Targeting BRAF in melanoma: biological and clinical challenges

Melanoma is an aggressive form of skin cancer that causes the greatest number of skin cancer-related deaths worldwide. In its early stages malignant melanoma can be cured by surgical resection, but once it has progressed to the metastatic stage it is extremely difficult to treat and does not respond to current therapies. A majority of cutaneous melanomas show activating mutations in the NRAS or BRAF proto-oncogenes, components of the Ras-Raf-Mek-Erk (MAPK) signal transduction pathway. The discovery of activating BRAF mutations in ∼50% of all melanomas has proved to be a turning point in the therapeutic management of the disseminated disease. This review summarizes the critical role of BRAF in melanoma pathophysiology, the clinical and pathological determinants of BRAF mutation status and finally addresses the current state of the art of BRAF inhibitors. We further outline the most recent findings on the mechanisms that underlie intrinsic and acquired BRAF inhibitor resistance and describe ongoing preclinical and clinical studies designed to delay or abrogate the onset of therapeutic escape.

MEK162 for patients with advanced melanoma harbouring NRAS or Val600 BRAF mutations: a non-randomised, open-label phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

Patients with melanoma harbouring Val600 BRAF mutations benefit from treatment with BRAF inhibitors. However, no targeted treatments exist for patients with BRAF wild-type tumours, including those with NRAS mutations. We aimed to assess the use of MEK162, a small-molecule MEK1/2 inhibitor, in patients with NRAS-mutated or Val600 BRAF-mutated advanced melanoma.

METHODS

In our open-label, non-randomised, phase 2 study, we assigned patients with NRAS-mutated or BRAF-mutated advanced melanoma to one of three treatment arms on the basis of mutation status. Patients were enrolled at university hospitals or private cancer centres in Europe and the USA. The three arms were: twice-daily MEK162 45 mg for NRAS-mutated melanoma, twice-daily MEK162 45 mg for BRAF-mutated melanoma, and twice-daily MEK162 60 mg for BRAF-mutated melanoma. Previous treatment with BRAF inhibitors was permitted, but previous MEK inhibitor therapy was not allowed. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who had an objective response (ie, a complete response or confirmed partial response). We report data for the 45 mg groups. We assessed clinical activity in all patients who received at least one dose of MEK162 and in patients assessable for response (with two available CT scans). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01320085, and is currently recruiting additional patients with NRAS mutations (based on a protocol amendment).

FINDINGS

Between March 31, 2011, and Jan 17, 2012, we enrolled 71 patients who received at least one dose of MEK162 45 mg. By Feb 29, 2012 (data cutoff), median follow-up was 3·3 months (range 0·6-8·7; IQR 2·2-5·0). No patients had a complete response. Six (20%) of 30 patients with NRAS-mutated melanoma had a partial response (three confirmed) as did eight (20%) of 41 patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma (two confirmed). The most frequent adverse events were acneiform dermatitis (18 [60%] patients with NRAS -mutated melanoma and 15 [37%] patients with the BRAF-mutated melanoma), rash (six [20%] and 16 [39%]), peripheral oedema (ten [33%] and 14 [34%]), facial oedema (nine [30%] and seven [17%]), diarrhoea (eight [27%] and 15 [37%]), and creatine phosphokinase increases (11 [37%] and nine [22%]). Increased creatine phosphokinase was the most common grade 3-4 adverse event (seven [23%] and seven [17%]). Four patients had serious adverse events (two per arm), which included diarrhoea, dehydration, acneiform dermatitis, general physical deterioration, irregular heart rate, malaise, and small intestinal perforation. No deaths occurred from treatment-related causes.

INTERPRETATION

To our knowledge, MEK162 is the first targeted therapy to show activity in patients with NRAS -mutated melanoma and might offer a new option for a cancer with few effective treatments.

FUNDING

Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

The novel SMAC mimetic birinapant exhibits potent activity against human melanoma cells

PURPOSE

Inhibitor of apoptosis proteins (IAP) promote cancer cell survival and confer resistance to therapy. We report on the ability of second mitochondria-derived activator of caspases mimetic, birinapant, which acts as antagonist to cIAP1 and cIAP2, to restore the sensitivity to apoptotic stimuli such as TNF-α in melanomas.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Seventeen melanoma cell lines, representing five major genetic subgroups of cutaneous melanoma, were treated with birinapant as a single agent or in combination with TNF-α. Effects on cell viability, target inhibition, and initiation of apoptosis were assessed and findings were validated in 2-dimensional (2D), 3D spheroid, and in vivo xenograft models.

RESULTS

When birinapant was combined with TNF-α, strong combination activity, that is, neither compound was effective individually but the combination was highly effective, was observed in 12 of 18 cell lines. This response was conserved in spheroid models, whereas in vivo birinapant inhibited tumor growth without adding TNF-α in in vitro resistant cell lines. Birinapant combined with TNF-α inhibited the growth of a melanoma cell line with acquired resistance to BRAF inhibition to the same extent as in the parental cell line.

CONCLUSIONS

Birinapant in combination with TNF-α exhibits a strong antimelanoma effect in vitro. Birinapant as a single agent shows in vivo antitumor activity, even if cells are resistant to single agent therapy in vitro. Birinapant in combination with TNF-α is effective in a melanoma cell line with acquired resistance to BRAF inhibitors.

Effect of dabrafenib on melanoma cell lines harbouring the BRAF(V600D/R) mutations

Background

Conventional therapeutic agents are largely unsatisfactory into the treatment of malignant melanoma. Recently, an innovative approach based on inhibitors of the mutated BRAF gene (which represents the most prevalent alteration in melanoma patients) appears very promising from the clinical point of view. On this regard, a new compound, dabrafenib (GSK2118436), has been demonstrated to be effective in patients carrying the BRAFV600E/K mutations. We here tested dabrafenib for its capability to inhibit cell growth on primary melanoma cell lines, established from patients' tumour tissues and carrying the BRAFV600D/R mutations.

Methods

Three melanoma cell lines were tested: M257 wild-type BRAF, LCP BRAFV600R and WM266 BRAFV600D. The MTT assays were performed using standardized approaches. To evaluate the inhibition of MAPK pathway and the consequent inhibition of cellular proliferation, the phosphorylation of ERK was examined by Western Blot analysis performed on total protein extracts from cell lines after treatment with dabrafenib.

Results

Our experiments demonstrated an effective action of Dabrafenib (GSK2118436) and the inhibition of MAPK pathway in melanoma cell lines carrying BRAFV600D/R mutations.

Conclusion

These results could be helpful to enlarge the number of melanoma patients who may benefit of a more effective targeted treatment.

Diagnosis and treatment of melanoma. European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline--Update 2012

Cutaneous melanoma (CM) is potentially the most dangerous form of skin tumour and causes 90% of skin cancer mortality. A unique collaboration of multi-disciplinary 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 CM diagnosis and treatment, based on systematic literature reviews and the experts' experience. Diagnosis is made clinically and staging is based upon the AJCC system. CMs are excised with one to two centimetre safety margins. Sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) is routinely offered as a staging procedure in patients with tumours more than 1mm in thickness, although there is as yet no clear survival benefit for this approach. Interferon-α treatment may be offered to patients with stage II and III melanoma as an adjuvant therapy, as this treatment increases at least the disease-free survival (DFS) and less clear the overall survival (OS) time. The treatment is however associated with significant toxicity. In distant metastasis, all options of surgical therapy have to be considered thoroughly. In the absence of surgical options, systemic treatment is indicated. BRAF inhibitors like vemurafenib for BRAF mutated patients as well as the CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab offer new therapeutic opportunities apart from conventional chemotherapy. Therapeutic decisions in stage IV patients should be primarily made by an interdisciplinary oncology team ('tumour board').