OnCo

Sign in to keep your watchlist

Your watched pages live in this browser. Sign in with an email link and OnCo keeps the same list on every device you use. Only your email address and your watchlist are stored.

Advanced melanoma: the decisions you may face

6 treatment settings, 5 with more than one named option. Each section lays out the options the standard of care names, what each is for, the trials behind them with their recorded results, the side effects and cautions on record, and questions to ask. Built from the cancer page's standard-of-care rows; nothing here is advice for your case.

Advanced, first line

First line, fit patient

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (CheckMate 067) or nivolumab plus relatlimab (RELATIVITY-047); anti-PD-1 monotherapy where toxicity must be minimised (KEYNOTE-006). Immunotherapy first even when BRAF-mutant (DREAMseq).

The options, in plain words

Nivolumab was the second PD-1 blocker and is often combined with ipilimumab. Long-term data show about half of advanced melanoma patients alive at 10 years on the combination.

Ipilimumab was the first checkpoint inhibitor (2011), and proved the immune system could be unleashed against cancer.

Opdualag combines relatlimab, the first drug targeting the LAG-3 immune brake, with nivolumab for melanoma.

Pembrolizumab is a PD-1 blocking antibody approved in more than 40 settings, from melanoma and lung cancer to the first tumour-agnostic approval for mismatch-repair-deficient tumours in 2017, and before and after surgery in triple-negative breast cancer. A subcutaneous form arrived in 2025, and it is the backbone partner for ADCs and personalised neoantigen vaccines.

The evidence behind it
  • Untreated advanced melanoma: nivolumab + ipilimumab vs nivolumab vs ipilimumab
    Show survival figures (1)

    Averages across everyone diagnosed, often years ago. Your stage, subtype, age, fitness and the treatment you receive matter more than the average, and the numbers are improving quickly.

    • 10-year OS 43% vs 37% vs 19%.
    Progression-free survival (co-primary) (months): Nivolumab + ipilimumab 11.5 vs Nivolumab 6.9 vs Ipilimumab 2.9 · HR 0.42 · source
  • Untreated unresectable or metastatic melanoma: nivolumab + relatlimab (fixed dose) vs nivolumab
    Show survival figures (1)

    Averages across everyone diagnosed, often years ago. Your stage, subtype, age, fitness and the treatment you receive matter more than the average, and the numbers are improving quickly.

    • PFS HR 0.75; median OS 51.0 vs 34.1 months.
    Progression-free survival (months): Nivolumab + relatlimab 10.1 vs Nivolumab 4.6 · HR 0.75 · source
  • Advanced melanoma, ≤1 prior systemic therapy: pembrolizumab (two schedules) vs ipilimumab
    Show survival figures (1)

    Averages across everyone diagnosed, often years ago. Your stage, subtype, age, fitness and the treatment you receive matter more than the average, and the numbers are improving quickly.

    • 10-year OS 34.0% vs 23.6%.
    Overall survival at 10 years (%): Pembrolizumab 34 vs Ipilimumab 23.6 · source
  • Untreated BRAF V600 metastatic melanoma: nivolumab + ipilimumab then dabrafenib + trametinib at progression, vs the reverse sequence
    Show survival figures (1)

    Averages across everyone diagnosed, often years ago. Your stage, subtype, age, fitness and the treatment you receive matter more than the average, and the numbers are improving quickly.

    • 2-year OS 71.8% vs 51.5%.
    Overall survival at 2 years (%): Immunotherapy first 71.8 vs Targeted therapy first 51.5 · source
The main trade-offs on record
Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Colitis with ipilimumab (1+3 mg/kg) · Monotherapy pooled unless stated25%14.4%
Hepatitis with ipilimumab · Monotherapy pooled unless stated15%13.4%
Colitis · Monotherapy pooled unless stated2.9%1.7%
Hepatitis · Monotherapy pooled unless stated1.8%1.5%

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Colitis (with nivolumab 1+3) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma25%14.4%
Hepatitis (with nivolumab) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma15%13.4%
Rash (with nivolumab) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma28%4.8%
Adrenal insufficiency (with nivolumab) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma8%2.6%

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Hypothyroidism (immune-mediated) · Pooled monotherapy data, >2,800 patients8%-
Pneumonitis (immune-mediated) · Pooled monotherapy data, >2,800 patients3.4%-
Colitis (immune-mediated) · Pooled monotherapy data, >2,800 patients1.7%-
Hepatitis (immune-mediated) · Pooled monotherapy data, >2,800 patients0.7%-
  • No pharmacokinetic interactions expected (antibody). See the irAE guide for toxicity management.

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Nivolumab, Ipilimumab, Relatlimab + nivolumab and the other options, which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. How closely do I match the people in CheckMate 067 and RELATIVITY-047, and does that change what the results mean for me?
    Why: Trial populations are selected; age, fitness, prior treatment and biomarkers all affect how far results carry.
  4. Which side effects of Nivolumab or Ipilimumab are most likely for me, which are reversible, and which would make us stop?
    Why: The recorded rates below come from labels and trials; your own risk depends on dose, other medicines and your health.
  5. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  6. Does your recommendation follow the current guideline (NCCN Guidelines: Melanoma: Cutaneous), and if it departs from it, why?
    Why: Departures from guidelines are sometimes right for an individual; they should be explained.
  7. For my situation (first line, fit patient), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab (CheckMate 067) or nivolumab plus relatlimab (RELATIVITY-047); anti-PD-1 monotherapy where toxicity must be minimised (KEYNOTE-006). Immunotherapy first even when BRAF-mutant (DREAMseq).
  8. Am I a candidate for Nivolumab, Ipilimumab, Relatlimab + nivolumab or related drugs, and what side effects should I expect?
    Why: Knowing the expected toxicities helps you plan work, family, and supportive care.
  9. How do the results of CheckMate 067 and RELATIVITY-047 apply to someone like me?
    Why: Trial populations differ from individual patients; ask how closely you match.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

Second line

BRAF V600-mutant, after immunotherapy or when rapid control is needed

Dabrafenib-trametinib, encorafenib-binimetinib or vemurafenib-cobimetinib.

The options, in plain words

Dabrafenib plus trametinib is the BRAF-plus-MEK pill combination, approved for BRAF V600E lung cancer and, since 2022, for any solid tumour with that mutation.

Encorafenib is a BRAF inhibitor that, with cetuximab and chemotherapy, became first-line standard for BRAF-mutant colorectal cancer in 2026.

Binimetinib is the MEK inhibitor partnered with encorafenib; blocking the next step in the same relay stops the tumour rerouting around the BRAF block.

The evidence behind it
  • Advanced BRAF V600 melanoma: encorafenib + binimetinib vs vemurafenib vs encorafenib
    Show survival figures (1)

    Averages across everyone diagnosed, often years ago. Your stage, subtype, age, fitness and the treatment you receive matter more than the average, and the numbers are improving quickly.

    • PFS 14.9 vs 7.3 months (HR 0.54); median OS 33.6 months.
    Progression-free survival (months): Encorafenib + binimetinib 14.9 vs Vemurafenib 7.3 · HR 0.54 · source
  • Untreated unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600E or V600K melanoma: dabrafenib plus trametinib versus dabrafenib plus placebo
    Show survival figures (1)

    Averages across everyone diagnosed, often years ago. Your stage, subtype, age, fitness and the treatment you receive matter more than the average, and the numbers are improving quickly.

    • Median progression-free survival 11.0 vs 8.8 months; median overall survival 25.1 vs 18.7 months (HR 0.71); pooled COMBI-d/v 5-year overall survival 34%.
    Progression-free survival (months): Dabrafenib + trametinib 11 (n=211) vs Dabrafenib + placebo 8.8 (n=212) · HR 0.67 · source
  • Untreated unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma: vemurafenib plus cobimetinib versus vemurafenib plus placebo
    Show survival figures (1)

    Averages across everyone diagnosed, often years ago. Your stage, subtype, age, fitness and the treatment you receive matter more than the average, and the numbers are improving quickly.

    • Median progression-free survival 12.3 vs 7.2 months (HR 0.58); median overall survival 22.3 vs 17.4 months (HR 0.70).
    Progression-free survival (months): Vemurafenib + cobimetinib 12.3 (n=247) vs Vemurafenib + placebo 7.2 (n=248) · HR 0.58 · source
The main trade-offs on record
  • Dabrafenib: take on an empty stomach. Trametinib: take on an empty stomach; both cause pyrexia.
  • Known QT prolongation. Avoid other QT-prolonging drugs where possible; check ECG and correct potassium and magnesium before and during treatment.
Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Dabrafenib + trametinib, Encorafenib and Binimetinib, which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. How closely do I match the people in COLUMBUS and COMBI-d, and does that change what the results mean for me?
    Why: Trial populations are selected; age, fitness, prior treatment and biomarkers all affect how far results carry.
  4. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  5. Does your recommendation follow the current guideline (NCCN Guidelines: Melanoma: Cutaneous), and if it departs from it, why?
    Why: Departures from guidelines are sometimes right for an individual; they should be explained.
  6. For my situation (braf v600-mutant, after immunotherapy or when rapid control is needed), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Dabrafenib-trametinib, encorafenib-binimetinib or vemurafenib-cobimetinib.
  7. Am I a candidate for Dabrafenib + trametinib, Encorafenib, Binimetinib, and what side effects should I expect?
    Why: Knowing the expected toxicities helps you plan work, family, and supportive care.
  8. How do the results of COLUMBUS and COMBI-d apply to someone like me?
    Why: Trial populations differ from individual patients; ask how closely you match.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

Nivolumab plus ipilimumab first for asymptomatic lesions (CheckMate 204); radiosurgery for symptomatic or progressing lesions; dabrafenib-trametinib in BRAF-mutant disease needing fast control. See the brain metastases page.

The options, in plain words

A single very high dose, or a few doses, aimed at a small brain or spine target with millimetre precision, replacing whole-brain radiotherapy for most brain metastases.

  • One to five sessions
  • Spares healthy brain
  • Treats targets surgery cannot reach

Nivolumab was the second PD-1 blocker and is often combined with ipilimumab. Long-term data show about half of advanced melanoma patients alive at 10 years on the combination.

Ipilimumab was the first checkpoint inhibitor (2011), and proved the immune system could be unleashed against cancer.

The evidence behind it
The main trade-offs on record
  • Limited to small targets
  • Radiation necrosis in a minority
  • Needs precise imaging and immobilisation
Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Colitis with ipilimumab (1+3 mg/kg) · Monotherapy pooled unless stated25%14.4%
Hepatitis with ipilimumab · Monotherapy pooled unless stated15%13.4%
Colitis · Monotherapy pooled unless stated2.9%1.7%
Hepatitis · Monotherapy pooled unless stated1.8%1.5%

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Colitis (with nivolumab 1+3) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma25%14.4%
Hepatitis (with nivolumab) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma15%13.4%
Rash (with nivolumab) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma28%4.8%
Adrenal insufficiency (with nivolumab) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma8%2.6%

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Stereotactic radiosurgery (Gamma Knife, CyberKnife, linac SRS), Nivolumab and Ipilimumab, which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. How closely do I match the people in CheckMate 204, and does that change what the results mean for me?
    Why: Trial populations are selected; age, fitness, prior treatment and biomarkers all affect how far results carry.
  4. Which side effects of Nivolumab or Ipilimumab are most likely for me, which are reversible, and which would make us stop?
    Why: The recorded rates below come from labels and trials; your own risk depends on dose, other medicines and your health.
  5. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  6. Does your recommendation follow the current guideline (NCCN Guidelines: Melanoma: Cutaneous), and if it departs from it, why?
    Why: Departures from guidelines are sometimes right for an individual; they should be explained.
  7. For my situation (brain metastases), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab first for asymptomatic lesions (CheckMate 204); radiosurgery for symptomatic or progressing lesions; dabrafenib-trametinib in BRAF-mutant disease needing fast control. See the brain metastases page.
  8. Am I a candidate for Nivolumab, Ipilimumab, and what side effects should I expect?
    Why: Knowing the expected toxicities helps you plan work, family, and supportive care.
  9. How do the results of CheckMate 204 apply to someone like me?
    Why: Trial populations differ from individual patients; ask how closely you match.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

Other settings

After PD-1 failure

Lifileucel TIL therapy (C-144-01); RP1 with nivolumab; ipilimumab-based combinations; clinical trials; imatinib for KIT-mutant tumours.

The options, in plain words

Lifileucel was the first approved TIL therapy: the patient's own tumour-fighting immune cells are expanded to billions and given back.

TIL therapyApproved

Immune cells that have already found their way into the tumour are harvested, grown to billions, and returned.

  • Naturally polyclonal against the patient's own neoantigens
  • Works in solid tumours

Vusolimogene oderparepvec is an engineered herpes virus injected into melanoma tumours, approved in August 2026 with nivolumab after immunotherapy failure.

Ipilimumab was the first checkpoint inhibitor (2011), and proved the immune system could be unleashed against cancer.

The drug that started the targeted therapy era in 2001, turning chronic myeloid leukaemia into a manageable condition with near-normal life expectancy.

The evidence behind it
  • Advanced melanoma progressing after anti-PD-1 (and BRAF/MEK if applicable): single infusion of lifileucel TIL
    Show survival figures (1)

    Averages across everyone diagnosed, often years ago. Your stage, subtype, age, fitness and the treatment you receive matter more than the average, and the numbers are improving quickly.

    • ORR 31.4%; median DOR 36.5 months (5-year analysis).
    Objective response rate (%): Lifileucel 31.4 (n=153) · source
The main trade-offs on record
  • Requires resectable tumour and 3-4 week manufacturing
  • IL-2 toxicity
  • Single-centre logistics
Side effectAny gradeGrade 3+
Colitis (with nivolumab 1+3) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma25%14.4%
Hepatitis (with nivolumab) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma15%13.4%
Rash (with nivolumab) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma28%4.8%
Adrenal insufficiency (with nivolumab) · Nivolumab 1 mg/kg + ipilimumab 3 mg/kg, melanoma8%2.6%

Rates from the label or pivotal trial as recorded on the product page; each grade 3+ figure links to its source.

  • Take with a meal and a large glass of water.
Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Lifileucel, TIL therapy, Vusolimogene oderparepvec and the other options, which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. How closely do I match the people in C-144-01, and does that change what the results mean for me?
    Why: Trial populations are selected; age, fitness, prior treatment and biomarkers all affect how far results carry.
  4. Which side effects of Ipilimumab are most likely for me, which are reversible, and which would make us stop?
    Why: The recorded rates below come from labels and trials; your own risk depends on dose, other medicines and your health.
  5. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  6. Does your recommendation follow the current guideline (NCCN Guidelines: Melanoma: Cutaneous), and if it departs from it, why?
    Why: Departures from guidelines are sometimes right for an individual; they should be explained.
  7. For my situation (after pd-1 failure), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Lifileucel TIL therapy (C-144-01); RP1 with nivolumab; ipilimumab-based combinations; clinical trials; imatinib for KIT-mutant tumours.
  8. Am I a candidate for Lifileucel, Vusolimogene oderparepvec, Ipilimumab or related drugs, and what side effects should I expect?
    Why: Knowing the expected toxicities helps you plan work, family, and supportive care.
  9. How do the results of C-144-01 apply to someone like me?
    Why: Trial populations differ from individual patients; ask how closely you match.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

Other settings

Treatment duration

Described in words

Stop anti-PD-1 therapy after two years or after a confirmed complete response; most remissions hold off treatment (KEYNOTE-006).

The path, in plain words

This setting names no product or technology record yet; the approach above is the standard as written. Ask your team which specific treatments they mean.

The evidence behind it
  • Advanced melanoma, ≤1 prior systemic therapy: pembrolizumab (two schedules) vs ipilimumab
    Show survival figures (1)

    Averages across everyone diagnosed, often years ago. Your stage, subtype, age, fitness and the treatment you receive matter more than the average, and the numbers are improving quickly.

    • 10-year OS 34.0% vs 23.6%.
    Overall survival at 10 years (%): Pembrolizumab 34 vs Ipilimumab 23.6 · source
The main trade-offs on record

No side-effect rates or interaction flags are recorded for these options yet. The side-effect lookup and interaction checker cover the products that have them.

Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Which specific treatments are you proposing for this setting, and what are the alternatives?
    Why: The standard of care here is described in words rather than named products; ask for the names.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. How closely do I match the people in KEYNOTE-006, and does that change what the results mean for me?
    Why: Trial populations are selected; age, fitness, prior treatment and biomarkers all affect how far results carry.
  4. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  5. Does your recommendation follow the current guideline (NCCN Guidelines: Melanoma: Cutaneous), and if it departs from it, why?
    Why: Departures from guidelines are sometimes right for an individual; they should be explained.
  6. For my situation (treatment duration), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Stop anti-PD-1 therapy after two years or after a confirmed complete response; most remissions hold off treatment (KEYNOTE-006).
  7. How do the results of KEYNOTE-006 apply to someone like me?
    Why: Trial populations differ from individual patients; ask how closely you match.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

Special situations

Oligometastatic disease

2 options

Surgery or radiosurgery for isolated metastases alongside systemic therapy; isolated limb perfusion for limb-confined disease.

The options, in plain words

A single very high dose, or a few doses, aimed at a small brain or spine target with millimetre precision, replacing whole-brain radiotherapy for most brain metastases.

  • One to five sessions
  • Spares healthy brain
  • Treats targets surgery cannot reach

Isolating the blood supply of an arm or leg so that chemotherapy doses 15-20 times higher than the body could tolerate can be circulated through it, to save limbs with melanoma or sarcoma that would otherwise be amputated.

  • Limb salvage in otherwise unresectable sarcoma
  • High complete response in melanoma in-transit disease
  • Minimal systemic toxicity when leak is controlled
The evidence behind it

No trial record is attached to this row yet. The trials tab lists what is recruiting and the landmark trials for this cancer.

The main trade-offs on record
  • Limited to small targets
  • Radiation necrosis in a minority
  • Needs precise imaging and immobilisation
  • Major operation; regional toxicity (Wieberdink grade)
  • TNF-α not approved in the US
  • Displaced in melanoma by systemic immunotherapy
Questions to ask about this decision
  1. Between Stereotactic radiosurgery (Gamma Knife, CyberKnife, linac SRS) and Isolated limb perfusion and infusion, which do you recommend for me, and what about my case would make you choose differently?
    Why: Guidelines list several reasonable options; the choice turns on details of your tumour, your health and your priorities.
  2. What is each option trying to achieve: cure, long control, or relief of symptoms, and over what time?
    Why: The aim shapes how much side effect and disruption is worth accepting.
  3. What happens if I delay, or decline this step for now? Is the decision reversible?
    Why: Some decisions can wait for a second opinion or a trial slot; others cannot. Knowing which is part of the choice.
  4. Does your recommendation follow the current guideline (NCCN Guidelines: Melanoma: Cutaneous), and if it departs from it, why?
    Why: Departures from guidelines are sometimes right for an individual; they should be explained.
  5. For my situation (oligometastatic disease), which of the standard options do you recommend and why?
    Why: Guideline options include: Surgery or radiosurgery for isolated metastases alongside systemic therapy; isolated limb perfusion for limb-confined disease.

Add these to your appointment list, or take the full question set for this cancer.

How to read this page. Options and results come from OnCo records with their sources; the settings are the standard-of-care rows on the cancer page, and the lines of therapy are on the sequencing grid. Where a setting names one path, the choice is usually about timing, trials and where to be treated: see expert centres. OnCo is orientation, not medical advice.