5-Year Outcomes with Cobimetinib plus Vemurafenib in BRAFV600 Mutation-Positive Advanced Melanoma: Extended Follow-up of the coBRIM Study

Characterisation and outcome of RAC1 mutated melanoma

BACKGROUND

Activating hot spot R29S mutations in RAC1, a small GTPase influencing several cellular processes including cell proliferation and cytoskeleton rearrangement, have been reported in up to 9% of sun-exposed melanomas. Clinical characteristics and treatment implications of RAC1 mutations in melanoma remain unclear.

METHODS

We investigated the largest set (n = 64) of RAC1 mutated melanoma patients reported to date, including a retrospective single institution cohort (n = 34) from the University Hospital Essen and a prospective multicentre cohort (n = 30) from the translational study Tissue Registry in Melanoma (TRIM; CA209-578), for patient and tumour characteristics as well as therapy outcomes.

RESULTS

From 3037 sequenced melanoma samples screened RAC1 mutations occurred in ^∼2% of samples (64/3037). The most common RAC1 mutation was P29S (95%, 61/64). The majority of tumours had co-occuring MAP kinase mutations (88%, 56/64); mostly activating NRAS (47%, 30/64) mutations, followed by activating BRAF (28%, 18/64) and NF1 (25%, 16/64) mutations. RAC1 mutated melanomas were almost exclusively of cutaneous origin (84%, 54/64) or of unknown primary (MUP, 14%, 9/64). C > T alterations were the most frequent mutation type identified demonstrating a UV-signature for RAC1 mutated melanoma. Most patients with unresectable disease (39) received immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) (77%, 30/39). Objective response rate of first-line treatment in patients with stage III/IV disease was 21%; median overall survival was 47.8 months.

CONCLUSIONS

RAC1 mutated melanomas are rare, mostly of cutaneous origin and frequently harbour concomitant MAP kinase mutations, particularly in NRAS. Patients with advanced disease benefit from systemic treatment with ICI.

Sequencing Targeted and Immune Therapy in BRAF-Mutant Melanoma: Lessons Learned

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The treatment strategy for BRAF-mutated melanoma remains unsatisfactory, although the advent of immune checkpoint inhibition has improved the prognosis of advanced melanoma. This article reports current evidence on the efficacy and safety of sequential immunotherapy with targeted therapy in patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma. It discusses criteria for the use of available options in clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Targeted therapy provides rapid disease control in a relatively high proportion of patients, although the development of secondary resistance limits the duration of responses; in contrast, immunotherapy may induce slow but more durable responses in a subset of patients. Therefore, the identification of a combination strategy for the use of these therapies seems a promising perspective. Currently, inconsistent data have been obtained, but most studies indicate that the administration of BRAFi/MEKi prior to immune checkpoint inhibitors appears to reduce the efficacy of immunotherapy. On the contrary, several clinical and real-life studies suggest that frontline immunotherapy with subsequent targeted therapy may be associated with better tumor control than immunotherapy alone. Larger clinical studies are ongoing to confirm the efficacy and safety of this sequencing strategy for treating BRAF-mutated melanoma with immunotherapy followed by targeted therapy.

Chemotherapy in Cutaneous Melanoma: Is There Still a Role?

Purpose of Review

In the preceding decade, the management of metastatic cutaneous melanoma has been revolutionised with the development of highly effective therapies including immune checkpoint inhibitors (specifically CTLA-4 and PD-1 inhibitors) and targeted therapies (BRAF and MEK inhibitors). The role of chemotherapy in the contemporary management of melanoma is undefined.

Recent Findings

Extended analyses highlight substantially improved 5-year survival rates of approximately 50% in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with first-line therapies. However, most patients will progress on these first-line treatments. Sequencing of chemotherapy following failure of targeted and immunotherapies is associated with low objective response rates and short progression-free survival, and thus, meaningful benefits to patients are minimal.

Summary

Chemotherapy has limited utility in the contemporary management of cutaneous melanoma (with a few exceptions, discussed herein) and should not be the standard treatment sequence following failure of first-line therapies. Instead, enrolment onto clinical trials should be standard-of-care in these patients.

Addressing the unmet needs of patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma in Latin America: Expert perspective

Melanoma represents an increasing public health burden with extensive unmet needs in Latin America (LA). A mutation in the BRAF gene is present in approximately 50% of all melanomas in White populations and is a target of precision medicine, with the potential to dramatically improve patient outcomes. Thus, increased access to BRAF testing and therapy is LA must be explored. At a multi-day conference, a panel of Latin American experts in oncology and dermatology were provided with questions to address the barriers limiting access to testing for BRAF mutation in patients with melanoma in LA, who may be eligible for targeted therapy to improve their prognosis. During the conference, responses were discussed and edited until a consensus on addressing the barriers was achieved. Identified challenges included ignorance of BRAF-status implications, limited human and infrastructural resources, affordability and reimbursement, fragmented care delivery, pitfalls in the sample journey, and lack of local data. Despite the clear benefits of targeted therapies for BRAF-mutated melanoma in other regions, there is no clear path to prepare LA for a sustainable personalized medicine approach to this disease. Due to melanoma’s time-sensitive nature, LA must aim to provide early access to BRAF testing and consider mutational status within treatment decision making. To this end, recommendations are provided and include establishing multidisciplinary teams and melanoma referral centers and improving access to diagnosis and treatment.

Long-Term Real-World Outcomes and Safety of Vemurafenib and Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib Therapy in Patients with BRAF-Mutated Melanoma

BACKGROUND

Combined treatment with BRAFi and/or MEK inhibitors (MEKi) improves outcomes in advanced melanoma patients in comparison with monotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to report real-world treatment efficacy and safety of vemurafenib (V) and vemurafenib + cobimetinib (V + C) from 10 years of practice.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 275 consecutive patients with unresectable or metastatic BRAF mutated melanoma started first-line V or V + C treatment between 1 October 2013 and 31 December 2020. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Log-rank and Chi-square tests were used for comparison between groups.

RESULTS

The estimated median overall survival (mOS) was 10.3 months in the V group, and 12.3 months in the V + C group (p = 0.0005; HR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.2-2.1), although the latter group of patients had lactate dehydrogenase elevated numerically more often. Estimated median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 5.5 months in the V group, and 8.3 months in the V + C group (p = 0.0002; HR = 1.62, 95% CI 1.3-2.1). Complete response, partial response, stable disease, and progressive disease as best responses were recorded in the V/V + C groups in 7%/10%, 52%/46%, 26%/28%, and 15%/16% of patients, respectively. The numbers of patients with any grade of adverse effects were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

We confirmed significant improvement in the mOS and mPFS of unresectable and/or metastatic BRAF mutated-melanoma patients treated outside clinical trials with V + C as compared with V, with no major increase in toxicity for the combination.

Precision oncology for BRAF-mutant cancers with BRAF and MEK inhibitors: from melanoma to tissue-agnostic therapy

BRAF activation occurs as part of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) cellular signaling pathway which leads to increased cellular proliferation and survival. Mutations in BRAF can result in unbridled activation of downstream kinases with subsequent uncontrolled cellular growth that formulate the basis for oncogenesis in multiple tumor types. Targeting BRAF by selective inhibitors has been one of the early successes in precision oncology. Agents have been explored either as monotherapy or in combination with MEK inhibition in BRAF V600-mutant pan-cancers and with EGFR inhibition in colorectal cancer. Spectrum of BRAF inhibition has evolved from being melanoma-specific to being a pan-cancer target. In this article, we review BRAF and MEK inhibitor drug development journey from tissue-specific melanoma, non-small-cell lung cancer, and anaplastic thyroid cancer to tissue-agnostic approvals.

Improved outcomes in women with BRAF-mutant melanoma treated with BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy across randomized clinical trials. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Available evidence suggests that in patients with advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma treated with the combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors, gender could be associated with survival outcome. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized clinical trials (RCTs) testing the combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors, to assess the interaction between treatment effect and patients' gender. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus, for phase II and III RCTs up to January 30, 2022. We included all RCTs that enrolled patients with BRAF V600-mutant advanced cutaneous melanoma and assessed combinations of BRAF and MEK inhibitors versus BRAF inhibitor monotherapy. Our aim was to assess differences if any in treatment efficacy between men and women, measured in terms of the differences in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) log-hazard ratios (log-HRs). We calculated the pooled PFS- and OS-HRs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in men and women using a random-effects model and assessed the heterogeneity between the estimates using an interaction test. Five RCTs that enrolled a total of 2,113 patients were included in the analysis. In women, the combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors halved the risk of progression or death as compared with BRAF inhibitor monotherapy with a pooled PFS-HR of 0.50 (95%CI 0.41-0.61). In men, the benefit obtained with BRAF and MEK inhibitors was smaller with a pooled PFS-HR of 0.63 (95%CI 0.54-0.74), P-heterogeneity = .05. A similar trend was observed for OS where the pooled OS-HR was 0.62 (95%CI 0.48-0.80) in women and only 0.78, (95%CI 0.67-0.92) in men, P-heterogeneity = 0.11. These results support meaningful gender-based heterogeneity of response to combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors targeted therapy in patients with advanced BRAF-mutant melanoma, that should be considered in future research to improve treatment effectiveness.

Efficacy of immunotherapy (Prolgolimab) and targeted therapy (Trametinib and Dabrafenib, Cobimetinib and Vemurafenib) in adult patients with metastatic or unresectable skin melanoma: matching-adjusted indirect comparison

Aim. To assess the comparative clinical efficacy of Prolgolimab monotherapy versus combination therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors (Dabrafenib and Trametinib, Vemurafenib and Cobimetinb) in adult patients with metastatic or unresectable skin melanoma implementing a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). Materials and methods. We conducted a systematic search for randomized clinical trials of Prolgolimab, combinations of Dabrafenib and Trametinib, Cobimetinib and Vemurafenib. Unanchored MAIC was applied due to the absence of common comparator between trials. We determined effect modifiers based on an expert survey. The population from Prolgolimab studies was weighted using defined effect modifiers, followed by the approximation of survival curves. Results. Systematic literature search revealed 4 RCTs that met the inclusion criteria: MIRACULUM, coBRIM, combi-v and combi-d. To increase the power of prolgolimab comparison, data from the observational study FORA were included in evidence synthesis and combined with data from MIRACULUM. We selected M staging and the proportion of patients with elevated LDH levels as effect modifiers. No significant differences (all p0.05) were established between Prolgolimab and combination therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors for both OS after 1 year and PFS outcomes after 2 years from initiation. Discussion. Despite the inclusion of observational data and the limitations of adjusted indirect comparison method, the results of this analyses are consistent with both other comparisons of anti-PD1 inhibitors with BRAF/MEK inhibitors, and with real world data. It is necessary to recompare targeted therapy and immunotherapy after five-year follow-up period due to peculiarities of time of onset of their effect with the presence of a primary failure with a gradual exit to a long plateau on anti-PD1 inhibitors therapy. Conclusion. In these unanchored MAICs, Prolgolimab monotherapy showed comparable efficacy with combinations of BRAF/MEK inhibitors (Dabrafenib + Trametinib, Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib) in first line therapy of patients with metastatic or unresectable melanoma. This analysis may be relevant for clinical decision-making about the choice of the first line therapy for patients with BRAF mutation.

Ocular adverse events associated with BRAF and MEK inhibitor combination therapy: a pharmacovigilance disproportionality analysis of the FDA adverse event reporting system

BACKGROUND

BRAF and MEK inhibitor combination therapy have significantly improved the outcome of several BRAF-mutation tumors, but it also confers the risk of drug-induced ocular adverse events (oAEs). However, very few studies focused on this risk.

METHODS

The United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) data from Quarter 1-2011 to Quarter 2-2022 were searched to detect signs of oAEs of three marketed BRAF and MEK inhibitor combination therapies: vemurafenib plus cobimetinib (V + C), dabrafenib plus trametinib (D + T), and encorafenib plus binimetinib (E + B). Disproportionality analyses were performed by calculating the proportional reporting ratio (PRR), χ2 (chi-square), and reporting odds ratios (RORs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A series of oAEs were identified, including 42 preferred terms, which could be classified into 8 aspects. In addition to previously reported oAEs, several unexpected oAE signals were detected. Moreover, differences in oAE profiles were found among three combination therapies (V + C, D + T, and E + B).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support an association between several oAEs and BRAF and MEK inhibitor combination therapies, including several new oAEs. In addition, oAEs profiles may vary across the treatment regimens. Further studies are needed to better quantify these oAEs.

Efficacy and Safety of Trametinib Monotherapy or in Combination With Dabrafenib in Pediatric BRAF V600-Mutant Low-Grade Glioma

PURPOSE

BRAF V600 mutations occur in many childhood cancers, including approximately 20% of low-grade gliomas (LGGs). Here, we describe a phase I/II study establishing pediatric dosing and pharmacokinetics of trametinib with or without dabrafenib, as well as efficacy and safety in a disease-specific cohort with BRAF V600-mutant LGG; other cohorts will be reported elsewhere.

METHODS

This is a four-part, phase I/II study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02124772) in patients age < 18 years with relapsed/refractory malignancies: trametinib monotherapy dose finding (part A) and disease-specific expansion (part B), and dabrafenib + trametinib dose finding (part C) and disease-specific expansion (part D). The primary objective assessed in all patients in parts A and C was to determine pediatric dosing on the basis of steady-state pharmacokinetics. Disease-specific efficacy and safety (across parts A-D) were secondary objectives.

RESULTS

Overall, 139 patients received trametinib (n = 91) or dabrafenib + trametinib (n = 48). Trametinib dose-limiting toxicities in > 1 patient (part A) included mucosal inflammation (n = 3) and hyponatremia (n = 2). There were no dose-limiting toxicities with combination therapy (part C). The recommended phase II dose of trametinib, with or without dabrafenib, was 0.032 mg/kg once daily for patients age < 6 years and 0.025 mg/kg once daily for patients age ≥ 6 years; dabrafenib dosing in the combination was as previously identified for monotherapy. In 49 patients with BRAF V600-mutant glioma (LGG, n = 47) across all four study parts, independently assessed objective response rates were 15% (95% CI, 1.9 to 45.4) for monotherapy (n = 13) and 25% (95% CI, 12.1 to 42.2) for combination (n = 36). Adverse event-related treatment discontinuations were more common with monotherapy (54% v 22%).

CONCLUSION

The trial design provided efficient evaluation of pediatric dosing, safety, and efficacy of single-agent and combination targeted therapy. Age-based and weight-based dosing of trametinib with or without dabrafenib achieved target concentrations with manageable safety and demonstrated clinical efficacy and tolerability in BRAF V600-mutant LGG.

BRAF inhibitor cessation prior to disease progression in metastatic melanoma: Long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

BRAF mutant melanoma treated with BRAF ± MEK inhibitor (targeted therapy) has a high response rate; however, most patients progress (PD). Some patients have durable response, but it is unknown whether treatment can be discontinued in these patients. We describe the recurrence risk, progression patterns, response to subsequent treatment, and survival of patients with advanced melanoma who ceased targeted therapy prior to PD.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ninety-four patients who ceased targeted therapy without progression were identified retrospectively from 11 centres: 45 were male; 81 V600E; 88 stage IV. Fifty-nine were treated with BRAF + MEK inhibitor, and 35 were treated with BRAF inhibitor alone. Median treatment duration was 29.6 months (range 0.36-77.9). At cessation, 67 were in complete response, 21 in partial response, and 2 stable disease.

RESULTS

After median follow-up from cessation of 42.9 months (range 0.0-88.7), 36 (38%) progressed; median time to progression was 4.7 months (range 0.7-56.9); 30 (83%) were asymptomatic and 7 (19%) had new brain metastases. Progression rates did not differ by best response: 34% for complete response and 43% for partial response (P = 0.65). Treatment duration was strongly associated with risk of progression: Median treatment duration was 18.3 (range 0.85-65.7) months for those who progressed and 34.6 (range 0.36-77.9) months for those who did not (P = 0.0004). Twenty-two received further targeted therapy with 15 (68%) responses.

CONCLUSION

Risk of progression after cessation of targeted therapy is strongly associated with treatment duration. Response to retreatment with targeted therapy is high.

BRAF and MEK Inhibitors and Their Toxicities: A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis summarizes the incidence of treatment-related adverse events (AE) of BRAFi and MEKi.

METHODS

A systematic search of Medline/PubMed was conducted to identify suitable articles published in English up to 31 December 2021. The primary outcomes were profiles for all-grade and grade 3 or higher treatment-related AEs, and the analysis of single side effects belonging to both categories.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of treatment-related all-grade Aes was 99% for Encorafenib (95% CI: 0.97-1.00) and 97% for Trametinib (95% CI: 0.92-0.99; I² = 66%) and Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.94-0.99; I² = 0%). In combined therapies, the rate was 98% for both Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (95% CI: 0.96-0.99; I² = 77%) and Encorafenib + Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.96-1.00). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in 69% of cases for Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.50-0.84; I² = 71%), 68% for Encorafenib (95% CI: 0.61-0.74), and 72% for Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (95% CI: 0.65-0.79; I² = 84%). The most common grade 1-2 AEs were pyrexia (43%) and fatigue (28%) for Dabrafenib + Trametinib and diarrhea for both Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (52%) and Encorafenib + Binimetinib (34%). The most common AEs of grade 3 or higher were pyrexia, rash, and hypertension for Dabrafenib + Trametinib (6%), rash and hypertension for Encorafenib + Binimetinib (6%), and increased AST and ALT for Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (10%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides comprehensive data on treatment-related adverse events of BRAFi and MEKi combination therapies, showing related toxicity profiles to offer a helpful tool for clinicians in the choice of therapy.

COLUMBUS 5-Year Update: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial of Encorafenib Plus Binimetinib Versus Vemurafenib or Encorafenib in Patients With BRAF V600-Mutant Melanoma

PURPOSE

Combination treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors has demonstrated benefits on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and is a standard of care for the treatment of advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma. Here, we report the 5-year update from the COLUMBUS trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01909453).

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma, untreated or progressed after first-line immunotherapy, were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily, vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily, or encorafenib 300 mg once daily. An updated analysis was conducted 65 months after the last patient was randomly assigned.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventy-seven patients were randomly assigned: 192 to encorafenib plus binimetinib, 191 to vemurafenib, and 194 to encorafenib. The 5-year PFS and OS rates with encorafenib plus binimetinib were 23% and 35% overall and 31% and 45% in those with normal lactate dehydrogenase levels, respectively. In comparison, the 5-year PFS and OS rates with vemurafenib were 10% and 21% overall and 12% and 28% in those with normal lactate dehydrogenase levels, respectively. The median duration of response with encorafenib plus binimetinib was 18.6 months, with disease control achieved in 92.2% of patients. In comparison, the median duration of response with vemurafenib was 12.3 months, with disease control achieved in 81.2% of patients. Long-term follow-up showed no new safety concerns, and results were consistent with the known tolerability profile of encorafenib plus binimetinib. Interactive visualization of the data presented in this article is available at COLUMBUS dashboard.

CONCLUSION

In this 5-year update of part 1 of the COLUMBUS trial, encorafenib plus binimetinib treatment demonstrated continued long-term benefits and a consistent safety profile in patients with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma.

Long-term survival of patients with advanced melanoma treated with BRAF-MEK inhibitors

Recent results of patients with advanced melanoma treated with first-line BRAF-MEK inhibitors in clinical trials showed 5-year survival in one-third of patients with a median overall survival (OS) of more than 2 years. This study aimed to investigate these patients' real-world survival and identify the characteristics of long-term survivors. The study population consisted of patients with advanced cutaneous melanoma with a BRAF-V600 mutated tumor who were treated with first-line BRAF-MEK inhibitors between 2013 and 2017. Long-term survival was defined as a minimum OS of 2 years from start therapy. The median progression-free survival (mPFS) and median OS (mOS) of real-world patients ( n  = 435) were respectively 8.0 (95% CI, 6.8-9.4) and 11.7 (95% CI, 10.3-13.5) months. Two-year survival was reached by 28% of the patients, 22% reached 3-year survival and 19% reached 4-year survival. Real-world patients often had brain metastases (41%), stage IV M1c disease (87%), ECOG PS ≥2 (21%), ≥3 organ sites (62%) and elevated LDH of ≥250 U/I (49%). Trial-eligible real-world patients had an mOS of 17.9 months. Patients surviving more than 2 years ( n  = 116) more often had an ECOG PS ≤1 (83%), normal LDH (60%), no brain metastases (60%), no liver metastases (63%) and <3 organ sites (60%). Long-term survival of real-world patients treated with first-line BRAF-MEK inhibitors is significantly lower than that of trial patients, which is probably explained by poorer baseline characteristics of patients treated in daily practice. Long-term survivors generally had more favorable characteristics with regard to age, LDH level and metastatic sites, compared to patients not reaching long-term survival.

Immunotherapy Options for Acral Melanoma, A fast-growing but Neglected Malignancy

Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer. It is classified as cutaneous and non-cutaneous, with the former characterized by developing in sun-exposed areas of the skin, UV-light radiation being its most important risk factor and ordinarily affecting fair skin populations. In recent years, the incidence of melanoma has been increasing in populations with darker complexion, for example, Hispanics, in which acral melanoma is highly prevalent. The WHO estimates that the incidence and mortality of melanoma will increase by more than 60% by 2040, particularly in low/medium income countries. Acral melanoma appears in the palms, soles and nails, and because of these occult locations, it is often considered different from other cutaneous melanomas even though it also originates in the skin. Acral melanoma is very rare in Caucasian populations and is often not included from genetic analysis and clinical trials. In this review, we present the worldwide epidemiology of acral melanoma; we summarize its genetic characterization and point out important signaling pathways for targeted therapy. We also discuss how genetic analyses have shown that acral melanoma carries a sufficient mutational load and neoantigen formation to be targeted by the immune system, arguing for a potential benefit with novel immunotherapeutic strategies, alone or combined with targeted therapy. This is important because chemotherapy remains the first-line treatment in non-developed nations despite a disheartening response. In summary, the increased incidence and mortality of acral melanoma in low/medium income countries calls for increasing our knowledge about its nature and therapeutic options and leveling off the asymmetric research conducted primarily on Caucasian populations.

Melanoma Treatments and Mortality Rate Trends in the US, 1975 to 2019

IMPORTANCE

Melanoma accounts for most of the deaths due to skin cancer. In the past decade, effective US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved therapies for melanoma have emerged.

OBJECTIVE

To review changes in the long-term melanoma mortality rate (MMR) trends in the US and determine whether they have any temporal association with the FDA approval of new agents.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study used population data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and retrospectively reviewed the age-adjusted MMR trends in adult patients (aged ≥18 years) from 1975 to 2019 in the US population. The timeline of the FDA approvals for melanoma treatment was also reviewed. Data were analyzed from March 15 to August 15, 2022.

EXPOSURES

Outcomes were assessed in association with FDA approval of drugs for the treatment of melanoma.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Mortality rates are from the SEER database, reported per 100 000 population and age-adjusted to the 2000 US standard population. The annual percent change (APC) has been used to report long-term trends.

RESULTS

After the introduction of newer treatments in 2011 (most after 2013), a significant reduction in MMR was seen from 2013 to 2017 in the US for the first time in the past 40 years. Rates increased from 1975 to 1988 (APC, 1.65% [95% CI, 1.30%-2.00%]; P < .001). No statistically significant change in MMR was seen from 1988 to 2013 (APC, 0.01% [95% CI, -1.10% to 0.12%]; P = .85). The MMR decreased significantly from 2013 to 2017 (APC, -6.28% [95% CI, -8.52% to -3.97%]; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest a benefit associated with the availability of effective therapies in the past decade and further suggest that the use of new pharmacological therapies is associated with decreased MMR in the US population. These data are very encouraging and support the continued development of such therapies. Additionally, the accessibility of these treatments and the associated health care costs need to be addressed.

The future of targeted kinase inhibitors in melanoma

Melanoma is a cancer of the pigment-producing cells of the body and its incidence is rising. Targeted inhibitors that act against kinases in the MAPK pathway are approved for BRAF-mutant metastatic cutaneous melanoma and increase patients' survival. Response to these therapies is limited by drug resistance and is less durable than with immune checkpoint inhibition. Conversely, rare melanoma subtypes have few therapeutic options for advanced disease and MAPK pathway targeting agents show minimal anti-tumor effects. Nevertheless, there is a future for targeted kinase inhibitors in melanoma: in new applications such as adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy and in novel combinations with immunotherapies or other targeted therapies. Pre-clinical studies continue to identify tumor dependencies and their corresponding actionable drug targets, paving the way for rational targeted kinase inhibitor combinations as a personalized medicine approach for melanoma.

A novel microRNA signature for the detection of melanoma by liquid biopsy

BACKGROUND

Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer and metastatic disease is associated with a significant survival rate drop. There is an urgent need for consistent tumor biomarkers to scale precision medicine and reduce cancer mortality. Here, we aimed to identify a melanoma-specific circulating microRNA signature and assess its value as a diagnostic tool.

METHODS

The study consisted of a discovery phase and two validation phases. Circulating plasma extracellular vesicles (pEV) associated microRNA profiles were obtained from a discovery cohort of metastatic melanoma patients and normal subjects as controls. A pEV-microRNA signature was obtained using a LASSO penalized logistic regression model. The pEV-microRNA signature was subsequently validated both in a publicly available dataset and in an independent internal cohort.

RESULTS

We identified and validated in three independent cohorts a panel of melanoma-specific circulating microRNAs that showed high accuracy in differentiating melanoma patients from healthy subjects with an area under the curve (AUC) of 1.00, 0.94 and 0.75 respectively. Investigation of the function of the pEV-microRNA signature evidenced their possible immune suppressive role in melanoma patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate that a blood test based on circulating microRNAs can non-invasively detect melanoma, offering a novel diagnostic tool for improving standard care. Moreover, we revealed an immune suppressive role for melanoma pEV-microRNAs.

Chemotherapie nach Progress unter Immuncheckpoint-Inhibition beim metastasierten malignen Melanom: Fallbericht und Literaturübersicht

Hintergrund Immuncheckpoint-Inhibitoren (ICI), BRAF- und MEK-Inhibitoren haben die Prognose von Patienten mit metastasiertem malignem Melanom entscheidend verbessert. Nichtsdestotrotz spricht ein erheblicher Prozentsatz nicht oder nur vorübergehend auf diese modernen Therapien an. Insbesondere bei Patienten mit BRAF-Wildtyp-Melanom sind die Therapieoptionen nach Versagen von ICI limitiert.

Kasuistik Eine 24-jährige Patientin stellte sich im Dezember 2015 mit einem akrolentiginösen malignen Melanom am linken Fußballen im Tumorstadium IIB (pT4a, pN0, cM0, Infiltrationstiefe 7,95 mm, BRAF-V600-Wildtyp) vor, das leitliniengerecht operativ versorgt und für 18 Monate adjuvant mit Interferon-alpha behandelt wurde. Nach Diagnose von zwei Lymphknotenmetastasen links inguinal und radikaler Lymphknotendissektion erhielt die Patientin für 12 Monate eine adjuvante Therapie mit Nivolumab. Nach einem 10-monatigen tumorfreien Intervall ohne Therapie erbrachte das Staging eine paraaortale Lymphknotenmetastase. Gemäß Tumorkonferenz-Beschluss wurde bei nunmehr vorliegendem Stadium IV eine Immunkombinationstherapie mit Nivolumab und Ipilimumab begonnen, die nach 2 Gaben aufgrund einer Autoimmunkolitis und -hepatitis Grad 3 beendet und auf eine Nivolumab-Monotherapie umgestellt wurde. Bei erneutem Tumorprogress auch nach Metastasenresektion und fehlender Möglichkeit einer Studienteilnahme wurde eine palliative Chemotherapie mit Dacarbazin 850 mg/m2 alle 3 Wochen eingeleitet. Hiermit ließ sich nach 4 Zyklen eine partielle Remission und nach 10 Zyklen eine Komplettremission erzielen, die nunmehr seit 10 Monaten ohne Therapie anhält.

Diskussion Es gibt Hinweise darauf, dass die Effektivität einer Chemotherapie nach vorangegangener Immuncheckpoint-Inhibition höher ist als ohne diese Vortherapie, möglicherweise durch einen immunmodulatorischen Effekt der Chemotherapie, der synergistisch mit einer Immunaktivierung durch ICI wirkt. Bisher liegen nur wenige Studien zu dieser Therapiesequenz beim Melanom vor, bei denen es sich ausschließlich um retrospektive Analysen handelt. Diese weisen auf einen klinischen Nutzen der Therapiesequenz hin, wenngleich die Evidenz hierfür sehr gering ist. Die meisten Patienten, die nach einer Vortherapie mit ICI auf Dacarbazin oder andere Chemotherapien ansprechen, erreichen eine partielle Remission. Anhaltende Komplettremissionen wie bei unserer Patientin sind eine Rarität.

UV-Induced Somatic Mutations Driving Clonal Evolution in Healthy Skin, Nevus, and Cutaneous Melanoma

Introduction: Due to its aggressiveness, cutaneous melanoma (CM) is responsible for most skin cancer-related deaths worldwide. The origin of CM is closely linked to the appearance of UV-induced somatic mutations in melanocytes present in normal skin or in CM precursor lesions (nevi or dysplastic nevi). In recent years, new NGS studies performed on CM tissue have increased the understanding of the genetic somatic changes underlying melanomagenesis and CM tumor progression. Methods: We reviewed the literature using all important scientific databases. All articles related to genomic mutations in CM as well as normal skin and nevi were included, in particular those related to somatic mutations produced by UV radiation. Conclusions: CM development and progression are strongly associated with exposure to UV radiation, although each melanoma subtype has different characteristic genetic alterations and evolutionary trajectories. While BRAF and NRAS mutations are common in the early stages of tumor development for most CM subtypes, changes in CDKN2A, TP53 and PTEN, together with TERT promoter mutations, are especially common in advanced stages. Additionally, large genome duplications, loss of heterozygosity, and copy number variations are hallmarks of metastatic disease. Finally, the mutations driving melanoma targeted-therapy drug resistance are also summarized. The complete sequential stages of clonal evolution leading to CM onset from normal skin or nevi are still unknown, so further studies are needed in this field to shed light on the molecular pathways involved in CM malignant transformation and in melanoma acquired drug resistance.

Treatment of Metastatic Melanoma at First Diagnosis: Review of the Literature

Metastatic melanoma (MM) is a pathological entity with a very poor prognosis that, until a few decades ago, had a low response rate to systemic treatments. Fortunately, in the last few years, new therapies for metastatic melanoma have emerged. Currently, targeted therapy and immunotherapy are the mainstays of the therapeutic arsenal available for patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma. However, both clinical evolution and drug efficacy in melanoma patients are very different depending on the stage at which it is diagnosed. In fact, the aggressiveness of melanoma is different depending on whether it debuts directly as metastatic disease or if what occurs is a relapse after a first diagnosis at an early stage, although the biological determinants are largely unknown. Another key aspect in the clinical management of metastatic melanoma at first diagnosis strives in the different prognosis of melanoma of unknown primary (MUP) compared to melanoma of known primary (MPK). Understanding the mechanisms behind this, and the repercussion of implementing targeted and immune therapies in this specific form is crucial for designing diagnosis and treatment decision algorithms that optimize the current strategies. In this review article, we recapitulate the information available thus far regarding the epidemiology and response to immunotherapy treatments or targeted therapy in patients diagnosed with metastatic melanoma as a first diagnosis, with especial emphasis on the emerging specific information of the subpopulation formed by MUP patients.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for melanoma. Part 2: Treatment - Update 2022

A unique collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), and the European Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed to make recommendations on cutaneous melanoma diagnosis and treatment, based on the systematic literature reviews and the experts' experience. Cutaneous melanomas are excised with one to 2-cm safety margins. Sentinel lymph node dissection shall be performed as a staging procedure in patients with tumor thickness ≥1.0 mm or ≥0.8 mm with additional histological risk factors, although there is as yet no clear survival benefit for this approach. Therapeutic decisions in stage III/IV patients should be primarily made by an interdisciplinary oncology team ("tumor board"). Adjuvant therapies can be proposed in stage III/completely resected stage IV patients and are primarily anti-PD-1, independent of mutational status, or alternatively dabrafenib plus trametinib for BRAF mutant patients. In distant metastases (stage IV), either resected or not, systemic treatment is always indicated. For first-line treatment particularly in BRAF wild-type patients, immunotherapy with PD-1 antibodies alone or in combination with CTLA-4 antibodies shall be considered. In stage IV melanoma with a BRAF-V600  E/K mutation, first-line therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors can be offered as an alternative to immunotherapy. In patients with primary resistance to immunotherapy and harboring a BRAF-V600  E/K mutation, this therapy shall be offered as second-line therapy. Systemic therapy in stage III/IV melanoma is a rapidly changing landscape, and it is likely that these recommendations may change in the near future.

Spartalizumab or placebo in combination with dabrafenib and trametinib in patients with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma: exploratory biomarker analyses from a randomized phase 3 trial (COMBI-i)

Background

The randomized phase 3 COMBI-i trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improved progression-free survival (PFS) with spartalizumab plus dabrafenib and trametinib (sparta-DabTram) vs placebo plus dabrafenib and trametinib (placebo-DabTram) in the overall population of patients with unresectable/metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma. This prespecified exploratory biomarker analysis was performed to identify subgroups that may derive greater treatment benefit from sparta-DabTram.

Methods

In COMBI-i (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02967692), 532 patients received spartalizumab 400 mg intravenously every 4 weeks plus dabrafenib 150 mg orally two times daily and trametinib 2 mg orally one time daily or placebo-DabTram. Baseline/on-treatment pharmacodynamic markers were assessed via flow cytometry-based immunophenotyping and plasma cytokine profiling. Baseline programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status and T-cell phenotype were assessed via immunohistochemistry; BRAF V600 mutation type, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) via DNA sequencing; gene expression signatures via RNA sequencing; and CD4⁺/CD8⁺ T-cell ratio via immunophenotyping.

Results

Extensive biomarker analyses were possible in approximately 64% to 90% of the intention-to-treat population, depending on sample availability and assay. Subgroups based on PD-L1 status/TMB or T-cell inflammation did not show significant differences in PFS benefit with sparta-DabTram vs placebo-DabTram, although T-cell inflammation was prognostic across treatment arms. Subgroups defined by BRAF V600K mutation (HR 0.45 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.99)), detectable ctDNA shedding (HR 0.75 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.96)), or CD4⁺/CD8⁺ ratio above median (HR 0.58 (95% CI 0.40 to 0.84)) derived greater PFS benefit with sparta-DabTram vs placebo-DabTram. In a multivariate analysis, ctDNA emerged as strongly prognostic (p=0.007), while its predictive trend did not reach significance; in contrast, CD4⁺/CD8⁺ ratio was strongly predictive (interaction p=0.0131).

Conclusions

These results support the feasibility of large-scale comprehensive biomarker analyses in the context of a global phase 3 study. T-cell inflammation was prognostic but not predictive of sparta-DabTram benefit, as patients with high T-cell inflammation already benefit from targeted therapy alone. Baseline ctDNA shedding also emerged as a strong independent prognostic variable, with predictive trends consistent with established measures of disease burden such as lactate dehydrogenase levels. CD4⁺/CD8⁺ T-cell ratio was significantly predictive of PFS benefit with sparta-DabTram but requires further validation as a biomarker in melanoma. Taken together with previous observations, further study of checkpoint inhibitor plus targeted therapy combination in patients with higher disease burden may be warranted.

Trial registration number

NCT02967692.

Outcome of Elective Checkpoint Inhibitor Discontinuation in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma Who Achieved a Complete Remission: Real-World Data

Checkpoint inhibitor therapy for metastatic melanoma has dramatically improved outcomes. Currently, 20 to 40% of treated patients achieve lengthy remissions. It is not clear whether patients in remission require ongoing therapy or if treatment can be safely discontinued. A retrospective chart review was performed of patients who underwent elective treatment discontinuation after two negative scans three months apart. Of 132 checkpoint inhibitor-treated patients, 46 achieved a complete response (34.8%) and electively discontinued therapy. The progression-free survival was 97.5% at 1 year and 94.7% at 3 years following treatment discontinuation. The median duration of follow-up was 26 months. In total, 4 of 46 individuals (8.7%) eventually relapsed (median time to relapse: 27 months). The median disease-specific survival of the entire cohort was not reached and was 100% at 4 years from the start of therapy. Two patients eventually died, one from melanoma and the other from an unrelated illness. We have identified an elective treatment discontinuation strategy that is generalizable to a variety of checkpoint inhibitor ± targeted therapy regimens. We found that most complete remissions remained durable after elective treatment discontinuation. We hypothesize that this approach could decrease potential drug toxicities, reduce the treatment-related financial burden, and improve patients’ quality of life.

Long-Term Outcomes of Targeted Therapy after First-Line Immunotherapy in BRAF-Mutated Advanced Cutaneous Melanoma Patients—Real-World Evidence

Background: Currently, limited data on targeted therapy and immunotherapy sequencing in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma is available. Targeted therapy and immunotherapy are expected to be comparable in terms of overall survival (OS) when used as second-line therapies; therefore, understanding the characteristics of patients who completed sequential treatment is needed. Methods: The primary objective of this study was to analyze the efficacy of BRAFi/MEKi activity as second-line therapy in patients with advanced melanoma. We also aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of patients with advanced melanoma who were treated sequentially with immunotherapy and targeted therapy. We enrolled 97 patients treated between 1st December 2015 and 31st December 2020 with first-line immunotherapy with programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitors; and for the second-line treatment with at least one cycle of BRAFi/MEKi therapy with follow-up through 31 January 2022. Results: Median OS since first-line treatment initiation was 19.9 months and 12.8 months since initiation of BRAFi/MEKi treatment. All BRAFi/MRKi combinations were similarly effective. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.5 months since initiation of any BRAFi/MEKi treatment. Conclusions: BRAFi/MEKi therapy is effective in the second-line in advanced and metastatic melanoma patients. For the first time, the efficacy of all BRAFi/MEKi combinations as second-line therapy is shown.

Targeted Therapy for Melanomas Without BRAF V600 Mutations

Modern therapy of advanced melanoma offers effective targeted therapeutic options in the form of BRAF plus MEK inhibition for patients with BRAF V600 mutations. For patients lacking these mutations, checkpoint inhibition remains the only first-line choice for treatment of metastatic disease. However, approximately half of patients do not respond to immunotherapy, requiring effective options for a second-line treatment. Advances in genetic profiling have found other possible target molecules, especially a wide array of rare non-V600 BRAF mutations which may respond to available targeted therapy.

More information on the characteristics of such mutants is needed to further assess the efficacy of targeted therapies in the metastatic and adjuvant setting of advanced melanoma. Thus, it may be helpful to classify known BRAF mutations by their kinase activation status and dependence on alternative signaling pathways. While BRAF V600 mutations appear to have an overall more prominent role of kinase activity for tumor growth, non-V600 BRAF mutations show great differences in kinase activation and, hence, response to BRAF plus MEK inhibition. When BRAF-mutated melanomas rely on additional signaling molecules such as RAS for tumor growth, greater benefit may be expected from MEK inhibition than BRAF inhibition. In other cases, mutations of c-kit or NRAS may serve as important pharmacological targets in advanced melanoma. However, since benefit from currently available targeted therapies for non-V600 mutants is usually inferior regarding response and long-term outcome, checkpoint inhibitors remain the standard recommended first-line therapy for these patients.

Herein, we review the current clinical data for characteristics and response to targeted therapy of melanomas lacking a V600 BRAF mutation.

Treatment of Metastatic Melanoma in the Elderly

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This study aims to review the clinical experience of melanoma treatments in patients with advanced age.

RECENT FINDINGS

During the last decade, the treatment paradigm for melanoma has changed dramatically with the use of checkpoint inhibitors, oncolytic viruses, and targeted therapies. We reviewed both the clinical trial and real-world experience of these therapies in patients of advanced age, and discuss how a personalized approach should be taken for these patients with consideration of incidence and management of side effects. Although special consideration should be taken, immunotherapy, oncolytic viruses, and targeted therapy have shown efficacy and tolerability in older patients with melanoma.

Die Systemtherapie des malignen Melanoms

In den vergangenen 10 Jahren wurde die Systemtherapie des malignen Melanoms durch die Zulassung neuer Substanzen revolutioniert. In der vorliegenden Übersicht werden zunächst die aktuellen adjuvanten Therapiemöglichkeiten beschrieben, anschließend werden der Kenntnisstand zur neoadjuvanten Therapie dargestellt und schließlich die Behandlungsoptionen im inoperablen Stadium beleuchtet.

Real-World Evidence of Systemic Therapy Sequencing on Overall Survival for Patients with Metastatic BRAF-Mutated Cutaneous Melanoma

Aim: To evaluate optimal systemic therapy sequencing (first-line targeted therapy (1L-TT) vs. first-line immunotherapy (1L-IO)) in patients with BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma. Methods: Nation-wide prospective data of patients with newly diagnosed BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma were retrieved from the Canadian Melanoma Research Network. Results: Our study included 79 and 107 patients in the 1L-IO and 1L-TT groups, respectively. There were more patients with ECOG 0−1 (91% vs. 72%, p = 0.023) in the 1L-IO group compared to the 1L-TT group. Multivariable Cox analysis suggested no OS differences between the two groups (HR 0.838, 95%CI 0.502−1.400, p = 0.500). However, patients who received 1L-TT then 2L-IO had the longest OS compared to 1L-IO without 2L therapy, 1L-IO then 2L-TT, and 1L-TT without 2L therapy (38.3 vs. 32.2 vs. 16.9 vs. 6.3 months, p < 0.001). For patients who received 2L therapy, those who received 2L-IO had a trend towards OS improvement compared with the 2L-TT group (21.7 vs. 8.9 months, p = 0.053). Conclusions: Our nation-wide prospective study failed to establish any optimal systemic therapy sequencing in advanced BRAF-mutant melanoma patients. Nevertheless, we provided evidence that immunotherapy has durable efficacy in advanced BRAF-mutant melanoma patients, regardless of treatment line, and that Canadian medical oncologists were selecting the appropriate treatment sequences in a real-world setting, based on patients’ clinical and tumour characteristics.

The Use of ctDNA for BRAF Mutation Testing in Routine Clinical Practice in Patients with Advanced Melanoma

Simple Summary

Assessment of BRAF mutation status is mandatory in advanced, previously untreated melanoma patients since it is present in 40–50% of cases and allows treatment with specific inhibitors. The testing is usually performed on the primary tumor or metastatic lesion; however, in some cases, liquid biopsy and analysis of circulating tumor DNA in the blood can be used. The aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical utility of plasma circulating tumor DNA analysis for BRAF mutation. We identified 46 patients (21 female, 25 male) who underwent such a procedure. A BRAF mutation was found in 45.7% of liquid biopsies and 44.8% of tissue samples. In 18 patients, therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors was initiated on the basis of the result of liquid biopsy. Our study confirms the clinical utility of BRAF mutation detection in liquid biopsy.

Abstract

Assessment of BRAF mutation status is mandatory in advanced, treatment-naïve melanoma patients. Liquid biopsy can be an alternative in cases with inadequate or unavailable tumor tissue. The aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical utility of plasma circulating tumor DNA analysis for BRAF mutation testing and to assess outcomes of therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors initiated based on the liquid biopsy results. This was a retrospective single-center analysis of 46 patients (21 female, 25 male) with advanced melanoma who underwent circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) BRAF mutation testing. A BRAF mutation was found in 45.7% (21/46) of liquid biopsies and 44.8% (13/29) of tissue samples. In patients with both ctDNA and tissue samples (n = 29), the concordance between the results of both tests was 82.8%. A BRAF mutation was detected in 7/17 (41.2%) patients with only ctDNA analysis. In 18 patients, therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors was initiated on the basis of the result of liquid biopsy. The objective response rate was 77.8 %, and the median PFS was 6.0 months. Our study confirms the clinical utility of BRAF mutation detection in plasma ctDNA. This study provides initial real-world data showing that treatment with BRAF/MEK inhibitors could be commenced based on liquid biopsy results.

Randomized Phase III Trial Evaluating Spartalizumab Plus Dabrafenib and Trametinib for BRAF V600-Mutant Unresectable or Metastatic Melanoma

PURPOSE

Preclinical data suggest the combination of an anti-programmed death receptor 1 antibody plus dabrafenib and trametinib to have superior antitumor activity compared with dabrafenib plus trametinib alone. These observations are supported by translational evidence suggesting that immune checkpoint inhibitors plus targeted therapy may improve treatment outcomes in patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma. COMBI-i is a phase III trial evaluating spartalizumab, an anti-programmed death receptor 1 antibody, in combination with dabrafenib and trametinib (sparta-DabTram), versus placebo plus dabrafenib and trametinib (placebo-DabTram) in patients with BRAF V600-mutant unresectable or metastatic melanoma.

METHODS

Patients received spartalizumab 400 mg intravenously every 4 weeks plus dabrafenib 150 mg orally twice daily and trametinib 2 mg orally once daily or placebo-DabTram. Participants were age ≥ 18 years with unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Overall survival was a key secondary end point (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02967692).

RESULTS

At data cutoff (July 1, 2020), the median progression-free survival was 16.2 months (95% CI, 12.7 to 23.9 months) in the sparta-DabTram arm versus 12.0 months (95% CI, 10.2 to 15.4 months) in the placebo-DabTram arm (hazard ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.66 to 1.03]; P = .042 [one-sided; nonsignificant]). The objective response rates were 69% (183 of 267 patients) versus 64% (170 of 265 patients), respectively. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 55% (146 of 267) of patients in the sparta-DabTram arm and 33% (88 of 264) in the placebo-DabTram arm.

CONCLUSION

The study did not meet its primary end point; broad first-line use of sparta-DabTram is not supported by these results. Further biomarker-driven investigation may identify patient subpopulations who could benefit from checkpoint inhibitor plus targeted therapy combinations.

Durable Response to Vemurafenib and Cobimetinib for the Treatment of BRAF-Mutated Metastatic Melanoma in Routine Clinical Practice

Background

The combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors delays the onset of resistance and provides more sustained and dramatic responses in comparison with a BRAF inhibitor in monotherapy. The objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the combination therapy with vemurafenib/cobimetinib in terms of durability, and to describe differential characteristics in patients associated to durable responses in real-world settings.

Patients and Methods

Retrospective, observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study involving 41 patients with advanced melanoma harboring a BRAF^V600 mutation who initiated a combination therapy with vemurafenib/cobimetinib between May 2018 and March 2019. Participants were differentiated regarding the durability of the response: durable (complete response, CR, or a partial response, PR, for at least 12 months) and non-durable (stable disease, SD, progressive disease, PD, or CR/PR <12 months). Secondary endpoints included treatment adherence, labor productivity, anxiety/depression, and safety profile.

Results

During the combination therapy, 12 patients (29.3%) had a CR, 19 a PR (46.3%), 5 showed SD (12.2%), and 5 had PD. A total of 12 patients (29.3%) were considered as achieving a durable response and 29 (70.7%) as a non-durable one. Practically all sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were similar between patients. Body mass index was the only differential factor (with higher body mass index achieving a non-durable response). The treatment adherence was 100% in patients with durable response and 66.7% in those with non-durable.

Conclusion

The combination treatment with vemurafenib/cobimetinib results in an important impact on long-term survival, leading to a steady CR in one-third of the patients.

Individualized Treatment Strategy for Cutaneous Melanoma: Where Are We Now and Where Are We Going?

In the past several decades, innovative research in cancer biology and immunology has contributed to novel therapeutics, such as targeted therapy and immunotherapy, which have transformed the management of patients with melanoma. Despite the remarkable therapeutic outcomes of targeted treatments targeting MAPK signaling and immunotherapy that suppresses immune checkpoints, some individuals acquire therapeutic resistance and disease recurrence. This review summarizes the current understanding of melanoma genetic variations and discusses individualized melanoma therapy options, particularly for advanced or metastatic melanoma, as well as potential drug resistance mechanisms. A deeper understanding of individualized treatment will assist in improving clinical outcomes for patients with cutaneous melanoma.