Reviewing the Risk-Benefit Ratio of Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Approaches in Melanoma

Welcome to a very special edition of OncLive^® On Air! I’m your host today, Jessica Hergert.

OncLive^® On Air is a podcast from OncLive, which provides oncology professionals with the resources and information they need to provide the best patient care. In both digital and print formats, OncLive covers every angle of oncology practice, from new technology to treatment advances to important regulatory decisions.

Today, we passed the mic to Jason J. Luke, MD, FACP, and Diwakar Davar, MD, to discuss the clinical trials that have shaped the past, present, and potential future of neoadjuvant versus adjuvant therapy for patients with melanoma.

Historically, adjuvant therapy has been a standard of care for patients with melanoma. Despite the benefit in relapse-free survival that adjuvant therapies confer, neoadjuvant therapy has started to pique interest in the field. The belief is that patients may have a more robust immune microenvironment up front, and thus, may be more responsive to neoadjuvant therapy. However, treatment selection and potential toxicities that could prevent surgical candidacy remain key concerns in this area.

In our exclusive interview, Dr. Luke, an associate professor of medicine in the Division of Hematology/Oncology, and director of the Cancer Immunotherapeutics Center within the Immunology and Immunotherapy Program at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center Hillman Cancer Center, and Dr. Daver, an assistant professor of medicine in the Department of Medicine, Hematology/Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh, discuss the evolution of adjuvant therapy in melanoma from interferon alpha to checkpoint inhibition to targeted therapy, the potential advantages of neoadjuvant therapy, and the relative risk-benefit ratio of using these agents in the curative setting.