Adjuvant Dabrafenib plus Trametinib in Stage III BRAF-Mutated Melanoma

Tolerability of BRAF and MEK Inhibitors for Metastasized Melanoma after Intra-Class Switch: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study

Targeted therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors (BRAFi, MEKi) is one of the mainstays of melanoma treatment. When dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) is observed, an option represents the intra-class switch to a different BRAFi+MEKi combination. Currently, there is scarce evidence for this procedure. This is a multicenter, retrospective analysis from six German skin cancer centers of patients who received two different combinations of BRAFi and MEKi. In total, 94 patients were included: 38 patients (40%) were re-exposed with a different combination because of previous unacceptable toxicity, 51 (54%) were re-exposed after progression, and 5 (5%) were included for other reasons. Of the 44 patients with a DLT during their first BRAFi+MEKi combination, only five (11%) experienced the same DLT during their second combination. A new DLT was experienced by 13 patients (30%). Six patients (14%) had to discontinue the second BRAFi treatment due to its toxicity. Compound-specific adverse events were avoided in the majority of patients by switching to a different combination. Efficacy data were similar to historical cohorts of BRAFi+MEKi rechallenge, with an overall response rate of 31% for patients who had previously progressed to treatment. We conclude that switching to a different BRAFi+MEKi combination if dose-limiting toxicity occurs is a feasible and rational approach in patients with metastatic melanoma.

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Solid Tumors in the Adjuvant Setting: Current Progress, Future Directions, and Role in Transplant Oncology

The rationale for administering immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in the adjuvant setting is to eradicate micro-metastases and, ultimately, prolong survival. Thus far, clinical trials have demonstrated that 1-year adjuvant courses of ICIs reduce the risk of recurrence in melanoma, urothelial cancer, renal cell carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers. Overall survival benefit has been shown in melanoma while survival data are still not mature in other malignancies. Emerging data also show the feasibility of utilizing ICIs in the peri-transplant setting for hepatobiliary malignancies. While ICIs are generally well-tolerated, the development of chronic immune-related adverse events, typically endocrinopathies or neurotoxicities, as well as delayed immune-related adverse events, warrants further scrutiny regarding the optimal duration of adjuvant therapy and requires a thorough risk-benefit determination. The advent of blood-based, dynamic biomarkers such as circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) can help detect minimal residual disease and identify the subset of patients who would likely benefit from adjuvant treatment. In addition, the characterization of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and ctDNA-adjusted blood tumor mutation burden (bTMB) has also shown promise in predicting response to immunotherapy. Until additional, prospective studies delineate the magnitude of overall survival benefit and validate the use of predictive biomarkers, a tailored, patient-centered approach to adjuvant ICIs that includes extensive patient counseling on potentially irreversible adverse effects should be routinely incorporated into clinical practice.

Safety and rapid response of dabrafenib and trametinib therapy during hyperbilirubinemia in metastatic melanoma

This case report describes the occurrence of hyperbilirubinemia as a complication of metastatic melanoma. A 72-year-old male patient was diagnosed with BRAF V600E-mutated melanoma with metastases in the liver, lymph nodes, lungs, pancreas, and stomach. Due to a lack of clinical data and specific guidelines for the treatment of mutated metastatic melanoma patients with hyperbilirubinemia, a conference of specialists debated between initiating treatment or providing supportive care. Ultimately, the patient was started on the combination therapy of dabrafenib and trametinib. This treatment resulted in a significant therapeutic response via normalization of bilirubin levels and an impressive radiological response of metastases just one month post-treatment initiation.

Cancer Treatment Patterns and Factors Affecting Receipt of Treatment in Older Adults: Results from the ASPREE Cancer Treatment Substudy (ACTS)

INTRODUCTION

Cancer treatment planning in older adults is complex and requires careful balancing of survival, quality of life benefits, and risk of treatment-related morbidity and toxicity. As a result, treatment selection in this cohort tends to differ from that for younger patients. However, there are very few studies describing cancer treatment patterns in older cohorts.

METHODS

We used data from the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) trial and the ASPREE Cancer Treatment Substudy (ACTS) to describe cancer treatment patterns in older adults. We used a multivariate logistic regression model to identify factors affecting receipt of treatment.

RESULTS

Of 1893 eligible Australian and United States (US) participants with incident cancer, 1569 (81%) received some form of cancer treatment. Non-metastatic breast cancers most frequently received treatment (98%), while haematological malignancy received the lowest rates of treatment (60%). Factors associated with not receiving treatment were older age (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.96), residence in the US (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.22-0.54), smoking (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.40-0.81), and diabetes (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.39-0.80). After adjustment for treatment patterns in sex-specific cancers, sex did not impact receipt of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is one of the first describing cancer treatment patterns and factors affecting receipt of treatment across common cancer types in older adults. We found that most older adults with cancer received some form of cancer treatment, typically surgery or systemic therapy, although this varied by factors such as cancer type, age, sex, and country of residence.

Deconstructing the Kaplan-Meier curve: Quantification of treatment effect using the treatment effect process

In studies of survival and its association with treatment and other prognostic variables, elapsed time alone will often show itself to be among the strongest, if not the strongest, of the predictor variables. Kaplan-Meier curves will show the overall survival of each group and the general differences between groups due to treatment. However, the time-dependent nature of treatment effects is not always immediately transparent from these curves. More sophisticated tools are needed to spotlight the treatment effects. An important tool in this context is the treatment effect process. This tool can be potent in revealing the complex myriad of ways in which treatment can affect survival time. We look at a recently published study in which the outcome was relapse-free survival, and we illustrate how the use of the treatment effect process can provide a much deeper understanding of the relationship between time and treatment in this trial.

Survival after lymphadenectomy of nodal metastases from melanoma of unknown primary site

Although the vast majority of melanomas have a primary site, 3%-4% of all melanomas in distant sites display no known primary site (MUP). This phenomenon is not fully understood and various hypotheses have been introduced. The prognostic significance of MUP has been unclear, with some studies showing no survival benefit while others find improved survival compared to stage-matched patients with melanoma of known primary site (MKP). Between 1997 and 2014, 864 patients underwent an en bloc resection of clinical nodal metastases at a referral centre for metastatic melanoma in Norway. The MUP (n = 113) and MKP (n = 751) patients were graded with stage III or IV. The overall survival (OS) was calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method, and multivariate analysis identified factors of significance for the two groups. A significant five-year OS emerged for stage III, MUP = 58% and 42% for MKP, but not for stage IV. The five-year relapse-free survival (RFS) was 41% and 31% for MUP and MKP respectively (p = 0.049). The statistically significant inter-group differences (MUP/MKP) were observed in the univariate and multivariate analyses of age, gender, number of affected nodes, tumour size and perinodal growth within stage III and tumour size within stage IV. After regional lymphadenectomy, MUP patients with clinical nodal metastases had a better outcome than MKP patients. This finding supports the theory that an endogenously mediated immune response may promote the regression of a cutaneous melanoma.

TMB and BRAF mutation status are independent predictive factors in high-risk melanoma patients with adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy

BACKGROUND

High tumor mutational burden (TMB) is associated with a favorable outcome in metastatic melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, data are limited in the adjuvant setting. As BRAF mutated patients have an alternative with targeted adjuvant therapy, it is important to identify predictive factors for relapse and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients receiving adjuvant anti-PD-1 antibodies.

METHODS

We evaluated 165 melanoma patients who started adjuvant anti-PD-1 antibody therapy at our center between March 2018 and September 2019. The initial tumor stage was assessed at the beginning of therapy according to the 8th edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. Tumor and normal tissue of the high-risk stages IIIC/D/IV were sequenced using a 700 gene NGS panel.

RESULTS

The tumor stages at the beginning of adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy were as follows: N = 80 stage IIIA/B (48%), N = 85 stage IIIC/D/IV (52%). 72/165 patients (44%) suffered a relapse, 44/72 (61%) with only loco regional and 28/72 (39%) with distant metastases. Sequencing results were available from 83 to 85 patients with stage IIIC/D/IV. BRAF mutation status (HR 2.12, 95% CI 1.12-4.08; p = 0.022) and TMB (HR 7.11, 95% CI 2.19-23.11; p = 0.001) were significant and independent predictive factors for relapse-free survival (RFS).

CONCLUSION

BRAF mutation status and TMB were independent predictive factors for RFS. Patients with BRAF V600E/K mutation and TMB high had the best outcome. A classification based on BRAF mutation status and TMB is proposed to predict RFS in melanoma patients with adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy.

Etanercept leads to a rapid recovery of a Dabrafenib-/Trametinib-associated toxic epidermal necrolysis-like severe skin reaction

Targeted therapy with BRAF- and MEK-Inhibitors (BRAFi, MEKi) provides an excellent therapeutic option for patients with malignant melanomas with a BRAF-Mutation. Mild cutaneous adverse events have been common under the BRAF- and MEK-Inhibitor therapy, on the contrary, severe cutaneous adverse reactions to drugs (SCARs) are rarely reported. We present the case of a 59- year-old female patient who after the resection of cutaneous in-transit metastases of a malignant melanoma received one adjuvant cycle of Nivolumab followed by a switch of the therapy to an oral BRAFi/MEKi therapy. 3-4 Weeks after the therapy switch she developed high fever, chills, progredient general weakness, headaches, abdominal complaints, generalised rash as well as thrombocytopaenia, eosinophilia, elevated liver enzymes, declining kidney, and pulmonary function as well as a maculopapular exanthema. She was diagnosed with drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) and quickly started recovery after initiation of a high steroid substitution. Under steroid dose reduction, the exanthema worsened and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) was histologically diagnosed. After a series of unsuccessful therapeutic approaches (high dose steroid, human immunoglobulins and ciclosporin) the patient received a single dose of the TNF-alpha inhibitor etanercept, which led to a quick recovery. This case demonstrates that DRESS and TEN can present a spectrum of possibly transitioning SCARs providing a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. Nevertheless, in a such complicated therapeutic setting, etanercept may be lifesaving even after multiple previous unsuccessful therapies. This effective approach provides evidence SCARs due to BRAF/MEK targeted therapy may be driven by TNF-alpha.

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.

Implementation of melanoma guidelines in the multidisciplinary setting: A qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Data suggest variation in utilization of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) and adjuvant systemic therapy (AT) for sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma. We aimed to explore how clinicians consider multidisciplinary treatment options.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews of surgical oncologists, medical oncologists, and otolaryngologists to produce a thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 26) described melanoma care as inherently "multidisciplinary," noting the importance of conversations facilitated by shared clinic days or space. Despite believing that their practice mirrored other clinicians, participants revealed diverging perspectives on CLND and AT. Multidisciplinary care presented challenges for surveillance as surgeons expressed desire to retain ownership of patients but did not feel comfortable overseeing AT needs. Participants questioned the fidelity of nodal ultrasounds, noted redundancy in their roles, and described a "surveillance burden" for patients.

CONCLUSION

Opportunities exist to improve multidisciplinary melanoma care through broader consensus of how to translate emerging data into patient care and delineating surveillance roles.

MEK Is a Potential Indirect Target in Subtypes of Head and Neck Cancers

The poor prognosis of head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is partly due to the lack of reliable prognostic and predictive markers. The Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK signaling pathway is often activated by overexpressed epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and stimulates the progression of HNSCCs. Our research was performed on three human papillomavirus (HPV)-negative HNSCC-cell lines: Detroit 562, FaDu and SCC25. Changes in cell viability upon EGFR and/or MEK inhibitors were measured by the MTT method. The protein-expression and phosphorylation profiles of the EGFR-initiated signaling pathways were assessed using Western-blot analysis. The EGFR expression and pY1068-EGFR levels were also studied in the patient-derived HNSCC samples. We found significant differences between the sensitivity of the tumor-cell lines used. The SCC25 line was found to be the most sensitive to the MEK inhibitors, possibly due to the lack of feedback Akt activation through EGFR. By contrast, this feedback activation had an important role in the FaDu cells. The observed insensitivity of the Detroit 562 cells to the MEK inhibitors might have been caused by their PIK3CA mutation. Among HNSCC cell lines, EGFR-initiated signaling pathways are particularly versatile. An ERK/EGFR feedback loop can lead to Akt-pathway activation upon MEK inhibition, and it is related not only to increased amounts of EGFR but also to the elevation of pY1068-EGFR levels. The presence of this mechanism may justify the combined application of EGFR and MEK inhibitors.

Completion Lymph Node Dissection for Melanoma Before and After the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial-II in the United States

BACKGROUND

The Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial-II (MSLT-II) revealed completion lymph node dissection (CLND) after positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) did not improve melanoma-specific survival compared with surveillance. Given these findings and the morbidity associated with CLND, this study investigated trends in rates and predictors of CLND after MSLT-II.

METHODS

Analysis of the National Cancer Database was performed for all patients aged ≥18 years with melanoma and a positive SLNB for 2012-2019. Rates of CLND before and after publication of MSLT-II were identified and logistic regression used to identify factors associated with CLND.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing CLND declined from 55.9% pre-MSLT-II (n = 9725) to 19.5% post-MSLT-II (n = 9419) (odds ratio [OR] 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-0.35). CLND was less likely in females (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.78-0.89), older patients (vs. 18-39 yr; 40-64 yr OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.65-0.98; 65-79 yr OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.53-0.84; >80 yr OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.30-0.49), sicker patients (Deyo category ≥2 OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.99), thinner primary lesions (vs. 0.01-0.79 mm; 1.01-4.00 mm OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.01-1.33; ≥4.01 mm OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.08-1.59), patients from metro areas (Rural OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.00-1.70; Urban OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.03-1.29), and those treated at lower-volume centers (vs. lowest-volume; highest-volume OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.14-1.50; high-volume OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.24-1.57).

CONCLUSIONS

MSLT-II has impacted clinical care; however, male gender, thicker lesions, rural/urban residence, younger age, fewer comorbidities, and treatment at higher-volume centers confer a greater likelihood of undergoing CLND. Further investigations should focus on whether these populations benefit from more aggressive surgical care.

Dabrafenib-Trametinib and Radiotherapy for Oligoprogressive BRAF Mutant Advanced Melanoma

The clinical management of metastatic melanoma has been changed by BRAF (BRAFi) and MEK inhibitors (MEKi), which represent a standard treatment for BRAF-mutant melanoma. In oligoprogressive melanoma patients with BRAF mutations, target therapy can be combined with loco-regional radiotherapy (RT). However, the association of BRAF/MEK inhibitors and RT needs to be carefully monitored for potential increased toxicity. Despite the availability of some reports regarding the tolerability of RT + target therapy, data on simultaneous RT and BRAFi/MEKi are limited and mostly focused on the BRAFi vemurafenib. Here, we report a series of metastatic melanoma patients who received fractioned RT regimens for oligoprogressive disease in combination with the BRAFi dabrafenib and the MEKi trametinib, which have continued beyond progression. None of the cases developed relevant adverse events while receiving RT or interrupted dabrafenib and trametinib administration. These cases suggest that a long period of dabrafenib/trametinib interruption during radiotherapy for oligoprogressive disease can be avoided. Prospective trials are warranted to assess the efficacy and safety of the contemporary administration of BRAF/MEK inhibitors and radiotherapy for oligoprogressive disease.

Comparison of efficacy and tolerability of adjuvant therapy for resected high-risk stage III-IV cutaneous melanoma: a systemic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted therapies have been widely used as adjuvant treatment for resected melanoma, the optimal therapy remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted this updated network meta-analysis (NMA) to assess the efficacy and tolerability of adjuvant therapies for cutaneous melanoma.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Web of Science were systematically searched for relevant literatures published in the last 30 years. Disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and serious adverse events were considered as the efficacy and tolerability outcomes.

RESULTS

In all, 27 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including 16,709 stage III-IV melanoma patients were enrolled in this NMA. For BRAF wild-type melanoma, our analysis showed that both nivolumab and pembrolizumab demonstrated significantly better DFS and tolerability than ipilimumab (10 mg/kg). Nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab (3 mg/kg), and ipilimumab (10 mg/kg) all appeared to be effective in prolonging OS, but no therapy demonstrated significantly better OS than ipilimumab (10 mg/kg). Nivolumab + ipilimumab showed the best DFS, but did not appear to be effective in improving OS and ranked only seventh in tolerability. Vaccines and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor therapies were well tolerated, but all failed to improve the DFS or OS in stage III melanoma patients. In terms of BRAF mutation-positive melanoma, ICIs (nivolumab + ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab; 10 mg/kg) exhibited comparable efficacy to dabrafenib + trametinib, and all these therapies showed significantly better DFS than placebo.

CONCLUSION

Considering efficacy and tolerability, nivolumab and pembrolizumab seem to be preferable adjuvant therapies for patients with stage III-IV melanoma. For BRAF mutation-positive patients, more RCTs are still required to determine which is better between ICIs and targeted therapy.

C-Reactive Protein and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio Predict Recurrence in Stage III Melanoma Patients with Microscopic Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis

Although adjuvant therapies with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and BRAF/MEK inhibitors improve recurrence-free survival (RFS) in stage III melanoma patients significantly, prognostic factors are needed to identify patients with a high risk of disease recurrence. Therefore, the aim of our study was to investigate the prognostic potential of routinely collected blood parameters for stage III melanoma patients with microscopic sentinel lymph node (SLN) metastasis. Altogether, we retrospectively analyzed 138 stage III melanoma patients who were diagnosed with microscopic SLN metastasis at the skin cancer center of the University Hospital Cologne between 2011 and 2020 and who did not receive prior adjuvant therapy with ICI or BRAF/MEK-inhibitors. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were performed to assess the impact of preoperatively collected blood parameters and blood ratios on recurrence-free survival (RFS; primary endpoint) and overall survival (OS). A high neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), low lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) and high C-reactive protein (CRP) value were significantly associated with shorter RFS in multivariate analysis. For LMR (cut-off 3.5) and for CRP (cut-off 3.0) this effect remained after dichotomization. CRP showed a stronger association with RFS than NLR or LMR, with the highest association being detected for the combination of low LMR and high CRP. Additionally, derived NLR ≥ 2.0 was significantly associated with shorter OS in multivariate analysis. In summary, our data suggest that CRP in combination with LMR should be considered as a marker for melanoma recurrence in stage III melanoma patients with microscopic SLN metastasis.

Adjuvant Therapy of Nivolumab Combined With Ipilimumab Versus Nivolumab Alone in Patients With Resected Stage IIIB-D or Stage IV Melanoma (CheckMate 915)

PURPOSE

Ipilimumab and nivolumab have each shown treatment benefit for high-risk resected melanoma. The phase III CheckMate 915 trial evaluated adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab alone in patients with resected stage IIIB-D or IV melanoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, phase III trial, 1,833 patients received nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks (916 patients) or nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks (917 patients) for ≤ 1 year. After random assignment, patients were stratified by tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression and stage. Dual primary end points were recurrence-free survival (RFS) in randomly assigned patients and in the tumor PD-L1 expression-level < 1% subgroup.

RESULTS

At a minimum follow-up of approximately 23.7 months, there was no significant difference between treatment groups for RFS in the all-randomly assigned patient population (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.09; P = .269) or in patients with PD-L1 expression < 1% (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.14). In all patients, 24-month RFS rates were 64.6% (combination) and 63.2% (nivolumab). Treatment-related grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported in 32.6% of patients in the combination group and 12.8% in the nivolumab group. Treatment-related deaths were reported in 0.4% of patients in the combination group and in no nivolumab-treated patients.

CONCLUSION

Nivolumab 240 mg once every 2 weeks plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg once every 6 weeks did not improve RFS versus nivolumab 480 mg once every 4 weeks in patients with stage IIIB-D or stage IV melanoma. Nivolumab showed efficacy consistent with previous adjuvant studies in a population resembling current practice using American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition, reaffirming nivolumab as a standard of care for melanoma adjuvant treatment.

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.

Cost-effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibition and targeted treatment in combination as adjuvant treatment of patient with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted treatments have improved the health outcomes of patients with advanced melanoma. However, due to the high cost of novel therapies, it is crucial to evaluate their value by considering both effectiveness and cost. To compare the cost-effectiveness of these novel agents (atezolizumab-vemurafenib-cobimetinib, vemurafenib-plus-cobimetinib, dabrafenib-plus-trametinib, and encorafenib-plus-binimetinib) for first-line treatment of metastatic melanoma with the BRAF^V600 mutation.

METHODS

A patient-level model was developed to project the health outcomes of 4 strategies for patients with advanced melanoma. We estimated transition probabilities from the IMspire150 (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672), COMBI-AD (NCT01682083), and COLUMBUS (NCT01909453) trials using a parametric survival model. All health outcomes, including direct cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), were estimated from the US payer perspective. Lifetime cost, QALYs, life-years (LYs), and ICERs were calculated. Univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test model robustness, along with multiple scenario analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 4 competing strategies, atezolizumab-vemurafenib-cobimetinib produced the best health outcomes, and the vemurafenib-cobimetinib strategy was the least expensive option. Atezolizumab-vemurafenib-cobimetinib, dabrafenib-plus-trametinib, and vemurafenib-cobimetinib formed the cost-effective frontier, indicating that the ordered ICERs were $325,113/QALYs for dabrafenib-plus-trametinib vs. vemurafenib-cobimetinib strategies and $2,247,500/QALYs for atezolizumab-vemurafenib-cobimetinib vs. dabrafenib-plus-trametinib strategies. Encorafenib-plus-binimetinib was dominated by the other 3 competing strategies. The drug price and first-line utility significantly influenced the model utcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

For BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma, the vemurafenib-cobimetinib strategy could be considered the most cost-effective treatment at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000.

Neoadjuvant treatment for stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma

BACKGROUND

Cutaneous melanoma is amongst the most aggressive of all skin cancers. Neoadjuvant treatment is a form of induction therapy, given to shrink a cancerous tumour prior to the main treatment (usually surgery). The purpose is to improve survival and surgical outcomes. This review systematically appraises the literature investigating the use of neoadjuvant treatment for stage III and IV cutaneous melanoma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of neoadjuvant treatment in adults with stage III or stage IV melanoma according to the seventh edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 10 August 2021 inclusive: Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and four trials registers, together with reference checking and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. We also handsearched proceedings from specific conferences from 2016 to 2020 inclusive.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people with stage III and IV melanoma, comparing neoadjuvant treatment strategies (using targeted treatments, immunotherapies, radiotherapy, topical treatments or chemotherapy) with any of these agents or current standard of care (SOC), were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and adverse effects (AEs). Secondary outcomes included time to recurrence (TTR), quality of life (QOL), and overall response rate (ORR). We used GRADE to evaluate the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight RCTs involving 402 participants. Studies enrolled adults, mostly with stage III melanoma, investigated immunotherapies, chemotherapy, or targeted treatments, and compared these with surgical excision with or without adjuvant treatment. Duration of follow-up and therapeutic regimens varied, which, combined with heterogeneity in the population and definitions of the endpoints, precluded meta-analysis of all identified studies. We performed a meta-analysis including three studies. We are very uncertain if neoadjuvant treatment increases OS when compared to no neoadjuvant treatment (hazard ratio (HR) 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 1.21; 2 studies, 171 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Neoadjuvant treatment may increase the rate of AEs, but the evidence is very uncertain (26% versus 16%, risk ratio (RR) 1.58, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.55; 2 studies, 162 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain if neoadjuvant treatment increases TTR (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.17; 2 studies, 171 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Studies did not report ORR as a comparative outcome or measure QOL data. We are very uncertain whether neoadjuvant targeted treatment with dabrafenib and trametinib increases OS (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.25; 1 study, 21 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or TTR (HR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.22; 1 study, 21 participants; very low-certainty evidence) when compared to surgery. The study did not report comparative rates of AEs and overall response, and did not measure QOL. We are very uncertain if neoadjuvant immunotherapy with talimogene laherparepvec increases OS when compared to no neoadjuvant treatment (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.64; 1 study, 150 participants, very low-certainty evidence). It may have a higher rate of AEs, but the evidence is very uncertain (16.5% versus 5.8%, RR 2.84, 95% CI 0.96 to 8.37; 1 study, 142 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain if it increases TTR (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.79; 1 study, 150 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not report comparative ORRs or measure QOL. OS was not reported for neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) when compared to the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab as adjuvant treatment. There may be little or no difference in the rate of AEs between these treatments (9%, RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.34; 1 study, 20 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study did not report comparative ORRs or measure TTR and QOL. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) likely results in little to no difference in OS when compared to neoadjuvant nivolumab monotherapy (P = 0.18; 1 study, 23 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). It may increase the rate of AEs, but the certainty of this evidence is very low (72.8% versus 8.3%, RR 8.73, 95% CI 1.29 to 59; 1 study, 23 participants); this trial was halted early due to observation of disease progression preventing surgical resection in the monotherapy arm and the high rate of treatment-related AEs in the combination arm. Neoadjuvant combination treatment may lead to higher ORR, but the evidence is very uncertain (72.8% versus 25%, RR 2.91, 95% CI 1.02 to 8.27; 1 study, 23 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It likely results in little to no difference in TTR (P = 0.19; 1 study, 23 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure QOL. OS was not reported for neoadjuvant immunotherapy (combined ipilimumab and nivolumab) when compared to neoadjuvant sequential immunotherapy (ipilimumab then nivolumab). Only Grade 3 to 4 immune-related AEs were reported; fewer were reported with combination treatment, and the sequential treatment arm closed early due to a high incidence of severe AEs. The neoadjuvant combination likely results in a higher ORR compared to sequential neoadjuvant treatment (60.1% versus 42.3%, RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.32; 1 study, 86 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study did not measure TTR and QOL. No data were reported on OS, AEs, TTR, or QOL for the comparison of neoadjuvant interferon (HDI) plus chemotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Neoadjuvant HDI plus chemotherapy may have little to no effect on ORR, but the evidence is very uncertain (33% versus 22%, RR 1.75, 95% CI 0.62 to 4.95; 1 study, 36 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain if neoadjuvant treatment increases OS or TTR compared with no neoadjuvant treatment, and it may be associated with a slightly higher rate of AEs. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of neoadjuvant treatment in clinical practice. Priorities for research include the development of a core outcome set for neoadjuvant trials that are adequately powered, with validation of pathological and radiological responses as intermediate endpoints, to investigate the relative benefits of neoadjuvant treatment compared with adjuvant treatment with immunotherapies or targeted therapies.

Exploring the chemotherapeutic potential of currently used kinase inhibitors: An update

Protein kinases are enzymes that transfer phosphate to protein, resulting in the modification of the protein. The human genome encodes approximately 538 kinases. Kinases play a role in maintaining a number of cellular processes, including control of the cell cycle, metabolism, survival, and differentiation. Protein kinase dysregulation causes several diseases, and it has been shown that numerous kinases are deregulated in cancer. The oncogenic potential of these kinases is increased by a number of processes, including overexpression, relocation, fusion point mutations, and the disruption of upstream signaling. Understanding of the mechanism or role played by kinases has led to the development of a large number of kinase inhibitors with promising clinical benefits. In this review, we discuss FDA-approved kinase inhibitors and their mechanism, clinical benefits, and side effects, as well as the challenges of overcoming some of their side effects and future prospects for new kinase inhibitor discovery.

Research landscape and trends of melanoma immunotherapy: A bibliometric analysis

Background

Immunotherapy for lung cancer has been a hot research area for years. This bibliometric analysis was intended to present research trends on melanoma immunotherapy.

Method

On April 1, 2022, the authors identified 2,109 papers on melanoma immunotherapy using the Web of Science and extracted their general information and the total number of citations. The authors then conducted a bibliometric analysis to present the research landscape, clarify the research trends, and determine the most cited papers (top-papers) as well as major journals on melanoma immunotherapy. Subsequently, recent research hotspots were identified by analyzing the latest articles in major journals.

Results

The total and median number of citations of these 2,109 papers on melanoma immunotherapy was 137,686 and 11, respectively. "Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma" by Hodi et al. was the most cited paper (9,824 citations). Among the journals, the top-paper number (16), average citations per paper (2,510.7), and top-papers rate (100%) of New England Journal of Medicine were the highest. Corresponding authors represented the USA took part in most articles (784). Since 2016, the hottest research area has changed from CTLA-4 to PD-1.

Conclusions

This bibliometric analysis comprehensively and quantitatively presents the research trends and hotspots based on 2,109 relevant publications, and further suggests future research directions. The researchers can benefit in selecting journals and in finding potential collaborators. This study can help researchers gain a comprehensive impression of the research landscape, historical development, and current hotspots in melanoma immunotherapy and can provide inspiration for future research.

Identifying the Transcriptional Drivers of Metastasis Embedded within Localized Melanoma

In melanoma, predicting which tumors will ultimately metastasize guides treatment decisions. Transcriptional signatures of primary tumors have been utilized to predict metastasis, but which among these are driver or passenger events remains unclear. We used data from the adjuvant AVAST-M trial to identify a predictive gene signature in localized tumors that ultimately metastasized. Using a zebrafish model of primary melanoma, we interrogated the top genes from the AVAST-M signature in vivo. This identified GRAMD1B, a cholesterol transfer protein, as a bona fide metastasis suppressor, with a majority of knockout animals rapidly developing metastasis. Mechanistically, excess free cholesterol or its metabolite 27-hydroxycholesterol promotes invasiveness via activation of an AP-1 program, which is associated with increased metastasis in humans. Our data demonstrate that the transcriptional seeds of metastasis are embedded within localized tumors, suggesting that early targeting of these programs can be used to prevent metastatic relapse.

SIGNIFICANCE

We analyzed human melanoma transcriptomics data to identify a gene signature predictive of metastasis. To rapidly test clinical signatures, we built a genetic metastasis platform in adult zebrafish and identified GRAMD1B as a suppressor of melanoma metastasis. GRAMD1B-associated cholesterol overload activates an AP-1 program to promote melanoma invasion. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 1.

Adjuvant BRAF-MEK Inhibitors versus Anti PD-1 Therapy in Stage III Melanoma: A Propensity-Matched Outcome Analysis

Adjuvant BRAF/MEK- and anti-PD-1 inhibition have significantly improved recurrence-free survival (RFS) compared to placebo in resected stage III BRAF-mutant melanoma. However, data beyond the clinical trial setting are limited. This study describes the toxicity and survival of patients treated with adjuvant BRAF/MEK inhibitors and compares outcomes to adjuvant anti-PD-1. For this study, stage III BRAF V600 mutant cutaneous melanoma patients treated with adjuvant BRAF/MEK-inhibition or anti-PD-1 were identified from the Dutch Melanoma Treatment Registry. BRAF/MEK- and anti-PD-1-treated patients were matched based on propensity scores, and RFS at 12 and 18 months were estimated. Between 1 July 2018 and 31 December 2021, 717 patients were identified. Of these, 114 patients with complete records were treated with BRAF/MEK therapy and 532 with anti-PD-1. Comorbidities (p = 0.04) and geographical region (p < 0.01) were associated with treatment choice. In 45.6% of BRAF/MEK-treated patients, treatment was prematurely discontinued. Grade ≥ 3 toxicity occurred in 11.5% of patients and was the most common cause of early discontinuation (71.1%). At 12 and 18 months, RFS in BRAF/MEK-treated patients was 85% and 70%, compared to 68% and 68% in matched anti-PD-1-treated patients (p = 0.03). In conclusion, comorbidities and geographical region determine the choice of adjuvant treatment in patients with resected stage III BRAF-mutant melanoma. With the currently limited follow-up, BRAF/MEK-treated patients have better RFS at 12 months than matched anti-PD-1-treated patients, but this difference is no longer observed at 18 months. Therefore, longer follow-up data are necessary to estimate long-term effectiveness.

Implications of BRAF V600E mutation in gliomas: Molecular considerations, prognostic value and treatment evolution

Gliomas are molecularly heterogeneous brain tumors responsible for the most years of life lost by any cancer. High-grade gliomas have a poor prognosis and despite multimodal treatment including surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, exhibit a high recurrence rate. There is a need for new therapeutic approaches based on precision medicine informed by biomarker assessment and BRAF, a key regulator of MAPK signaling pathway, influencing cell differentiation, proliferation, migration and pro-tumorigenic activity, is emerging as a promising molecular target. V600E, is the most frequent BRAF alteration in gliomas, especially in pediatric low-grade astrocytomas, pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma, papillary craniopharyngioma, epithelioid glioblastoma and ganglioglioma. The possible application of BRAF-targeted therapy in gliomas is continuously growing and there is preliminary evidence of prolonged disease control obtained by BRAF inhibitors in tumors harboring BRAF V600E mutation. The possibility of introducing targeted therapies into the treatment algorithm represents a paradigm shift for patients with BRAF V600E mutant recurrent high-grade and low-grade glioma and BRAF routine testing should be considered in clinical practice. The focus of this review is to summarize the molecular landscape of BRAF across glioma subtypes and the novel therapeutic strategies for BRAF V600E mutated tumors.

Prognostic significance of age on superficial spreading melanoma after resection: lessons from SEER database involving 12 536 patients

BACKGROUND

This study sought to analyse the impact of elderly age on long-term prognosis of superficial spreading melanoma (SSM) after surgery.

METHODS

A population-based cohort of patients undergoing resection for SSM from 2004 to 2015 was collected, using data from National Cancer Institute' Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)* Stat software. Patients were divided into the non-elderly group (≤70 years) and elderly group (>70 years). Baseline characteristics and long-term survivals were compared between the two groups. A 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce the risk of bias. The impact of the elderly age on overall survival (OS) and cause-specific mortality (CSM) was estimated by Cox-regression and competing-risk regression models.

RESULTS

Among 12 536 patients with SSM after resection included into the cohort, 8664 patients were ≤70 years, and 3872 were >70 years. Patients in the elderly group had higher incidences of multiple tumours, worse tumour stage and infiltration degree, lymphatic metastasis, and larger size of primary lesions. Using PSM, 3581 pairs of patients were created. On matched analysis, the elderly group was associated with worse OS and CSM. On multivariable Cox-regression and competing-risk regression analyses, elderly age was identified as an independent risk factor of OS and CSM after adjusting for other prognostic variables.

CONCLUSIONS

The elderly age of patients was independently associated with worse OS and CSM after resection of SSM when baseline and tumour characteristics were balanced. Adjuvant therapy and individualized strategy on follow-up should be made for elderly patients after resection of SSM.

Clinical Trials in Melanoma: Margins, Lymph Nodes, Targeted and Immunotherapy

Multiple randomized controlled trials have influenced the current standard of care for patients with cutaneous melanoma. Since the development of targeted and immune therapy, studies of adjuvant therapy for patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma have led to the approval of combined B-raf proto-oncogene (BRAF) and mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase inhibitors for patients with a BRAF mutation, and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein-4 or antiprogrammed cell death-1 therapy for patients without a BRAF mutation. This article discusses the details of the trials that have influenced these treatment decisions, in addition to discussing ongoing trials and possible future directions.

Quality of life and mental health in real-world patients with resected stage III/IV melanoma receiving adjuvant immunotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) has expanded into the adjuvant setting enhancing the importance of knowledge on the immune-related toxicities and their impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Large phase 3 trials of patients with resected Stage III/IV melanoma found no effect on HRQoL during adjuvant immunotherapy. This study investigates how HRQoL was affected during and after adjuvant immunotherapy in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Patients with resected melanoma treated with adjuvant nivolumab from 2018 to 2021 in Denmark were identified using the Danish Metastatic Melanoma Database (DAMMED). The study was performed as a nationwide cross-sectional analysis as a questionnaire consisting of six different validated questionnaires on HRQoL, cognitive function, fatigue, depression, fear of recurrence, and decision regret was sent to all patients in March 2021. To evaluate HRQoL during and after adjuvant treatment, patients were divided into groups depending on their treatment status when answering the questionnaire; patients in active treatment for 0-6 months, patients in active treatment for >6 months, patients who ended treatment 0-6 months ago, and patients who ended treatment >6 months ago.

RESULTS

A total of 271/412 (66%) patients completed the questionnaire. Patients who ended therapy 0-6 months ago had the lowest HRQoL and had more fatigue. Patients in active treatment for >6 months had lower HRQoL and more fatigue than patients who started treatment 0-6 months ago. Patients ending therapy >6 months ago had higher HRQoL and less fatigue compared to patients who ended therapy 0-6 months ago. Multivariable analysis showed an association between HRQoL and treatment status, comorbidity, civil status, and employment status.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant nivolumab may affect some aspects of QoL, but the influence seems temporary. Patient characteristics, such as civil status, employment status, and comorbidity were associated with HRQoL.

EGFR pathway targeting drugs in head and neck cancer in the era of immunotherapy

Receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) are cell surface receptors that bind growth factor ligands and initiate cellular signaling. Of the 20 classes of RTKs, 7 classes, I-V, VIII, and X, are linked to head and neck cancers (HNCs). We focus on the first class of RTK, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), as it is the most thoroughly studied class. EGFR overexpression is observed in 20% of tumors, and expression of EGFR variant III is seen in 15% of aggressive chemoradiotherapy resistant HNCs. Currently, the EGFR monoclonal antibody (mAb) cetuximab is the only FDA approved RTK-targeting drug for the treatment of HNCs. Clinical trials have also included EGFR mAbs, with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and small molecule inhibitors targeting the EGFR, MAPK, and mTOR pathways. Additionally, Immunotherapy has been found to be effective in 15 to 20% of patients with recurrent or metastatic HNC as a monotherapy. Thus, attempts are underway for the combinatorial treatment of immunotherapy and EGFR mAbs to determine if the recruitment of immune cells in the tumor microenvironment can overcome EGFR resistance.

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.

Melanogenesis and the Targeted Therapy of Melanoma

Pigment production is a unique character of melanocytes. Numerous factors are linked with melanin production, including genetics, ultraviolet radiation (UVR) and inflammation. Understanding the mechanism of melanogenesis is crucial to identify new preventive and therapeutic strategies in the treatment of melanoma. Here, we reviewed the current available literatures on the mechanisms of melanogenesis, including the signaling pathways of UVR-induced pigment production, MC1R's central determinant roles and MITF as a master transcriptional regulator in melanogenesis. Moreover, we further highlighted the role of targeting BRAF, NRAS and MC1R in melanoma prevention and treatment. The combination therapeutics of immunotherapy and targeted kinase inhibitors are becoming the newest therapeutic option in advanced melanoma.

Increased MARCKS Activity in BRAF Inhibitor-Resistant Melanoma Cells Is Essential for Their Enhanced Metastatic Behavior Independent of Elevated WNT5A and IL-6 Signaling

Treatment of melanoma with a BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) frequently initiates development of BRAFi resistance, leading to increased tumor progression and metastasis. Previously, we showed that combined inhibition of elevated WNT5A and IL-6 signaling reduced the invasion and migration of BRAFi-resistant (BRAFi-R) melanoma cells. However, the use of a combined approach per se and the need for high inhibitor concentrations to achieve this effect indicate a need for an alternative and single target. One such target could be myristoylated alanine-rich C-kinase substrate (MARCKS), a downstream target of WNT5A in BRAFi-sensitive melanoma cells. Our results revealed that MARCKS protein expression and activity are significantly elevated in PLX4032 and PLX4720 BRAFi-R A375 and HTB63 melanoma cells. Surprisingly, neither WNT5A nor IL-6 contributed to the increases in MARCKS expression and activity in BRAFi-R melanoma cells, unlike in BRAFi-sensitive melanoma cells. However, despite the above findings, our functional validation experiments revealed that MARCKS is essential for the increased metastatic behavior of BRAFi-R melanoma cells. Knockdown of MARCKS in BRAFi-R melanoma cells caused reductions in the F-actin content and the number of filopodia-like protrusions, explaining the impaired migration, invasion and metastasis of these cells observed in vitro and in an in vivo zebrafish model. In our search for an alternative explanation for the increased activity of MARCKS in BRAFi-R melanoma cells, we found elevated basal activities of PKCα, PKCε, PKCι, and RhoA. Interestingly, combined inhibition of basal PKC and RhoA effectively impaired MARCKS activity in BRAFi-R melanoma cells. Our results reveal that MARCKS is an attractive single antimetastatic target in BRAFi-R melanoma cells.

Artificial Intelligence and Advanced Melanoma: Treatment Management Implications

Artificial intelligence (AI), a field of research in which computers are applied to mimic humans, is continuously expanding and influencing many aspects of our lives. From electric cars to search motors, AI helps us manage our daily lives by simplifying functions and activities that would be more complex otherwise. Even in the medical field, and specifically in oncology, many studies in recent years have highlighted the possible helping role that AI could play in clinical and therapeutic patient management. In specific contexts, clinical decisions are supported by "intelligent" machines and the development of specific softwares that assist the specialist in the management of the oncology patient. Melanoma, a highly heterogeneous disease influenced by several genetic and environmental factors, to date is still difficult to manage clinically in its advanced stages. Therapies often fail, due to the establishment of intrinsic or secondary resistance, making clinical decisions complex. In this sense, although much work still needs to be conducted, numerous evidence shows that AI (through the processing of large available data) could positively influence the management of the patient with advanced melanoma, helping the clinician in the most favorable therapeutic choice and avoiding unnecessary treatments that are sure to fail. In this review, the most recent applications of AI in melanoma will be described, focusing especially on the possible finding of this field in the management of drug treatments.

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.

Real-world outcomes using PD-1 antibodies and BRAF + MEK inhibitors for adjuvant melanoma treatment from 39 skin cancer centers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland

BACKGROUND

Programmed death-1 (PD-1) antibodies and BRAF + MEK inhibitors are widely used for adjuvant therapy of fully resected high-risk melanoma. Little is known about treatment efficacy outside of phase III trials. This real-world study reports on clinical outcomes of modern adjuvant melanoma treatment in specialized skin cancer centers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.

METHODS

Multicenter, retrospective study investigating stage III-IV melanoma patients receiving adjuvant nivolumab (NIV), pembrolizumab (PEM) or dabrafenib + trametinib (D + T) between 1/2017 and 10/2021. The primary endpoint was 12-month recurrence-free survival (RFS). Further analyses included descriptive and correlative statistics, and a multivariate linear-regression machine learning model to assess the risk of early melanoma recurrence.

RESULTS

In total, 1198 patients from 39 skin cancer centers from Germany, Austria and Switzerland were analysed. The vast majority received anti PD-1 therapies (n = 1003). Twelve-month RFS for anti PD-1 and BRAF + MEK inhibitor-treated patients were 78.1% and 86.5%, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 1.998 [95% CI 1.335-2.991]; p = 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) in anti PD-1 (95.8%) and BRAF + MEK inhibitor (96.9%) treated patients (p > 0.05) during the median follow-up of 17 months. Data indicates that anti PD-1 treated patients who develop immune-related adverse events (irAEs) have lower recurrence rates compared to patients with no irAEs (HR 0.578 [95% CI 0.443-0.754], p = 0.001). BRAF mutation status did not affect overall efficacy of anti PD-1 treatment (p > 0.05). In both, anti PD-1 and BRAF + MEK inhibitor treated cohorts, data did not show any difference in 12-month RFS and 12-month OS comparing patients receiving total lymph node dissection (TLND) versus sentinel lymph node biopsy only (p > 0.05). The recurrence prediction model reached high specificity but only low sensitivity with an AUC = 0.65. No new safety signals were detected. Overall, recorded numbers and severity of adverse events were lower than reported in pivotal phase III trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite recent advances in adjuvant melanoma treatment, early recurrence remains a significant clinical challenge. This study shows that TLND does not reduce the risk of early melanoma recurrence and should only be considered in selected patients. Data further highlight that variables collected during clinical routine are unlikely to allow for a clinically relevant prediction of individual recurrence risk.

Tissue-resident memory T cells in the era of (Neo) adjuvant melanoma management

Tissue-resident memory T (TRM) cells have emerged as key players in the immune control of melanoma. These specialized cells are identified by expression of tissue retention markers such as CD69, CD103 and CD49a with downregulation of egress molecules such as Sphingosine-1-Phosphate Receptor-1 (S1PR1) and the lymphoid homing receptor, CD62L. TRM have been shown to be integral in controlling infections such as herpes simplex virus (HSV), lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV) and influenza. More recently, robust pre-clinical models have also demonstrated TRM are able to maintain melanoma in a dormant state without progression to macroscopic disease reminiscent of their ability to control viral infections. The discovery of the role these cells play in anti-melanoma immunity has coincided with the advent of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy which has revolutionized the treatment of cancers. ICIs that target programmed death protein-1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) have led to substantial improvements in outcomes for patients with metastatic melanoma and have been rapidly employed to reduce recurrences in the resected stage III setting. While ICIs mediate anti-tumor activity via CD8+ T cells, the specific subsets that facilitate this response is unclear. TRM invariably exhibit high expression of immune checkpoints such as PD-1, CTLA-4 and lymphocyte activating gene-3 (LAG-3) which strongly implicates this CD8+ T cell subset as a crucial mediator of ICI activity. In this review, we present pre-clinical and translational studies that highlight the critical role of TRM in both immune control of primary melanoma and as a key CD8+ T cell subset that mediates anti-tumor activity of ICIs for the treatment of melanoma.

Prognosis of Patients With Primary Melanoma Stage I and II According to American Joint Committee on Cancer Version 8 Validated in Two Independent Cohorts: Implications for Adjuvant Treatment

PURPOSE

The first randomized trial of adjuvant treatment with checkpoint inhibitor in stage II melanoma reported a significant reduction in risk of tumor recurrence. This study evaluates two independent data sets to further document survival probabilities for patients with primary stage I and II melanoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The Central Malignant Melanoma Registry (CMMR) in Germany evaluated 17,544 patients with a primary diagnosis of stage I and II melanoma from 2000 to 2015. The exploratory cohort consisted of 6,725 patients from the Center for Dermato-Oncology at the University of Tübingen, and the confirmatory cohort consisted of 10,819 patients from 11 other German centers. Survival outcomes were compared with published American Joint Committee on Cancer version 8 (AJCCv8) stage I and II survival data.

RESULTS

For the two CMMR cohorts in stage IA compared with the AJCCv8 cohort, melanoma-specific survival rates at 10 years were 95.1%-95.6% versus 98%; 89.7%-90.9% versus 94% in stage IB; 80.7%-83.1% versus 88% in stage IIA; 72.0%-79.9% versus 82% in stage IIB; and 57.6%-64.7% versus 75% in stage IIC, respectively. Recurrence rates were approximately twice as high as melanoma-specific mortality rates in stages IA-IIA.

CONCLUSION

The melanoma-specific survival rates in the two CMMR cohorts across stages I and II are less favorable than published in AJCCv8. This has important implications for the consideration of adjuvant treatment in this population.

Application of Electronic Health Record Text Mining: Real-World Tolerability, Safety, and Efficacy of Adjuvant Melanoma Treatments

Introduction: Nivolumab (N), pembrolizumab (P), and dabrafenib plus trametinib (D + T) have been registered as adjuvant treatments for resected stage III and IV melanoma since 2018. Electronic health records (EHRs) are a real-world data source that can be used to review treatments in clinical practice. In this study, we applied EHR text-mining software to evaluate the real-world tolerability, safety, and efficacy of adjuvant melanoma treatments. Methods: Adult melanoma patients receiving adjuvant treatment between January 2019 and October 2021 at the Leiden University Medical Center, the Netherlands, were included. CTcue text-mining software (v3.1.0, CTcue B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands) was used to construct rule-based queries and perform context analysis for patient inclusion and data collection from structured and unstructured EHR data. Results: In total, 122 patients were included: 54 patients treated with nivolumab, 48 with pembrolizumab, and 20 with D + T. Significantly more patients discontinued treatment due to toxicity on D + T (N: 16%, P: 6%, D + T: 40%), and X2 (6, n = 122) = 14.6 and p = 0.024. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) mainly showed immune-related treatment-limiting adverse events (AEs), and chronic thyroid-related AE occurred frequently (hyperthyroidism: N: 15%, P: 13%, hypothyroidism: N: 20%, P: 19%). Treatment-limiting toxicity from D + T was primarily a combination of reversible AEs, including pyrexia and fatigue. The 1-year recurrence-free survival was 70.3% after nivolumab, 72.4% after pembrolizumab, and 83.0% after D + T. Conclusions: Text-mining EHR is a valuable method to collect real-world data to evaluate adjuvant melanoma treatments. ICIs were better tolerated than D + T, in line with RCT results. For BRAF+ patients, physicians must weigh the higher risk of reversible treatment-limiting AEs of D + T against the risk of long-term immune-related AEs.

Cpd-42 protects against calcium oxalate nephrocalcinosis-induced renal injury and inflammation by targeting RIPK3-mediated necroptosis

Calcium oxalate (CaOx) crystals, as the predominant component of human kidney stones, can trigger excessive cell death and inflammation of renal tubular epithelial cells, involved in the pathogenesis of nephrocalcinosis. Necroptosis mediated by receptor-interacting protein kinase 3 (RIPK3) serves a critical role in the cytotoxicity of CaOx crystals. Here, we assessed the therapeutic potential of a novel RIPK3 inhibitor, compound 42 (Cpd-42), for CaOx nephrocalcinosis by comparison with dabrafenib, a classic RIPK3 inhibitor. Our results demonstrated that Cpd-42 pretreatment attenuated CaOx crystals-induced renal tubular epithelial cell (TEC) injury by inhibiting necroptosis and inflammation in vitro and in vivo. Furthermore, in an established mouse model of CaOx nephrocalcinosis, Cpd-42 also reduced renal injury while improving the impaired kidney function and intrarenal crystal deposition. Consistent with this finding, Cpd-42 was confirmed to exhibit superior inhibition of necroptosis and protection against renal TEC injury compared to the classic RIPK3 inhibitor dabrafenib in vitro and in vivo. Mechanistically, RIPK3 knockout (KO) tubular epithelial cells pretreated with Cpd-42 did not show further enhancement of the protective effect on crystals-induced cell injury and inflammation. We confirmed that Cpd-42 exerted protective effects by specifically targeting and inhibiting RIPK3-mediated necroptosis to block the formation of the RIPK1-RIPK3 necrosome. Taken together, targeted inhibition of RIPK3-mediated necroptosis with Cpd-42 may provide a potential therapeutic approach for CaOx nephrocalcinosis.

MEK inhibitors for neurofibromatosis type 1 manifestations: Clinical evidence and consensus

The wide variety of clinical manifestations of the genetic syndrome neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) are driven by overactivation of the RAS pathway. Mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase inhibitors (MEKi) block downstream targets of RAS. The recent regulatory approvals of the MEKi selumetinib for inoperable symptomatic plexiform neurofibromas in children with NF1 have made it the first medical therapy approved for this indication in the United States, the European Union, and elsewhere. Several recently published and ongoing clinical trials have demonstrated that MEKi may have potential benefits for a variety of other NF1 manifestations, and there is broad interest in the field regarding the appropriate clinical use of these agents. In this review, we present the current evidence regarding the use of existing MEKi for a variety of NF1-related manifestations, including tumor (neurofibromas, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors, low-grade glioma, and juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia) and non-tumor (bone, pain, and neurocognitive) manifestations. We discuss the potential utility of MEKi in related genetic conditions characterized by overactivation of the RAS pathway (RASopathies). In addition, we review practical treatment considerations for the use of MEKi as well as provide consensus recommendations regarding their clinical use from a panel of experts.

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.

Pembrolizumab versus placebo as adjuvant therapy in resected stage IIB or IIC melanoma (KEYNOTE-716): distant metastasis-free survival results of a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with stage IIB or IIC melanoma who undergo surgery alone are at a substantial risk for disease recurrence. Adjuvant pembrolizumab significantly improved recurrence-free survival versus placebo in stage IIB or IIC melanoma in the first interim analysis of the KEYNOTE-716 trial. Here, we report results from the secondary endpoint of distant metastasis-free survival (prespecified third interim analysis), and recurrence-free survival with longer follow-up.

METHODS

KEYNOTE-716 is a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover or rechallenge, randomised, phase 3 trial done at 160 academic medical centres and hospitals across 16 countries. Eligible patients were aged 12 years and older with newly-diagnosed, completely resected, and histologically confirmed stage IIB (T3b or T4a) or IIC (T4b) cutaneous melanoma; negative sentinel lymph node biopsy; and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either 200 mg of pembrolizumab (2 mg/kg up to a maximum of 200 mg in paediatric patients) or placebo, both intravenously, every 3 weeks for 17 cycles (part 1) or until disease recurrence or unacceptable toxicity. Eligible patients with disease recurrence could receive further treatment with pembrolizumab in the part 2 crossover or rechallenge phase. Randomisation was done using an interactive response technology system and stratified by T category and paediatric status. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed recurrence-free survival (assessed here with longer follow-up), and we report the prespecified third interim analysis of distant metastasis-free survival (secondary endpoint). Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population (all patients who were randomly assigned, according to assigned group) and safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of trial treatment, according to the treatment received. KEYNOTE-716 is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03553836, and has completed recruitment.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 23, 2018, and Nov 4, 2020, 976 patients were randomly assigned to receive pembrolizumab (n=487) or placebo (n=489). At a median follow-up of 27·4 months (IQR 23·1-31·7), median distant metastasis-free survival was not reached (95% CI not reached [NR]-NR) in either group. Pembrolizumab significantly improved distant metastasis-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0·64, 95% CI 0·47-0·88, p=0·0029) versus placebo. Median recurrence-free survival was 37·2 months (95% CI NR-NR) in the pembrolizumab group and not reached in the placebo group (95% CI NR-NR). The risk of recurrence remained lower with pembrolizumab versus placebo (HR 0·64, 95% CI 0·50-0·84). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were hypertension (16 [3%] of 483 patients in the pembrolizumab group vs 17 [4%] of 486 patients in the placebo group), diarrhoea (eight [2%] vs one [<1%]), rash (seven [1%] vs two [<1%]), autoimmune hepatitis (seven [1%] vs two [<1%]), and increased lipase (six [1%] vs eight [2%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 49 (10%) patients in the pembrolizumab group and 11 (2%) patients in the placebo group. No treatment-related deaths were reported.

INTERPRETATION

Adjuvant pembrolizumab is an efficacious treatment option for resected stage IIB and IIC melanoma, with significant improvement in distant-metastasis free survival versus placebo and continued reduction in the risk of recurrence with an adverse event profile consistent with previous studies of pembrolizumab. The overall benefit-risk of pembrolizumab continues to be positive in the adjuvant setting.

FUNDING

Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co.

Neoadjuvant relatlimab and nivolumab in resectable melanoma

Relatlimab and nivolumab combination immunotherapy improves progression-free survival over nivolumab monotherapy in patients with unresectable advanced melanoma1. We investigated this regimen in patients with resectable clinical stage III or oligometastatic stage IV melanoma (NCT02519322). Patients received two neoadjuvant doses (nivolumab 480 mg and relatlimab 160 mg intravenously every 4 weeks) followed by surgery, and then ten doses of adjuvant combination therapy. The primary end point was pathologic complete response (pCR) rate2. The combination resulted in 57% pCR rate and 70% overall pathologic response rate among 30 patients treated. The radiographic response rate using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 was 57%. No grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events were observed in the neoadjuvant setting. The 1- and 2-year recurrence-free survival rate was 100% and 92% for patients with any pathologic response, compared to 88% and 55% for patients who did not have a pathologic response (P = 0.005). Increased immune cell infiltration at baseline, and decrease in M2 macrophages during treatment, were associated with pathologic response. Our results indicate that neoadjuvant relatlimab and nivolumab induces a high pCR rate. Safety during neoadjuvant therapy is favourable compared to other combination immunotherapy regimens. These data, in combination with the results of the RELATIVITY-047 trial1, provide further confirmation of the efficacy and safety of this new immunotherapy regimen.

Five-Year Analysis of Adjuvant Pembrolizumab or Placebo in Stage III Melanoma

BACKGROUND: In the previously reported primary analyses of this phase 3 trial, 12 months of adjuvant pembrolizumab resulted in significantly longer recurrence- and distant metastasis-free survival than placebo in patients with resected high-risk stage III melanoma. To confirm the stability of these benefits, longer-term data were needed. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1019 patients to receive 200 mg of pembrolizumab or placebo intravenously every 3 weeks for a total of 18 doses (approximately 1 year) and had previously reported data with a 15-, 36-, and 42-month median follow-up. We now report data at a median follow-up of 4.9 years. We report a number of outcomes, including recurrence-free survival in the overall population and in the subgroup of patients with cancer who were positive for the programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1). Distant metastasis-free survival was a secondary end point. RESULTS: In the overall intention-to-treat population, pembrolizumab was still associated with longer recurrence-free survival than placebo (5-year rate of recurrence-free survival, 55.4% [95% confidence interval (CI), 50.8 to 59.8] vs. 38.3% [95% CI, 33.9 to 42.7]; hazard ratio for recurrence or death, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.72]) and a longer distant metastasis-free survival (5-year rate of distant metastasis-free survival, 60.6% [95% CI, 56.0 to 64.9] vs. 44.5% [95% CI, 39.9 to 48.9]; hazard ratio for distant metastasis or death, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.52 to 0.75]). Similar findings were obtained in the subgroup of 853 patients with PD-L1–positive tumors. CONCLUSIONS: The 5-year analysis of adjuvant therapy with pembrolizumab resulted in a sustained improvement in the long-term recurrence- and distant metastasis-free survival compared with placebo in patients with resected stage III melanoma. (Funded by Merck & Co., Inc.; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02362594, and EudraCT number, 2014-004944-37.)

BRAF Testing in Melanoma and Colorectal Cancer in Latin America: Challenges and Opportunities

The incidence of colorectal cancer in Argentina and Brazil has reached levels comparable to those in higher-income countries. Similarly, the incidence of melanoma in Latin America has increased during the past decades. BRAFmutation is seen frequently in melanomas and colorectal cancer. Discovering the expression of this specific biomarker in both cancers has unleashed the potential for targeted molecular therapies.In patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma, adopting a combined targeted treatment approach has shown a dramatic increase in overall survival. However, several barriers impede the development of early BRAF testing in Latin America, jeopardizing the potential for personalized therapies and care. To address this, the Americas Health Foundation convened a virtual meeting of Latin American oncologists to address the barriers to BRAF testing in melanoma and colorectal cancer. During a three-day conference, expert oncologists used literature reviews and personal experience to detail the barriers to early BRAF testing in their region. They proposed actionable steps to overcome the barriers identified, which included deficiencies in knowledge, treatment options, equitable distribution, timely results, and local data on BRAF mutations. Oncologists proposed several actions to overcome barriers, including raising public and healthcare awareness about the importance of BRAF testing, expanding treatment options in clinics across the region, developing centers in underserved areas, and increasing affordable treatment options for patients who test positive for BRAF mutations.

Molecular Pathways and Mechanisms of BRAF in Cancer Therapy

With the identification of activating mutations in BRAF across a wide variety of malignancies, substantial effort was placed in designing safe and effective therapeutic strategies to target BRAF. These efforts have led to the development and regulatory approval of three BRAF inhibitors as well as five combinations of a BRAF inhibitor plus an additional agent(s) to manage cancer such as melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, anaplastic thyroid cancer, and colorectal cancer. To date, each regimen is effective only in patients with tumors harboring BRAFV600 mutations and the duration of benefit is often short-lived. Further limitations preventing optimal management of BRAF-mutant malignancies are that treatments of non-V600 BRAF mutations have been less profound and combination therapy is likely necessary to overcome resistance mechanisms, but multi-drug regimens are often too toxic. With the emergence of a deeper understanding of how BRAF mutations signal through the RAS/MAPK pathway, newer RAF inhibitors are being developed that may be more effective and potentially safer and more rational combination therapies are being tested in the clinic. In this review, we identify the mechanics of RAF signaling through the RAS/MAPK pathway, present existing data on single-agent and combination RAF targeting efforts, describe emerging combinations, summarize the toxicity of the various agents in clinical testing, and speculate as to where the field may be headed.