Neoadjuvant treatment of melanoma: case reports and review

Table 1 Summary of traditional neoadjuvant studies

	Patients (n)	Study design, end point	Agent	Clinical response	Survival
Sasson et al. [5]	16, metastatic	Retrospective, OS	Various*	62.5% (7PR, 3CR)	OS – 68.8% DFS – 62.5%, median f/u 35 mo
Jouary et al. [6]	13, metastatic	Retrospective, OS	DTIC	60% did not progress.	OS - 31.6 vs 25.3 mo (study group vs. retrospective cohort)
Shah et al. [7]	19, Stage III	Phase II, ORR	Tem	16% (1PR, 2CR)	NR
Buzaid et al. [8]	64, Stage III	Phase II, ORR	Cis, Vin, IL2, DTIC, IFN	50%**(28PR, 4 CR)	Median OS 27 mo. Median DFS 13 mo
Gibbs et al. [9]	48, Stage III	Phase II, ORR	Cis, Vin, IL2, DTIC, IFN	38.9%^# (13PR, 1CR)	79% OS, 65% PFS at 2.6 yrs.
Koyanagi et al. [10]	63, Stage III	Phase II, DFS	Cis, Vin, DTIC, IL2, IFN	NR	DFS- 70%, median f/u 30.4 mo. 2 yr OS – 80.9%
Lewis et al. [11]	92, Stage III	Phase II, OS	Cis, Vin, DTIC, IL2, IFN	26%^##	RFS – 64% OS- 78%, median f/u 40.4 mo
Kounalakis et al. [12]	153, Stage III	Retrospective, OS	Cis, Vin, DTIC, IL2, IFN	55% ⁺ (14 PR, 14 CR)	5 yr OS-82% (micromet disease), and 77% (bulky disease)
Moschos et al. [13]	20, Stage III	Phase II, ORR	HDI	55% (8PR, 3 CR)	90% PFS at 1.5 yrs.

*Study designed to compare utility of resection vs. no resection and had various chemotherapeutic regiments including: single agent DTIC or combination with camustine, cis-platin, tamoxifen, or interferon.
**Reported histological response rate.
^#Only 36 of the 48 patients had clinically evaluable disease to assess response rates.
^##Only 50 of the 92 patients had clinically evaluable disease to assess response rates.
⁺Only 51 of the 153 patients had clinically evaluable disease to assess response rates.

ISSN: 2162-3619