Real-world treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with metastatic melanoma

Abstract

Introduction/Objective. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of different approaches in the treatment of metastatic melanoma in daily clinical practice in a situation with limited and late availability of new drugs in a resource-limited country and to compare these parameters with those reported in clinical studies and from other real-world data. Methods. Main methods included assessment of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Patients were included in the study if they were treated with first or second-line systemic therapy for radiologically/ pathologically confirmed metastatic melanoma. Patients were divided into four groups based on the type of therapy they received: chemotherapy (dacarbazin), BRAF inhibitor (vemurafenib), BRAF/MEK inhibitors (vemurafenib/cobimetinib and trametinib/dabrafenib) and anti PD-1 therapy with pembrolizumab. Results. Regardless of the line of therapy, the calculated median OS in chemotherapy and vemurafenib group was nine months. The median OS in the BRAF/MEK inhibitor group was 14 months and 15 months in the pembrolizumab group. Median PFS in the chemotherapy group was four months, seven months for vemurafenib, in the BRAF/MEK inhibitor group nine months and in the pembrolizumab group six months. There was a statistically significant difference in survival between first and second-line therapy in the pembrolizumab group. Conclusion. Our results showed lower median OS and PFS in comparison to reported data from clinical trials. Compared to other real-world data from countries with similar problems related to the late reimbursement of new drugs, our research has shown similar results.

Keywords

• metastatic melanoma
• immunotherapy
• targeted therapy
• chemotherapy
• survival
• real-world data