Pembrolizumab in Resected Stage II Melanoma
- Adjuvant pembrolizumab maintained an RFS advantage vs placebo, with similar rates of new primary melanoma between arms.
- Patients remained at risk for new cutaneous malignancies regardless of treatment, although nonmelanoma skin cancers were more frequent with placebo.
- Immune-mediated skin toxicities were more common with pembrolizumab but occurred infrequently, were largely manageable, and did not alter the drug’s overall benefit-risk profile.
What was the rationale for the secondary analysis?
Long-term survivors of melanoma are at risk of developing new melanomas or other cutaneous malignancies like BCC and CSCC, but the interplay between prior immunotherapy exposure and the likelihood of developing secondary cancer is not well understood.
The multicenter, double-blind KEYNOTE-716 trial was designed to evaluate adjuvant pembrolizumab vs placebo in patients with stage IIB or IIC cutaneous melanoma. Previously reported results highlighted significant improvements in RFS (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.49-0.79) and distant metastasis-free survival (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.79) with pembrolizumab vs placebo.2
The study enrolled 976 patients who were at least 12 years old with completely resected stage IIB or IIC cutaneous melanoma between September 23, 2018, and November 4, 2020.1 Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous pembrolizumab at 200 mg or 2 mg/kg for pediatric patients or placebo every 3 weeks for up to 17 cycles.
Given the long-term survival advantage afforded by pembrolizumab, secondary analyses were performed to better understand the incidence and time to diagnosis of new melanoma or other cutaneous malignant neoplasm, a sensitivity analysis of RFS with new primary melanoma counted as an event, and the occurrence of immune-mediated severe skin reactions.
What were the patient demographics?
A total of 976 patients were randomly assigned to receive either pembrolizumab or placebo. The median age at diagnosis was 61 years (IQR, 52-69), and most patients were male (60.3%).
The median follow-up was 52.8 months (range, 39.4-64.8). In the pembrolizumab arm, 37 patients (7.6%) received a new skin cancer diagnosis, with a median time to diagnosis of 168.0 days (range, 1.0-1182.0). Of these, 12 (2.5%) were new invasive primary melanomas, 6 (1.2%) were new primary melanomas in situ, 19 (3.9%) were BCCs, and 9 (1.8%) were CSCCs. In the placebo arm, 56 patients (11.5%) received a new skin cancer diagnosis, with a median time to diagnosis of 177.0 days (range, 1.0-1043.0). Of these, 9 (1.8%) were new invasive primary melanoma, 9 (1.8%) were new primary melanoma in situ, 26 (5.3%) were BCC, and 17 (3.5%) were CSCC.
How did the safety profile compare between pembrolizumab and placebo?
With respect to safety, which was evaluated in patients who had received at least 1 dose of treatment, immune-mediated severe skin reactions occurred in 16 of 483 patients (3.3%) in the pembrolizumab arm vs 3 of 486 (0.6%) in the placebo arm. The rates of grade 3 or 4 events were 2.9% (n = 14) and 0.6% (n = 3), respectively. Such events in the pembrolizumab arm were bullous dermatitis (n = 1; 0.2%), erythema multiforme (n = 1; 0.2%), exfoliative rash (n = 1; 0.2%), pemphigoid (n = 1; 0.2%), pruritus (n = 3; 0.6%), rash (n = 7; 1.4%), maculopapular rash (n = 2; 0.4%), pruritic rash (n = 2; 0.4%), and pustular rash (n = 1; 0.2%).
Immune-mediated adverse effects or infusion reactions occurred in 185 of 483 patients (38.3%) in the pembrolizumab arm vs 46 of 486 (9.5%) in the placebo arm. Grade 3 or 4 events occurred in 53 (11.0%) and 6 (1.2%) patients, respectively.
Immune-mediated severe skin reactions led to treatment discontinuation in 3 patients (0.6%) in the pembrolizumab arm. Immune-mediated severe skin reactions requiring systemic corticosteroids occurred in 9 of 16 patients (56.3%) in the pembrolizumab arm vs 2 of 3 patients (66.7%) in the placebo arm. Immune-mediated severe skin reactions resolved in 14 of 16 cases (87.5%) in the pembrolizumab arm vs all 3 cases (100%) in the placebo arm.
What is the significance of these data?
“In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, the RFS benefit associated with pembrolizumab was sustained after accounting for new melanoma, and immune-mediated severe skin reactions occurred infrequently and were manageable. These findings do not suggest a need for change to the previously published benefit-risk profile of adjuvant pembrolizumab for high-risk stage II melanoma,” the study authors wrote in their conclusion.
References
- Leachman SA, Luke JJ, Ascierto PA, et al. Adjuvant pembrolizumab for stage IIB or IIC melanoma: a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2026;9(2):e2559603. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.59603
- Luke JJ, Ascierto PA, Khattak MA, et al. Pembrolizumab versus placebo as adjuvant therapy in resected stage IIB or IIC melanoma: final analysis of distant metastasis-free survival in the phase III KEYNOTE-716 study. J Clin Oncol. 2024;42(14):1619-1624. doi:10.1200/JCO.23.02355