Baseline visceral disease burden and treatment delivery factors association with outcomes after tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte therapy for metastatic melanoma.

Abstract

e21521 Background: Outcomes following tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy vary in real-world practice, and accessible predictors are needed to inform patient selection and timing of referral. We evaluated whether baseline disease burden, metastatic distribution, and treatment delivery factors are associated with outcomes following TIL therapy. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients with metastatic melanoma treated with TIL therapy across Mayo Clinic sites (N = 27 infused). Baseline disease burden was characterized using AJCC metastatic stage and organ-specific involvement. A composite high visceral burden variable was defined as the presence of M1d disease and/or liver metastases. Bridging therapy use prior to infusion was recorded. Post-infusion IL-2 exposure was categorized as low (0-2 doses) vs. high (3-6 doses). Best overall response (BOR) was summarized using RECIST-based standard criteria. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were measured from TIL infusion and estimated using Kaplan–Meier methods with univariable Cox regression. Results: Median age at infusion was 62.0 years; 59.3% were male. Melanoma subtypes included cutaneous (81.5%) and mucosal (18.5%). Bridging therapy was used in 48.1%. Baseline metastatic stage was M1a/M1b in 18.5%, M1c in 63.0%, and M1d in 18.5%. Median follow up was 8.3 months. BOR included complete response (18.5%), partial response (37.0%), stable disease (22.2%), and progressive disease (22.2%), yielding an objective response rate of 55.6% and disease control rate of 77.8%. Patients with high visceral disease burden experienced inferior OS vs. those without high visceral burden (median 5.2 vs 13.4 months; HR 4.77, 95% CI 1.22–18.63; p = 0.014). Bridging therapy was not associated with OS or PFS. Higher post-infusion IL-2 exposure (seen in 77.8% of patients) was associated with improved OS (median 9.0 vs 3.7 months; HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04–0.67, p = 0.005), likely reflecting early post-infusion clinical tolerance rather than a causal treatment effect. Median PFS for the cohort was 3.6 months and did not differ by IL-2 exposure ( p = 0.3), metastatic stage ( p = 0.8), bridging therapy ( p = 0.7), liver metastases ( p = 0.2), or LDH above upper limit of normal ( p = 0.1). Conclusions: The above findings are hypothesis generating and will support evaluation in larger cohort. In this real-world cohort of patients treated with TIL therapy, baseline visceral disease burden was strongly associated with survival outcomes, while bridging therapy did not compromise post-infusion efficacy among patients proceeding to infusion. Post-infusion IL-2 exposure correlated with OS and likely reflects early treatment tolerance. These readily available clinical features may inform patient counseling, referral timing, and sequencing decisions as TIL therapy enters broader clinical use.