Skip to main content

Table 3 Tumor Mutation Burden as Predictor of Melanoma Outcome: OS and PFS Data

From: Targeted literature review on use of tumor mutational burden status and programmed cell death ligand 1 expression to predict outcomes of checkpoint inhibitor treatment

Trial/Author (Year)

Subpopulation or Population

Treatment

No. of Patients

OS

PFS

Median (95% CI), Months

HR (95% CI)

Median (95% CI), Months

HR(95% CI)

Johnson et al. (2016) [33]

High (>  23.1 mutations per mb)

NIVO, PEM, and ATEZO

65

NE

NR

NE

NR

Intermediate (3.3–23.1 mutations per mb)

65

9.9 (NR)

NR

2.9 (NR)

NR

Low (<  3.3 mutations per mb)

65

12.3 (NR)

NR

2.8 (NR)

NR

Roszik et al. (2016) [34]

Predicted TML ≤ 100

IPI

19

19.14 (NR)

0.35 (0.16–0.77)

NR

NR

Predicted TML > 100

57

Undefined (NR)

NR

NR

Yaghmour et al. (2016) [28]

TML: top quintile

NIVO, PEM, and IPI

50 (overall patients)

NR

3.29(0.75–25.53)

NR

NR

TML: other quintiles combined

NR

NR

NR

  1. ATEZO atezolizumab; CI confidence interval; HR hazard ratio; IPI ipilimumab; mb megabase; NE could not be estimated/not reached; NIVO nivolumab; NR not reported; OS overall survival; PFS progression-free survival; TML tumor mutational load