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 PopulationTreatmentNo. of PatientsOSPFS
Median (95% CI), MonthsHR (95% CI)Median (95% CI), MonthsHR(95% CI)
Johnson et al. (2016) [33]High (>  23.1 mutations per mb)NIVO, PEM, and ATEZO65NENRNENR
Intermediate (3.3–23.1 mutations per mb)659.9 (NR)NR2.9 (NR)NR
Low (<  3.3 mutations per mb)6512.3 (NR)NR2.8 (NR)NR
Roszik et al. (2016) [34]Predicted TML ≤ 100IPI1919.14 (NR)0.35 (0.16–0.77)NRNR
Predicted TML > 10057Undefined (NR)NRNR
Yaghmour et al. (2016) [28]TML: top quintileNIVO, PEM, and IPI50 (overall patients)NR3.29(0.75–25.53)NRNR
TML: other quintiles combinedNRNRNR
  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