = .0004) (Fig. 2B) (Table 2).

thumbnail image

Figure 2. Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival after the diagnosis of melanoma brain metastases is shown by the pattern and timing of central nervous system involvement. Analysis was performed for (A) 1 to 3 parenchymal brain metastases (mets) (solid line; n = 199), >3 parenchymal brain mets (dotted line; n = 118; P = .0001 vs 1-3 mets), or leptomeningeal involvement (LMD) only (dotted and dashed line; n = 11; P = .0002 vs 1-3 mets); (B) LMD absent (solid line; n = 306) versus LMD present (dotted line; n = 24) (P = .0004); and (C) diagnosis of brain mets before diagnosis of extracranial mets (solid line; n = 20), at time of diagnosis of extracranial mets (dotted line; n = 63), or after diagnosis of extracranial mets (dashed line; n = 247; P < .0001 vs before/at time of diagnosis of extracranial mets).

Download figure to PowerPoint

The impact of the timing of the development of brain metastases in relation to extracranial metastases was examined (Fig. 2C). Patients who developed brain metastases before the detection of other extracranial metastases (n = 20) had a median OS of 14.26 months from the time of diagnosis of brain involvement, which was longer than that of patients who were diagnosed concurrently with brain and extracranial metastases (n = 63; median OS, 7.0 months [P = .12]). Patients who developed brain metastases after being diagnosed with, and receiving systemic treatment of, extracranial metastases (n = 247) were found to have the worst outcome (median OS, 3.72 months vs patients diagnosed before and/or with synchronous extracranial metastases; HR, 1.78 [P < .0001]) (Table 2).

Patients received a variety of treatments of their brain metastases. The survival of patients who were initially treated with surgical resection (n = 90; median OS, 9.82 months), stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) (n = 21; median OS, 7.69 months), chemotherapy (n = 55; median OS, 4.64 months), whole brain radiotherapy (WBXRT) (n = 116; median OS, 3.86 months), and supportive care only (n = 35; median OS, 1.22 months) is shown in Figure 3A. It is difficult to retrospectively compare the efficacy of different therapies for melanoma brain metastases because the therapies administered are generally determined by the extent of disease involvement. In general, patients with limited tumor burden in the CNS (usually up to 3 lesions) are often treated with surgical resection or SRS. Patients with more diffuse metastases, or those with poor performance status, are more frequently treated with WBXRT or chemotherapy, or with supportive care only.21 Consistent with this practice, the correlation between the number of brain metastases (1-3 vs >3) and the treatment modality given (craniotomy/SRS vs WBXRT/chemotherapy vs supportive care only) was estimated by the Pearson correlation coefficient, and the P value for this interaction was found to be <.0001. This indicates that there was a significant correlation between the number of brain metastases and the treatment given, and thus prevents meaningful comparison of the relative efficacy of these different treatment modalities in this cohort.

thumbnail image

Figure 3. Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival is shown after different treatments of melanoma brain metastases. (A) Survival after the diagnosis of melanoma brain metastases is shown by the initial treatment given for central nervous system (CNS) involvement. Treatments are indicated on the graph. (B) Among patients who received systemic therapy as treatment of brain metastases, survival is shown for patients who received temozolomide (TMZ) as part of those treatments (solid line; n = 24) versus those who never received TMZ (dotted line; n = 134) (P = .07). WBXRT indicates whole brain radiotherapy.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Temozolomide (TMZ) is an alkylating agent that crosses the blood-brain barrier and has produced clinical responses in some patients with melanoma brain metastases.22-24 In this study, patients who received TMZ as the initial therapy for their brain metastases (n = 7) had a median OS of 4.70 months, which did not differ significantly from that of patients receiving any other systemic therapy as their initial treatment (n = 50; median OS, 4.67 months [P = .55]). Patients who received TMZ (n = 24) at any time after the diagnosis of brain metastases demonstrated a trend toward longer survival than patients who received other systemic therapies (n = 134) (median OS, 7.79 months vs 6.92 months; P = .07 by the log-rank test) (Fig. 3B).

It is possible that patients who have chemoresponsive extracranial melanoma metastases will also have responsive brain metastases, and thus will have better survival after the diagnosis of brain involvement. Therefore, we determined the association between survival after the diagnosis of brain involvement and the clinical response to prior systemic therapies. This analysis excluded those patients who were treated in the adjuvant setting. “Responders” were defined as patients who achieved a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) to prior systemic therapy according to World Health Organization criteria; all other patients were classified as “nonresponders.” Overall, responders to prior systemic therapies (n = 139) had a median OS of 5.36 months after the diagnosis of brain metastases, which was slightly longer but not significantly different from the outcomes for nonresponders (n = 168; median OS, 4.13 months [P = .17]) (Fig. 4A) (Table 2). However, among patients who received systemic therapy as the initial treatment of their brain metastases, the patients who had previously responded to systemic therapy (n = 21) survived significantly longer than those patients who had not previously achieved a clinical response to systemic therapy (n = 31) (median OS, 6.58 months vs 3.81 months; P = .05) (Fig. 4B). Among patients treated initially with WBXRT, there was also trend toward improved survival noted among the responders to prior systemic therapies (n = 52) compared with the nonresponders (n = 56) (median OS, 5.24 months vs 3.24 months; P = .10). It is interesting to note that there was no significant difference noted among the responders and the nonresponders treated initially with systemic therapy in the subsequent use of salvage WBXRT (12 of 21 responders and 14 of 32 nonresponders; P = .34 by the chi-square test). Overall, responders to prior systemic therapy who were treated initially with either chemotherapy or WBXRT had longer survival than the nonresponders (median OS, 5.46 months vs 3.55 months; P = .01) (Fig. 4C). However, the survival for responders treated initially with surgical resection or SRS (n = 47) was longer than that for patients treated with chemotherapy or WBXRT (n = 73) (median OS, 8.62 months vs 5.46 months; P = .02). There was no difference with regard to survival for the responders to prior systemic therapy compared with nonresponders who were treated with surgery or SRS (P = .70) or with supportive care only (P = .87).

thumbnail image

Figure 4. Kaplan-Meier analysis of overall survival is shown after the diagnosis of melanoma brain metastases by responsiveness to prior systemic therapy. (A) Survival after the diagnosis of brain metastases is shown among patients who previously demonstrated a clinical response (complete response/partial response) to systemic therapy for extracranial metastases (solid line; n = 139) versus patients who did not respond (dotted line; n = 168) (P = .19). (B) Among patients who received systemic treatment as the initial therapy for brain metastases, survival is shown for patients who previously responded to systemic therapy for extracranial metastases (solid line; n = 21) versus patients who did not respond (dotted line; n = 32) (P = .05). (C) Among patients who received systemic therapy or whole brain radiotherapy (WBXRT) as the initial therapy for brain metastases, survival is shown for patients who previously responded to systemic therapy for extracranial metastases (solid line; n = 73) versus patients who did not respond (dotted line; n = 87) (P = .01). (D) Survival is shown among patients who previously responded to systemic therapy who were initially treated with surgical resection or stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) (solid line; n = 47), chemotherapy or WBXRT (dashed line; n = 73), or supportive care only (dotted line; n = 15). Patients treated with surgical resection or SRS were found to have a longer survival than patients treated with chemotherapy or WBXRT (P = 02).

Download figure to PowerPoint

Multivariate analysis was performed on variables that were found to be significant on univariate analysis in the overall patient cohort: date of diagnosis of brain metastases, number and pattern of brain metastases, and the timing of brain metastases diagnosis in relation to extracranial metastases. The bimodal comparison of the presence or absence of LMD was not included in this multivariate analysis because of its overlap with analysis of the number/pattern of brain metastases. A diagnosis of brain metastases before January 1, 1996, having >3 parenchymal metastases or LMD only, and the development of brain metastases after receiving systemic therapy for extracranial metastatic disease were factors found to be significantly associated with shorter survival (Table 3). A separate multivariate analysis that included the bimodal absence or presence of LMD and excluded the number of brain metastases identified the presence of LMD (P = .008) as well as the date (P = .004) and the timing (P < .0001) of a brain metastases diagnosis to be prognostic (data not shown).

Table 3. Factors Associated With Overall Survival: Multivariate Model
VariableNo. of Patients (Deaths)Median Survival, MonthsMultivariate PHR95% CI for HR
  1. HR indicates hazard ratio; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; mets, metastases; LMD, leptomeningeal disease.

Brain mets diagnosis date
 Before 01/01/1996207 (206)4.141.00
 After 01/01/1996123 (118)5.92.020.750.59–0.95
No. of brain mets
 1-3199 (194)5.921.00
 >3118 (117)3.52.0051.401.11–1.78
 LMD only11 (11)1.22.012.291.23–4.28
Timing vs extracranial mets
 Before/at extracranial mets83 (81)7.931.00
 After extracranial mets247 (243)3.72<.00011.711.31–2.22

DISCUSSION

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES
  7. REFERENCES

The 3 most common sources of brain metastases in patients are lung cancer, breast cancer, and melanoma.21 Because melanoma is much less common than lung and breast cancer, this reflects the high proclivity of melanoma to metastasize to the CNS. Thus, there is a tremendous need to develop more effective therapies for melanoma brain metastases. An improved understanding of the clinical characteristics of these tumors will facilitate research in this area.

In our review of 743 patients with regional or distant metastases who were enrolled in clinical trials at our institution from 1986 to 2004, 44% of the patients with advanced melanoma developed brain involvement during the course of their disease, with a median OS from the time of diagnosis of brain metastases of 4.65 months. This median OS is similar to that presented in other large series that have been reported previously. An analysis of 686 melanoma patients diagnosed between 1985 and 2000 with cerebral metastases at the Sydney Melanoma Unit (Sydney, Australia) reported a median OS of 4.1 months.4 A series of 702 patients with melanoma brain metastases treated at Duke University from 1978 to 1998 reported a median OS of 3.8 months.6 More recently, an analysis of 355 patients with melanoma brain metastases diagnosed from 1991 to 2001 and treated at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) reported a median OS of 5.2 months.5 Because patients in our cohort who were diagnosed with melanoma brain metastases after 1996 survived longer than those diagnosed before that date, it is possible that the slightly longer median survival in the MSKCC cohort reflects the finding that their analysis focused on more contemporary patients than the other studies.

The increased use of MRI as a screening tool for brain metastases over time may have contributed to this improvement. In addition to possible lead time bias, the earlier diagnosis of brain involvement could possibly lead to an increased frequency of diagnosing patients with lower disease burden, allowing for the more frequent use of locally directed therapies that are associated with better outcomes. In our cohort, we did find a significant difference in the treatments given for brain metastases among patients diagnosed before versus those diagnosed after January 1, 1996 (P = .03 by the chi-square test). Although a similar percentage of patients were treated with chemotherapy or WBXRT (52.5% of patients diagnosed after vs 54.8% of patients diagnosed before January 1, 1996), patients diagnosed after that date were more frequently treated with surgery or SRS (41.7% of patients diagnosed after vs 30.9% of patients diagnosed before January 1, 1996) and less often with supportive care only (5.8% of patients diagnosed after vs 14.2% of patients diagnosed before January 1, 1996). In particular, there was a marked increase in the use of SRS as the initial treatment of brain metastases (2.0% of patients diagnosed before vs 14.1% of patients diagnosed after January 1, 1996), whereas the use of surgery was essentially unchanged (28.9% vs 27.5%, respectively). Although there was no significant difference with regard to patient survival for patients diagnosed after January 1, 1996 versus those diagnosed before that date among those treated with surgical resection (P = .16), chemotherapy (P = .77), WBXRT (P = .51), or supportive care only (P = .48), there was significant improvement in survival noted among patients treated with SRS (median OS, 7.9 months in those diagnosed after January 1, 1996 vs 2.93 months in those diagnosed before; P = .01). It is therefore possible that the improvement in outcomes noted in patients diagnosed after January 1 1996 may reflect the increasing use and efficacy SRS for brain metastases, and not necessarily be attributable only to earlier detection by MRI screening.

In each of the other studies of large cohorts of melanoma patients with brain metastases, the lack of concurrent extracranial metastases was identified as a positive prognostic factor. This factor was also found to be prognostic in our study, although this represents a relatively small population in our cohort. This is likely because the patients being studied herein had sought systemic treatment, usually for distant metastases. Thus, patients who may have had a solitary brain metastasis and then failed to develop additional disease are unlikely to be in this cohort. The MSKCC study also identified patient age >65 years as a negative prognostic factor, but it was not found to be significant in our cohort (Table 2).

Also similar to previous studies, patients with >3 parenchymal metastases were found to have worse outcomes than patients with ≤3 parenchymal metastases in our cohort.5 However, the presence of LMD had a much more dramatic impact on survival, even in comparison with the presence of >3 parenchymal metastases. Similar to cerebral metastases, melanoma is among the solid tumors most frequently associated with LMD. In various reports, melanoma was the associated primary tumor in 17% to 25% of LMD caused by solid tumors.25 In addition, secondary LMD has been identified as a complication of metastatic melanoma in 22% to 46% of patients. There is also an entity known as primary leptomeningeal melanoma, which was first described by Virchow in 1859.26, 27 In our study, we identified 24 patients with LMD. The median survival of these patients was slightly less than 2 months, which was significantly shorter than that of patients with parenchymal involvement only, regardless of the number of metastases. A smaller study on the impact of WBXRT on patient survival in patients with CNS melanoma also identified LMD as a negative prognostic factor.28 In that study of 102 patients, patients with LMD were found to have significantly poorer survival (P = .003) after completing WBXRT compared with patients without LMD. In the MSKCC series, LMD was detected in 11.3% of patients, and they had a median survival of 4 months, which was significantly shorter then the median survival of patients without LMD (6 months) on univariate analysis, but not on multivariate analysis.

Several clinical trials have reported low response rates and poor survival for patients with melanoma brain metastases who are treated with systemic therapies.29-33 Although many of these negative data were not available at the beginning of the study period for our cohort, we did investigate the characteristics of patients who were treated with systemic therapy alone as the initial treatment of brain metastases in our cohort, to better understand what factors might have led to the selection of this therapeutic modality. Comparison of the patients initially treated with chemotherapy with those treated with WBXRT identified no significant difference in the prior responsiveness to systemic therapies among the patients (P = .36 by the chi-square test). Patients treated with WBXRT were more likely to have >3 brain metastases (72.6% vs 30.2%; P < .001). Additional review of patient records identified that the patients treated with chemotherapy were more likely to have active non-CNS metastases that were not considered controlled (92.7% vs 75.2%; P = .007) compared with those patients treated with WBXRT. Thus, overall it appears that systemic therapy was used as the initial therapy for brain metastases in this cohort for patients with lower CNS disease burden and concurrent higher non-CNS disease burden.

Because this cohort of patients was selected based on enrollment in clinical trials for extracranial systemic metastases, we were able to perform a unique assessment of the prognostic value of the responsiveness to previous therapies on survival after the development of brain metastases in a relatively large group of patients. Patients who previously achieved a CR or PR to systemic therapies (“responders”) overall did not have longer survival after the diagnosis of brain metastases compared with those patients who had not achieved a response (“nonresponders”). However, prior response to systemic therapy did predict for longer survival among patients who received systemic therapy as their initial treatment of brain metastases. It is interesting to note that we also observed a trend toward longer survival for the responders compared with the nonresponders among patients initially treated with WBXRT. Although it is therefore possible that the improved survival noted with systemic therapy for brain metastases could be caused by an increased subsequent use of WBXRT, we did not find a significant difference in the use of this salvage therapy between the responders and the nonresponders. In addition, among the patients who did receive salvage WBXRT after initial chemotherapy for brain metastases, there was a longer interval from the initiation of chemotherapy to the initiation of radiotherapy for the responders versus the nonresponders (median, 130 days vs 47 days; P = .01). This possible selective benefit for chemotherapy for brain metastases among patients with documented prior responses to systemic therapies for non-CNS metastases needs to be evaluated in other cohorts of patients. If confirmed, this would suggest preferential benefit for the use of systemic treatments in patients whose tumors previously demonstrated responsiveness to systemic therapies. In addition, combined analysis of patients who were treated with either systemic therapy or WBXRT as the initial treatment of brain metastases demonstrated a significantly longer survival for the responders compared with the nonresponders. These data support a rationale for these somewhat aggressive interventions in patients with documented responses to prior systemic therapies compared with the use of supportive care only. Although comparative analysis of the relative efficacy of different treatment modalities is limited by the retrospective nature of the current study, our data do not specifically support that such modalities should be used in place of surgery or SRS in patients who are considered eligible for such treatments, because responders treated with such local therapies did have longer survival compared with those treated with chemotherapy or WBXRT (P = .02).

In conclusion, this study reported on the factors that were correlated with survival after the development of brain metastases among a large cohort of patients with advanced melanoma who were treated at our institution. Several of the factors that were found to be significant in this cohort have also been identified in previous studies, such as >3 parenchymal metastases, LMD, and the development of brain metastases after prior systemic therapies. This study is distinct from other series with regard to the predominance of patients in this cohort who previously received systemic therapies and the documentation of responsiveness to those treatments. To our knowledge, we have identified for the first time data indicating that patients who previously responded to systemic therapies for extracranial melanoma metastases may derive greater benefit from systemic treatments, or from WBXRT, for brain metastases compared with patients who failed to respond to prior systemic treatments. Our data also indicate that although there has been a statistically significant improvement in the outcomes for patients with melanoma brain metastases over time, the outcomes among these patients remain quite poor. There is a critical need for new, more effective treatments for patients with brain metastases from melanoma, perhaps building on our evolving understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of this disease.34 The results of this study add to our knowledge about outcomes in patients with melanoma brain metastases, and may be useful in future treatments and the design of clinical trials for these patients.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES
  7. REFERENCES

Supported in part by the Carol Courtney Memorial Fund and the Chiron Corporation.

REFERENCES

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURES
  7. REFERENCES
  • 1
    Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009; 59: 225-249.
  • 2
    Sawaya R, Bindal RK, Lang FF, Abi-Said D. Metastatic brain tumors. In: Kaye AH, Laws ERJr, eds. Brain Tumors. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone; 2001: 999-1026.
  • 3
    Lotze MT, Dallal RM, Kirkwood JM, Flickinger JC. Cutaneous melanoma. In: DeVita VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA, eds. Cancer: Principles and Practice of Oncology. 6th ed. Vol 2. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2001: 2012-2069.
  • 4
    Fife KM, Colman MH, Stevens GN, et al. Determinants of outcome in melanoma patients with cerebral metastases. J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22: 1293-1300.
  • 5
    Raizer JJ, Hwu WJ, Panageas KS, et al. Brain and leptomeningeal metastases from cutaneous melanoma: survival outcomes based on clinical features. Neuro Oncol. 2008; 10: 199-207.
  • 6
    Sampson JH, Carter JHJr, Friedman AH, Seigler HF. Demographics, prognosis, and therapy in 702 patients with brain metastases from malignant melanoma. J Neurosurg. 1998; 88: 11-20.
  • 7
    Skibber JM, Soong SJ, Austin L, Balch CM, Sawaya RE. Cranial irradiation after surgical excision of brain metastases in melanoma patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 1996; 3: 118-123.
  • 8
    Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc. 1958; 53: 457-481.
  • 9
    Buzaid A, Legha SS, Balch CM, et al. Pilot study of preoperative chemotherapy with cisplatin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine in patients with local-regional recurrence of melanoma. Cancer. 1994; 74: 2476-2482.
  • 10
    Buzaid AC, Colome M, Bedikian A, et al. Phase II study of neoadjuvant concurrent biochemotherapy in melanoma patients with local-regional metastases. Melanoma Res. 1998; 8: 549-556.
  • 11
    Eton O, Legha SS, Bedikian AY, et al. Sequential biochemotherapy versus chemotherapy for metastatic melanoma: results from a phase III randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20: 2045-2052.
  • 12
    Kim KB, Legha SS, Gonzalez R, et al. A randomized phase III trial of biochemotherapy versus interferon-alpha-2b for adjuvant therapy in patients at high risk for melanoma recurrence. Melanoma Res. 2009; 19: 4249.
  • 13
    Kim KB, Eton O, East MJ, et al. Pilot study of high-dose, concurrent biochemotherapy for advanced melanoma. Cancer. 2004; 101: 596-603.
  • 14
    Legha S, Plager C, Ring S, et al. A phase-II study of biochemotherapy using interleukin-2 (IL-2) + interferon alpha-2A (IFN) in combination with cisplatin (C), vinblastine (V) and DTIC (D) in patients with metastatic melanoma. Presented at: 28th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, May 17-19, 1992, San Diego, CA. 1992;11: 343.
  • 15
    Legha SS, Ring S, Bedikian A, et al. Treatment of metastatic melanoma with combined chemotherapy containing cisplatin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (CVD) and biotherapy using interleukin-2 and interferon-alpha. Ann Oncol. 1996; 7: 827-835.
  • 16
    Legha SS, Ring S, Eton O, et al. Development of a biochemotherapy regimen with concurrent administration of cisplatin, vinblastine, dacarbazine, interferon alfa, and interleukin-2 for patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 1998; 16: 1752-1759.
  • 17
    Legha SS, Ring S, Papadopoulos N, Plager C, Chawla S, Benjamin R. A prospective evaluation of a triple-drug regimen containing cisplatin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (CVD) for metastatic melanoma. Cancer. 1989; 64: 2024-2029.
  • 18
    Papadopoulos NE, Bedikian AY, Ring S, Kim KB, Camacho L, Eton O. Phase II study of CTD (cisplatin, paclitaxel, DTIC) in metastatic melanoma (MM). Presented at: 39th American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting, May 31-June 3, 2003, Chicago, IL. 2003;22: 2889.
  • 19
    Papadopoulos NE, Eton O, Kim KB, Camacho LH, Hwu P, Bedikian AY. Phase II study of “hybrid” biochemotherapy for advanced melanoma. Presented at: 42nd American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting, June 2-6, 2006, Atlanta, GA. 2006;24: 18007.
  • 20
    Sanguino AM, Bedikian AY, Legha SS, et al. Long-term clinical results of the combination of cisplatin (C), vinblastine (V), DTIC (D) and interferon-alfa (I) with or without tamoxifen (T) for metastatic melanoma. Presented at: 42nd American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting. 2006;24: 8039.
  • 21
    Eichler AF, Loeffler JS. Multidisciplinary management of brain metastases. Oncologist. 2007; 12: 884-898.
  • 22
    Biasco G, Pantaleo MA, Casadei S. Treatment of brain metastases of malignant melanoma with temozolomide. N Engl J Med. 2001; 345: 621-622.
  • 23
    Danson SJ, Middleton MR. Temozolomide: a novel oral alkylating agent. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2001; 1: 13-19.
  • 24
    Dvorak J, Melichar B, Zizka J, Hadzi-Nikolov D, Petera J. Complete response of multiple melanoma brain metastases after treatment with temozolomide. Onkologie. 2004; 27: 171-174.
  • 25
    Taillibert S, Laigle-Donadey F, Chodkiewicz C, Sanson M, Hoang-Xuan K, Delattre JY. Leptomeningeal metastases from solid malignancy: a review. J Neurooncol. 2005; 75: 85-99.
  • 26
    Schneider F, Putzier M. Primary leptomeningeal melanoma. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002; 27: E545-E547.
  • 27
    Rosenthal G, Gomori JM, Tobias S, Diment J, Shoshan Y. Unusual cases involving the CNS and nasal sinuses: Case 1. Primary leptomeningeal melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21: 3875-3877.
  • 28
    Morris SL, Low SH, A'Hern RP, et al. A prognostic index that predicts outcome following palliative whole brain radiotherapy for patients with metastatic malignant melanoma. Br J Cancer. 2004; 91: 829-833.
  • 29
    Agarwala SS, Kirkwood JM, Gore M, et al. Temozolomide for the treatment of brain metastases associated with metastatic melanoma: a phase II study. J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22: 2101-2107.
  • 30
    Atkins MB, Sosman JA, Agarwala S, et al. Temozolomide, thalidomide, and whole brain radiation therapy for patients with brain metastasis from metastatic melanoma: a phase II Cytokine Working Group study. Cancer. 2008; 113: 2139-2145.
  • 31
    Krown SE, Niedzwiecki D, Hwu W-J, et al. Phase II study of temozolomide and thalidomide in patients with metastatic melanoma in the brain: high rate of thromboembolic events (CALGB 500102). Cancer. 2006; 107: 1883-1890.
  • 32
    Margolin K, Atkins B, Thompson A, et al. Temozolomide and whole brain irradiation in melanoma metastatic to the brain: a phase II trial of the Cytokine Working Group. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2002; 128: 214-218.
  • 33
    Mornex F, Thomas L, Mohr P, et al. A prospective randomized multicentre phase III trial of fotemustine plus whole brain irradiation versus fotemustine alone in cerebral metastases of malignant melanoma. Melanoma Res. 2003; 13: 97-103.
  • 34
    Davies MA, Samuels Y. Analysis of the genome to personalize therapy for melanoma [published online ahead of print August 9, 2010]. Oncogene doi:10.1038.onc.2010.323.