Update on tolerability and overall survival in COLUMBUS: landmark analysis of a randomised phase 3 trial of encorafenib plus binimetinib vs vemurafenib or encorafenib in patients with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma

Future perspective of targeted treatments in pediatric low-grade glioma (pLGG): the evolution of standard-of-care and challenges of a new era

While surgery, when possible, remains the mainstay of pediatric low-grade glioma (pLGG) management, adjuvant therapy has significantly evolved over time. Radiation therapy was commonly used in the late 1990s for tumors that could not be resected or recurred. This resulted in significant late morbidity in this population and mortality related to secondary malignancies and chronic health conditions. Chemotherapy became the mainstay of adjuvant therapy but children still experienced late morbidity secondary to exposure to multiple lines of treatment over time. Targeted therapies emerged after the identification of frequent genetic alterations in the mitogen activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway including KIAA1549-BRAF fusions and BRAF-V600 mutations and the near universal upregulation of the MAPK pathway in these tumors. Both BRAF and MEK inhibitors have shown efficacy in the treatment of pLGG and have led to prolonged stability in some cases. Multiple phase III clinical trials are now comparing targeted therapy to standard-of-care chemotherapy regimens setting the stage for targeted therapy to replace chemotherapy as the first-line treatment in some cases. Targeted therapy, however, is not without its challenges. There are clear examples of resistance and mechanisms of resistance have not been fully elucidated. There is also no clear duration for these therapies and rebound growth is a well-known phenomenon especially in BRAF-V600 mutant tumors. Targeted therapies are also fairly recent developments and long-term toxicities and functional outcomes are still being monitored. Very young and adolescent/young adult LGGs also carry molecular features that may not be addressed by inhibition of the MAPK pathway. Adjuvant therapy for pLGG has evolved from radiation for all unresectable or residual tumors to molecularly driven targeted therapies with improved quality of life, late effects, and less off-target toxicities. While there is still much to learn in regard to newer targeted therapies for pLGG, the era of targeted therapies for pediatric LGG is upon us.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors in cancers: Treatment optimization - Part I

A multitude of TKI has been developed and approved targeting various oncogenetic alterations. While these have provided improvements in efficacy compared with conventional chemotherapies, resistance to targeted therapies occurs. Mutations in the kinase domain result in the inability of TKI to inactivate the protein kinase. Also, gene amplification, increased protein expression and downstream activation or bypassing of signalling pathways are commonly reported mechanisms of resistance. Improved understanding of mechanisms involved in TKI resistance has resulted in the development of new generations of targeted agents. In a race against time, the search for new, more potent and efficient drugs, and/or combinations of drugs, remains necessary as new resistance mechanisms to the latest generation of TKI emerge. This review examines the various generations of TKI approved to date and their common mechanisms of resistance, focusing on TKI targeting BCR-ABL, epidermal growth factor receptor, anaplastic lymphoma kinase and BRAF/MEK tyrosine kinases.

Cost-effectiveness of encorafenib with binimetinib in unresectable or metastatic BRAF-mutant melanoma

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of encorafenib with binimetinib (EncoBini) as compared to other targeted double combination therapies, namely dabrafenib with trametinib (DabraTrame) and vemurafenib with cobimetinib (VemuCobi), for the treatment of BRAF V600-mutant unresectable or metastatic melanoma (MM) from the French payer perspective.

METHODS

A partitioned survival model was developed considering a lifetime horizon. The model structure simulated the clinical pathway of patients with BRAF V600-mutant MM. Clinical effectiveness and safety inputs were sourced from the COLUMBUS trial, a network meta-analysis and published literature. Costs, resource use, and the quality of life inputs were obtained from the literature and appropriate French sources.

RESULTS

Over a lifetime horizon, EncoBini was associated, on average, with reduced costs and increased quality adjusted life years (QALYs), dominating both targeted double combination therapies. For a willingness-to-pay threshold of €90,000 per QALY, the probability of EncoBini being cost-effective against either comparator remained above 80%. The most influential model parameters were the hazard ratios for the overall survival of EncoBini vs DabraTrame and VemuCobi, the pre- and post-progression utility values, as well as treatment dosages and the relative dose intensity of all interventions.

CONCLUSION

EncoBini is associated with reduced costs and increased QALYs, dominating other targeted double combination therapies (DabraTrame, VemuCobi) for patients with BRAF V600-mutant MM in France. EncoBini is a highly cost-effective intervention in MM.

COLUMBUS 7-year update: A randomized, open-label, phase III trial of encorafenib plus binimetinib versus vemurafenib or encorafenib in patients with BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma

BACKGROUND

Treatment with encorafenib plus binimetinib and encorafenib monotherapy is associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with vemurafenib in patients with BRAF V600E/K-mutant metastatic melanoma. We report results from the 7-year analysis of COLUMBUS part 1 (NCT01909453) at 99.7 months (median duration between randomization and data cutoff).

METHODS

577 patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma who were treatment-naive or progressed after first-line immunotherapy were randomized 1:1:1 to encorafenib 450 mg once daily (QD) plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily (BID) (n = 192), vemurafenib 960 mg BID (n = 191), or encorafenib monotherapy 300 mg QD (n = 194). No prior BRAF/MEK inhibitor was allowed.

RESULTS

Seven-year PFS and OS rates (95 % CI) were 21.2 % (14.7-28.4 %) and 27.4 % (21.2-33.9%) in the encorafenib plus binimetinib arm and 6.4 % (2.1-14.0 %) and 18.2 % (12.8-24.3 %) in the vemurafenib arm, respectively. Median melanoma-specific survival (95 % CI) was 36.8 months (27.7-51.5 months) in the encorafenib plus binimetinib arm and 19.3 months (14.8-25.9 months) in the vemurafenib arm. Thirty-four long-term responders (complete/partial response ongoing at 7 years) were identified across arms.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the longest follow-up from a phase III trial of BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination in BRAF V600E/K-mutant metastatic melanoma. Safety results were consistent with the known tolerability profile of encorafenib plus binimetinib. Results support the long-term efficacy and known safety of encorafenib plus binimetinib in this population and provide new insights on long-term responders. Interactive data visualization is available at the COLUMBUS dashboard (https://clinical-trials.dimensions.ai/columbus7/).

Estimating scenarios for survival time in patients with advanced melanoma receiving immunotherapy and targeted therapy

BACKGROUND

We aim to provide survival scenario estimates for patients with advanced melanoma starting targeted therapies and immunotherapies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We sought randomized trials of targeted therapies and immunotherapies for advanced melanoma and recorded the following percentiles (represented survival scenario) from each overall survival (OS) curve: 90th (worst-case), 75th (lower-typical), 50th (median), 25th (upper-typical), and 10th (best-case). We tested whether these scenarios can be estimated for each OS curve by multiplying its median by 4 multiples: 0.25 (worst-case), 0.5 (lower-typical), 2 (upper-typical), and 3 (best-case).

RESULTS

We identified 15 trials with 8025 patients. For first-line combination targeted therapy treatment groups, the median (interquartile range, IQR) in months for each percentile was: 90th, 6.2 (6.0-6.5); 75th, 11.3 (11.3-11.4); and median, 24.4 (23.5-25.3). For the first-line combination immunotherapy treatment group, the percentiles in months were: 90th, 3.9 (2.8-4.5); 75th, 13.4 (10.1-15.4), median 73 (not applicable). In targeted therapy groups, simple multiples of the median OS were accurate for estimating the 90th percentile in 80%; 75th percentile in 40%; 25th percentile in 100%. In immunotherapy groups, these multiples were accurate at 0% for the 90th percentile, and 43% for the 75th percentile. The 90th percentile (worst-case scenario) was better estimated as 1/6× median OS, and the 75th percentile (lower-typical) as 1/3× median OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Simple multiples of the median OS are a useful framework to estimate scenarios for survival for patients receiving targeted therapies, not immunotherapy. Longer follow-up is required to estimate upper-typical and best-case scenarios.

Clinical practice guidelines for molecular tumor marker, 2nd edition review part 2

In recent years, rapid advancement in gene/protein analysis technology has resulted in target molecule identification that may be useful in cancer treatment. Therefore, "Clinical Practice Guidelines for Molecular Tumor Marker, Second Edition" was published in Japan in September 2021. These guidelines were established to align the clinical usefulness of external diagnostic products with the evaluation criteria of the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. The guidelines were scoped for each tumor, and a clinical questionnaire was developed based on a serious clinical problem. This guideline was based on a careful review of the evidence obtained through a literature search, and recommendations were identified following the recommended grades of the Medical Information Network Distribution Services (Minds). Therefore, this guideline can be a tool for cancer treatment in clinical practice. We have already reported the review portion of "Clinical Practice Guidelines for Molecular Tumor Marker, Second Edition" as Part 1. Here, we present the English version of each part of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Molecular Tumor Marker, Second Edition.

Long-term survival with systemic therapy in the last decade: Can melanoma be cured?

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have been shown to prolong survival of patients with several types of cancer, and the finding was first established in melanoma. Previously, systemic therapy for advanced melanoma aimed only at tumor control and palliation of symptoms. However, in recent years, some patients who received systemic therapy have achieved a complete response and survived without continuous treatment for more than several years. This review discusses the long-term survival rates achieved with currently used systemic therapies and their future perspectives. Long-term survival is currently most likely to be achieved with the use of the standard-dose combination of nivolumab plus ipilimumab, however, this regimen is associated with a high frequency of serious or persistent immune-related adverse events. Several new anti-PD-1-based combination therapies with a better risk-benefit balance are currently under development. Although the acral and mucosal subtypes tend to be less responsive to immune checkpoint inhibitors, anti-PD-1-based combination therapy should continue to be investigated for these subtypes owing to its potential for better long-term survival. With the development of efficacious immunotherapy and targeted therapy, it is important to determine the optimal duration of systemic therapy to avoid unnecessary health and financial burdens as well as to improve efforts to support long-term cancer survivors. As the goal of systemic therapy shifts from tumor control to long-term survival, in future clinical trials, long-term clinical outcomes should be evaluated to assess the benefits of novel agents.

Increasing Incidence and Decreasing Mortality of Melanoma in Elderly Adults: An Epidemiologic Study in Olmsted County, Minnesota

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Primary cutaneous melanoma incidence is increasing in elderly individuals. This population-based cohort examines incidence and mortality rates among adults aged 61 years and older with cutaneous melanoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the Rochester Epidemiology Project, patients aged 61 years of age or older with a first lifetime diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma between January 1, 1970 and December 31, 2020 were identified.

RESULTS

The age- and sex-adjusted incidence rate increased from 16.4 (95% CI, 8.2-24.6) per 100,000 person-years in 1970 to 1979 to 201.5 (95% CI, 185.1-217.8) per 100,000 person-years in 2011 to 2020 (12.3-fold increase). There was a 16.0x increase in males and an 8.5× increase in females. Melanoma incidence has stabilized in males (1.2-fold increase, p = .11) and continues to significantly increase in females (2.7-fold increase, p < .001). Older age at diagnosis was significantly associated with an increased risk of death (HR 1.23 per 5-year increase in age at diagnosis, 95% CI, 1.02-1.47).

CONCLUSION

Melanoma incidence continues to increase since 1970. The incidence has risen in elderly females, but has stabilized in males. Mortality has decreased throughout this period.

Targeted therapeutic strategies for melanoma

ABSTRACT

Melanoma accounts for a small proportion of skin cancers diagnosed each year, but it has a high degree of malignancy and rapid progression, resulting in a short survival period for patients. The incidence of melanoma continues to rise, and now melanoma accounts for 1.7% of cancer diagnoses worldwide and is the fifth most common cancer in the United States. With the development of high-throughput sequencing technologies, the understanding of the pathophysiology of melanoma had also been improved. The most common activating mutations in melanoma cells are BRAF , NRAS , and KIT mutations, which disrupt cell signaling pathways related to tumor proliferation. The progress has led to the emergence of molecularly targeted drugs, which extends the survival of patients with advanced melanoma. A large number of clinical trials have been conducted to confirm that targeted therapy for patients with advanced melanoma can improve progression-free survival and overall survival, and for stage III patients after radical tumor resection targeted therapy can reduce the recurrence of melanoma. Patients who were originally stage III or IV inoperable have the opportunity to achieve tumor radical resection after targeted therapy. This article reviewed the clinical trial data and summarized the clinical benefits and limitations of these therapies.

Demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy during dabrafenib and trametinib treatment for metastatic melanoma: A case report

BACKGROUND

Melanoma is an aggressive malignancy, historically characterized with a poor prognosis and few treatment options. The advent of target therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors, as well as immunotherapy, changed this scenario and improved the prognosis of patients with BRAF V600E mutation. These therapies are generally well tolerated. Neurological toxicities, especially polyradiculopathy, are very rare with BRAF inhibitors and MEK inhibitors although some cases have been described in recent years, regardless of the type of target therapies combination used.

CASE REPORT

We report the case of a patient with BRAF V600E-mutated metastatic melanoma treated with dabrafenib and trametinib who has developed a demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy.

CONCLUSION

This case, once more, should draw our attention to the possibility of rare, but potentially serious side effects, even in the case of generally well-tolerated treatments. Especially in the presence of side effects, it is important a close relationship between clinicians and patients for the management of adverse events and the choice of the best treatment strategy.

Anorectal mucosal melanoma

Anorectal mucosal melanoma accounts for less than 1 % of all anorectal malignant tumors and a tendency for delayed diagnosis leads to advanced disease at presentation.1,2 Due to the rarity of the disease, there are limited prospective trials exploring the optimal treatment strategies. Generally, tumors are surgically excised, with a preference for conservative management with wide local excision. In the past decade, there have been advances with immunotherapy and other targeted therapies. Multiple clinical trials continue exploring neoadjuvant/adjuvant combination treatments in the setting of advanced or unresectable disease.

Treatment experience with encorafenib plus binimetinib for BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma: management insights for clinical practice

For patients with locally advanced or metastatic melanoma who have BRAF V600 activating mutations, combination therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors is now the standard of care. The combination of encorafenib, a highly selective adenosine triphosphate-competitive BRAF inhibitor, plus binimetinib, a potent, selective, allosteric, non-adenosine triphosphate-competitive MEK1/2 inhibitor, was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for unresectable or metastatic melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations based on data from the phase III COLUMBUS study (NCT01909453). Clinical data evaluating BRAF and MEK inhibitor combinations in advanced melanoma indicate a specific profile of adverse events that includes serious retinopathy, skin disorders, and cardiovascular toxicities. Here we provide an overview of the rationale for combining BRAF and MEK inhibitors for the treatment of melanoma, long-term safety results from COLUMBUS, and guidance on managing the most common adverse events associated with this combination based on clinical experience. Proactive and appropriate management of adverse events can allow for longer treatment durations and may result in better treatment outcomes.

Targeted therapy and immunotherapy for orbital and periorbital tumors: a major review

Traditionally, for patients who are poor candidates for surgery and/or radiotherapy, palliative chemotherapy is often offered but with significant toxic side effects. However, recent advancements in our understanding of tumor biology and molecular genetics have brought new understanding to the molecular pathways of certain tumors and cancers. This has ushered in a new era of precision medicine specific to a tumor or cancer treatment pathway (targeted therapy) or directed to host-tumor responses (immunotherapy). This article will focus on recent updates in the application of available targeted and immunotherapy for managing orbital and periorbital tumors and tumor-like conditions, which include cutaneous basal cell carcinoma, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma, cutaneous melanoma, Merkel cell carcinoma, sebaceous gland carcinoma, solitary fibrous tumor, dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans, orbital meningioma, neurofibromatosis, Langerhans cell histiocytosis, ocular adnexal lymphoma, orbital lymphatic malformation, and adenoid cystic carcinoma.

Psychological and behavioral symptoms in patients with melanoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Improved survival rates have made it increasingly important for clinicians to focus on cancer survivorship issues affecting the quality of life of melanoma patients. To provide a comprehensive overview of the disease and treatment-related issues affecting such patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to estimate the prevalence of symptoms of depression, anxiety, fatigue, sleep disturbance, and cognitive problems among melanoma patients, both uveal and cutaneous, before, during and after treatment.

METHODS

The review was preregistered with PROSPERO (#CRD42020189847) and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive search of the literature published up until June 2022 was undertaken using PubMed, PsycInfo, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL. Two independent reviewers screened 1418 records and quality-rated included studies. The reported prevalence rates of symptoms were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Sixty-six studies including a total of 12,400 melanoma patients published between 1992 and 2022 were included. Pooled prevalence rates ranged from 6% to 16% for depression and 7%-30% for anxiety across diagnoses (uveal and cutaneous melanoma) and assessment time points. One third of the patients (35%) reported clinically significant fatigue, 20%-44% had cognitive complaints, while prevalence of sleep disturbance was not reported. Quality assessment indicated that 80% of the studies were of good quality.

CONCLUSION

A large body of research shows that depression and anxiety symptoms are prevalent in melanoma patients before, during and after treatment. However, research examining other symptoms known to affect quality of life, such as fatigue, sleep disturbances, and cognitive problems, is still needed.

Efficacy and Safety of Rechallenge with BRAF/MEK Inhibitors in Advanced Melanoma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rechallenging advanced melanoma patients with BRAFi/MEKi. Seven studies, accounting for 400 patients, were included. Most patients received immunotherapy before the rechallenge, and 79% underwent rechallenge with the combination of BRAFi/MEKi. We found a median progression-free survival of 5 months and overall survival of 9.8 months. The one-year survival rate was 42.63%. Regarding response, ORR was 34% and DCR 65%. There were no new or unexpected safety concerns. Rechallenge with BRAFi/MEKi can improve outcomes in advanced melanoma patients with refractory disease. These findings have significant implications for clinical practice, particularly in the setting of progressive disease in later lines and limited treatment options.

IMPemBra: a phase 2 study comparing pembrolizumab with intermittent/short-term dual MAPK pathway inhibition plus pembrolizumab in patients with melanoma harboring the BRAFV600 mutation

BACKGROUND

Continuous combination of MAPK pathway inhibition (MAPKi) and anti-programmed death-(ligand) 1 (PD-(L)1) showed high response rates, but only limited improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) at the cost of a high frequency of treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) in patients with BRAF^V600-mutated melanoma. Short-term MAPKi induces T-cell infiltration in patients and is synergistic with anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1) in a preclinical melanoma mouse model. The aim of this phase 2b trial was to identify an optimal regimen of short-term MAPKi with dabrafenib plus trametinib in combination with pembrolizumab.

METHODS

Patients with treatment-naïve BRAF^V600E/K-mutant advanced melanoma started pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. In week 6, patients were randomized to continue pembrolizumab only (cohort 1), or to receive, in addition, intermittent dabrafenib 150 mg two times per day plus trametinib 2 mg one time per day for two cycles of 1 week (cohort 2), two cycles of 2 weeks (cohort 3), or continuously for 6 weeks (cohort 4). All cohorts continued pembrolizumab for up to 2 years. Primary endpoints were safety and treatment-adherence. Secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) at week 6, 12, 18 and PFS.

RESULTS

Between June 2016 and August 2018, 33 patients with advanced melanoma have been included and 32 were randomized. Grade 3-4 TRAE were observed in 12%, 12%, 50%, and 63% of patients in cohort 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. All planned targeted therapy was given in 88%, 63%, and 38% of patients in cohort 2, 3, and 4. ORR at week 6, 12, and 18 were 38%, 63%, and 63% in cohort 1; 25%, 63%, and 75% in cohort 2; 25%, 50%, and 75% in cohort 3; and 0%, 63%, and 50% in cohort 4. After a median follow-up of 43.5 months, median PFS was 10.6 months for pembrolizumab monotherapy and not reached for patients treated with pembrolizumab and intermittent dabrafenib and trametinib (p=0.17). The 2-year and 3-year landmark PFS were both 25% for cohort 1, both 63% for cohort 2, 50% and 38% for cohort 3 and 75% and 60% for cohort 4.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of pembrolizumab plus intermittent dabrafenib and trametinib seems more feasible and tolerable than continuous triple therapy. The efficacy is promising and appears to be favorable over pembrolizumab monotherapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02625337.

BRAF Mutations in CNS Tumors-Prognostic Markers and Therapeutic Targets

Gliomas are a heterogeneous group of brain tumors with limited therapeutic options. However, identification of BRAF V600E mutations in a subset of gliomas has provided a genomic-targeted approach for management of these diseases. In this review, we aimed to review the role of BRAF V600E in gliomagenesis, to characterize concurrent genomic alterations and their potential prognostic implications, and to review comprehensively the efficacy data of BRAF inhibitors (combined or not with MEK inhibitors) for the treatment of low- and high-grade gliomas. We also provide a summary of the toxicity of these agents and describe resistance mechanisms that may be circumvented by alternative genomic approaches. Although the efficacy of targeted therapy for management of BRAF V600E-mutant gliomas has mostly been assessed in small retrospective and phase 2 studies with heterogeneous populations, the data generated so far are a proof of concept that genomic-directed therapies improve outcomes of patients with refractory/relapsed glioma and underpin the need of comprehensive genomic assessments for these difficult-to-treat diseases. In the future, the role of targeted therapy in the first-line setting and of genomic-directed therapies to overcome resistance mechanisms should be assessed in well-designed clinical trials.

Early switch from run-in treatment with vemurafenib plus cobimetinib to atezolizumab after 3 months leads to rapid loss of tumour control in patients with advanced BRAFV600-positive melanoma: The ImmunoCobiVem phase 2 randomised trial

AIM

ImmunoCobiVem investigated whether a planned switch to atezolizumab after achieving tumour control during run-in with vemurafenib + cobimetinib improves progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to continuous targeted therapy (TT) in patients with previously untreated advanced BRAF^V600-mutated melanoma.

METHODS

In this multicenter phase 2 study, patients received vemurafenib plus cobimetinib. After 3months, patients without progressive disease (PD) were randomly assigned (1:1) to continue vemurafenib + cobimetinib (Arm A) or switch to atezolizumab (Arm B) until first documented PD (PD1). Primary outcome was PFS1 (time from start of run-in until PD1 or death). OS and safety were also assessed.

RESULTS

Of 185 patients enroled between November 2016 and December 2019, 135 were randomly assigned after the run-in period (Arm A, n = 69; Arm B, n = 66). Median PFS1 was significantly longer in Arm A versus Arm B (13.9 versus 5.9months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.84; P_Stratified=0.001). Median OS was not reached in either arm (HR 1.22; 95%CI, 0.69-2.16; P_Stratified=0.389); 2-year OS was higher in Arm B versus Arm A (67%; 95%CI, 53-78 versus 58%; 95%CI, 45-70). Grade 3/4 AEs occurred in 55% of patients in Arm A and 64% in Arm B; treatment-related AEs led to discontinuation of any drug in 7% and 9% of patients, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In patients with BRAF^V600-mutated advanced melanoma who achieve tumour control with TT, early switch at 3months to atezolizumab led to rapid loss of tumour control but provided a numerical OS benefit at 2years compared with continued TT.

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

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

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.

Real-world efficacy of the first line therapy with prolgolimab in patients with metastatic melanoma: interim results of the FORA (FOrteca Real practice Assessment) observational study

Background. Novel agents immune checkpoint inhibitors fundamentally changed the prognosis for life in patients with metastatic and/or inoperable melanoma. The development, studies, and approval of a new original PD1 inhibitor in Russia in 2020 prompted the professional community to conduct a prospective observational study in the Russian Federation to assess the real-world efficacy and safety of prolgolimab, as real-world patients differ from the refined population in clinical trials. Aim. To evaluate the real-world efficacy and safety of prolgolimab in patients with metastatic and/or inoperable melanoma. Materials and methods. From October 2020 to October 2022, the study enrolled 700 patients with metastatic and/or inoperable melanoma receiving prolgolimab in real clinical settings in oncological institutions of various levels in the Russian Federation. The main inclusion criteria were: pathology-confirmed diagnosis of melanoma, metastatic and/or inoperable type, use of prolgolimab outside of clinical trials, and signed informed consent by the patient. Objective response rate (ORR) was considered the main criterion for evaluating the efficacy of therapy, and the safety criterion was the incidence of grade 34 adverse events. Statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS 20.0 software package. Results. The ORR for patients with skin melanoma treated with prolgolimab in the first line therapy (n= 207/337) was 48.3% (n=100), the disease stabilization was reported in 30.4% (n=63), and progression in 21.3% (n=44) of patients. There were no significant differences in response to therapy between patients with/without BRAF mutation, although ORR was higher in patients with BRAF mutation: the ORR for patients with BRAF mutation was 57.9% (n=33), and for BRAF non-mutated patients, 44.4% (n=52; p=0.222). At a median follow-up of 5 months, the median PFS was 10 months (95% confidence interval 7.3512.64). The incidence of grade 34 treatment-related adverse events according to CTCAE 5.0 was 2% (n=12), and 12% (n=82) for grade 12 adverse events. Conclusion. The results confirm the high efficacy and satisfactory tolerability of prolgolimab in patients with metastatic and/or inoperable melanoma in real-world settings. There were no significant differences in ORR between patients with or without BRAF mutation.

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.

Recent Advancements, Limitations, and Future Perspectives of the use of Personalized Medicine in Treatment of Colon Cancer

Due to the heterogeneity of colon cancer, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation are ineffective in all cases. The genomic profile and biomarkers associated with the process are considered in personalized medicine, along with the patient's personal history. It is based on the response of the targeted therapies to specific genetic variations. The patient's genetic transcriptomic and epigenetic features are evaluated, and the best therapeutic approach and diagnostic testing are identified through personalized medicine. This review aims to summarize all the necessary, updated information on colon cancer related to personalized medicine. Personalized medicine is gaining prominence as generalized treatments are finding it challenging to contain colon cancer cases which currently rank fourth among global cancer incidence while being the fifth largest in total death cases worldwide. In personalized therapy, patients are grouped into specific categories, and the best therapeutic approach is chosen based on evaluating their molecular features. Various personalized strategies are currently being explored in the treatment of colon cancer involving immunotherapy, phytochemicals, and other biomarker-specific targeted therapies. However, significant challenges must be overcome to integrate personalized medicine into healthcare systems completely. We look at the various signaling pathways and genetic and epigenetic alterations associated with colon cancer to understand and identify biomarkers useful in targeted therapy. The current personalized therapies available in colon cancer treatment and the strategies being explored to improve the existing methods are discussed. This review highlights the advantages and limitations of personalized medicine in colon cancer therapy. The current scenario of personalized medicine in developed countries and the challenges faced in middle- and low-income countries are also summarized. Finally, we discuss the future perspectives of personalized medicine in colon cancer and how it could be integrated into the healthcare systems.

Encorafenib, binimetinib, and cetuximab in BRAF V600E-mutated colorectal cancer: an early post-marketing phase vigilance study

BACKGROUND

Triplet and doublet regimens of encorafenib plus cetuximab with and without binimetinib, respectively, were approved in Japan for unresectable, metastatic, BRAF V600E-mutated colorectal cancer (mCRC) that had progressed after 1-2 prior chemotherapies. This early post-marketing phase vigilance (EPPV) study collected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) from Japanese patients to ensure safety measures as appropriate.

METHODS

Patients with BRAF V600E mCRC who received the triplet or doublet regimens in Japan were selected for this study. ADRs were collected as spontaneous reports between November 27, 2020 and May 26, 2021. Serious ADRs were evaluated according to guidelines of the International Council for Harmonisation and the EudraVigilance list of Important Medical Event Terms.

RESULTS

An estimated 550 Japanese patients with mCRC received the triplet or doublet regimens during the 6-month EPPV period. Overall, 101 and 42 patients reported ADRs and serious ADRs, respectively. No ADRs leading to death were reported. The most frequently reported ADRs were nausea (17 patients), serous retinal detachment (16), decreased appetite (12), diarrhea (11), and vomiting (11). Among the important identified/potential risks that are defined in the risk management plans for encorafenib and binimetinib, eye disorder-related ADRs were observed in 32 patients, rhabdomyolysis-related ADRs in 12, hemorrhage-related ADRs in 7, and hepatic dysfunction-related ADRs in 7. Of 22 patients with serious eye disorders, 20 recovered or were recovering during the EPPV period.

CONCLUSION

The safety profile in this EPPV study was similar to that from the phase III BEACON CRC study and no new safety concerns were identified.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

New Insights into the Phenotype Switching of Melanoma

Melanoma is considered one of the deadliest skin cancers, partly because of acquired resistance to standard therapies. The most recognized driver of resistance relies on acquired melanoma cell plasticity, or the ability to dynamically switch among differentiation phenotypes. This confers the tumor noticeable advantages. During the last year, two new features have been included in the hallmarks of cancer, namely "Unlocking phenotypic plasticity" and "Non-mutational epigenetic reprogramming". Such are inextricably intertwined as, most of the time, plasticity is not discernable at the genetic level, as it rather consists of epigenetic reprogramming heavily influenced by external factors. By analyzing current literature, this review provides reasoning about the origin of plasticity and clarifies whether such features already exist among tumors or are acquired by selection. Moreover, markers of plasticity, molecular effectors, and related tumor advantages in melanoma will be explored. Ultimately, as this new branch of tumor biology opened a wide landscape of therapeutic possibilities, in the final paragraph of this review, we will focus on newly characterized drugs targeting melanoma plasticity.

Comparative efficacy and safety of targeted therapies for BRAF-mutant unresectable or metastatic melanoma: Results from a systematic literature review and a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to estimate the relative efficacy and safety of targeted therapies for the treatment of metastatic melanoma using a network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) identified studies in Medline, Embase and Cochrane published until November 2020. Screening used prespecified eligibility criteria. Following a transitivity assessment across included studies, Bayesian NMA was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 43 publications reporting 15 targeted therapy trials and 42 reporting 18 immunotherapy trials were retained from the SLR and considered for the NMA. Due to substantial between-study heterogeneity with immunotherapy trials, the analysis considered a network restricted to targeted therapies. Among combination therapies, encorafenib + binimetinib was superior to dabrafenib + trametinib for overall response rate (OR = 1.86; 95 % credible interval [CrI] 1.10, 3.17), superior to vemurafenib + cobimetinib with fewer serious adverse events (SAEs) (OR = 0.51; 95 % CrI 0.29, 0.91) and fewer discontinuations due to AEs (OR = 0.45; 95 % CrI 0.21, 0.96), and superior to atezolizumab + vemurafenib + cobimetinib with fewer SAEs (OR = 0.41; 95 % CrI 0.21, 0.82). Atezolizumab + vemurafenib + cobimetinib and encorafenib + binimetinib were generally comparable for efficacy endpoints. Among double combination therapies, encorafenib + binimetinib showed high probabilities of being better for all efficacy and safety endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

This NMA confirms that combination therapies are more efficacious than monotherapies. Encorafenib + binimetinib has a favourable efficacy profile compared to other double combination therapies and a favourable safety profile compared to both double and triple combination therapies.

Non-V600E/K BRAF Mutations in Metastatic Melanoma: Molecular Description, Frequency, and Effectiveness of Targeted Therapy in a Large National Cohort

PURPOSE

Mitogen-activating protein kinase inhibitors (MAPKis) are largely used in V600E/K BRAF–mutated metastatic melanomas, but data regarding effectiveness of targeted therapy in patients with rare BRAF mutations and molecular description of these infrequent mutations are scarce.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A multicenter study was conducted on patients with metastatic melanoma harboring a well-identified mutation of BRAF and enrolled from March 2013 to June 2021 in the French nationwide prospective cohort MelBase. The molecular BRAF mutation pattern, response to MAPKis when applicable, and survival data were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 856 selected patients, 51 (6%) harbored a non-V600E/K BRAF mutation involving codons V600 (24 of 51, 47%; V600G 27.4%, V600R 15.6%), K601 (6 of 51, 11.7%), and L597 (4 of 51, 7.8%). An objective response to MAPKis either BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) alone or combined with MEK inhibitor was achieved in 56% (353 of 631) of V600E/K, 58% (11 of 19) of non-E/K V600, and 22% (2 of 9) of non-V600 BRAF-mutated patients, with a median progression-free survival of 7.7, 7.8, and 2.8 months, respectively. Overall, objective response rate was higher with BRAFi + MEK inhibitor combination than with BRAFi in monotherapy for each subset.

CONCLUSION

Rare BRAF mutations are not anecdotal in the metastatic melanoma population. Although data interpretation must remain careful owing to the limited size of some subsets of patients, non-E/K V600 BRAF mutations seem to confer a high sensitivity to targeted therapy, whereas MAPKis seem less effective in patients with non-V600 BRAF mutations. However, this strategy may be used as an alternative option in the case of immunotherapy failure in the latter population.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Fifty years of progress in surgical oncology: Melanoma

This paper outlines the scientific and clinical advances in the treatment of melanoma over the past 50 years. Among the highlights of progress, the dominant themes include evidence-based reduction in the extent and morbidity of surgical procedures in patients with local or regional melanoma without compromising end results, and the introduction of effective systemic therapy, specifically targeted therapy matched to patients based on specific tumor mutations, and immune checkpoint blockade. Management of advanced disease has also changed dramatically, due to improved understanding of the genomic variability of the disease as well as continuing improvements in imaging.

Treatment reality of patients with BRAF-mutant advanced/metastatic melanoma in Switzerland in the era of choice

Cutaneous melanoma represents a major cause of cancer death in Europe. Without adequate therapy, the 5-year survival rate is 15-20% in distant metastatic disease. Evaluating the status quo of treatment standards in advanced melanoma and rationale for therapy decisions in Switzerland between January 2016 and September 2018. In this retrospective, anonymized registry, data of male and female patients with unresectable advanced/metastatic BRAF-positive cutaneous melanoma treated in first-, second- and third-line with registered substances were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Forty-one patients (56.1% male) were included providing a total of 70 treatment lines (first-line: n = 41; second-line: n = 18; and third-line: n = 11). Within the patients presenting with stage III or IV melanoma, immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors was more frequently administered as first-line treatment than targeted therapy (TT) (70.7% vs. 29.3%). Across all lines, patients received TT in 47.1% (predominantly combined BRAF-MEK-inhibition) and immunotherapy in 52.9% of the cases (anti-PD-1 monotherapy in 62.2% and anti-PD-1/anti-CTLA-4 combinations in 37.8%). Most commonly, the treatment type was switched from TT to immunotherapy or vice versa upon disease progression. The most frequent rationales for prescribing either TT or immunotherapy were physician's preference (40.0%) or remission pressure (28.6%), respectively. Disease progression led to treatment discontinuation more frequently than undesired events. Patients in Switzerland with unresectable advanced or metastatic BRAF-mutant melanoma predominantly receive guideline-recommended treatments. IO was used as predominant front-line therapy, with TT/immunotherapy switch being the predominant treatment principle. Sequencing studies are underway to identify the optimal treatment regimen for those patients. 32: 366-372 Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

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

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

Truth or dare: switching BRAF/MEK inhibitors after acute interstitial nephritis in a patient with metastatic melanoma - A case report and review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of BRAF/MEK inhibitors has significantly improved overall survival of patients with BRAF V600-mutant advanced or metastatic melanoma. Most patients treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors will experience adverse events during the course of their treatment. Kidney impairment, however, was rarely reported in the pivotal trials. To date, there are only three cases of biopsy-proven acute interstitial nephritis associated with dabrafenib and trametinib reported in the literature.

CASE REPORT

A 50-year-old man diagnosed with metastatic melanoma was hospitalized in August 2021, 5 months after treatment initiation with dabrafenib and trametinib. He presented with acute kidney injury, with serum creatinine of 3.34 mg/dL and eGFR of 20.3 mL/min/m². Kidney biopsy revealed acute interstitial nephritis.

MANAGEMENT & OUTCOME

He was treated with methylprednisolone 16 mg qd, and both dabrafenib and trametinib were permanently discontinued, with recuperation of his kidney function. Another BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination, encorafenib and binimetinib, was introduced, with preserved kidney function and excellent disease control.

DISCUSSION

We report the first case of biopsy-proven interstitial nephritis in a patient treated with dabrafenib and trametinib, with successful introduction of another BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination. Although rare, clinicians should be aware of the risk of renal adverse events associated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Renal biopsy is mandatory in the absence of a clear explanation or rapid recovery of renal failure. In case of proven interstitial nephritis, corticosteroids should be initiated. Switching to another BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination can be considered for patients with complete recovery of renal function and limited treatment options.

Clinical Activity of Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase-Targeted Therapies in Patients With Non-V600 BRAF-Mutant Tumors

PURPOSE

Non-V600 mutations comprise approximately 35% of all BRAF mutations in cancer. Many of these mutations have been identified as oncogenic drivers and can be classified into three classes according to molecular characteristics. Consensus treatment strategies for class 2 and 3 BRAF mutations have not yet been established.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis with published reports of individual patients with cancer harboring class 2 or 3 BRAF mutations from 2010 to 2021, to assess treatment outcomes with US Food and Drug Administration-approved mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway targeted therapy (MAPK TT) according to BRAF class, cancer type, and MAPK TT type. Coprimary outcomes were response rate and progression-free survival.

RESULTS

A total of 18,167 studies were screened, identifying 80 studies with 238 patients who met inclusion criteria. This included 167 patients with class 2 and 71 patients with class 3 BRAF mutations. Overall, 77 patients achieved a treatment response. In both univariate and multivariable analyses, response rate and progression-free survival were higher among patients with class 2 compared with class 3 mutations, findings that remain when analyses are restricted to patients with melanoma or lung primary cancers. MEK ± BRAF inhibitors demonstrated greater clinical activity in class 2 compared with class 3 BRAF-mutant tumors than BRAF or EGFR inhibitors.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that MAPK TTs have clinical activity in some class 2 and 3 BRAF-mutant cancers. BRAF class may dictate responsiveness to current and emerging treatment strategies, particularly in melanoma and lung cancers. Together, this analysis provides clinical validation of predictions made on the basis of a mutation classification system established in the preclinical literature. Further evaluation with prospective clinical trials is needed for this population.

Management of cutaneous melanoma: radiologists challenging and risk assessment

Melanoma patient remains a challenging for the radiologist, due to the difficulty related to the management of a patient more often in an advanced stage of the disease. It is necessary to determine a stratification of risk, optimizing the means, with diagnostic tools that should be optimized in relation to the type of patient, and improving knowledge. Staging and risk assessment procedures are determined by disease presentation at diagnosis. Melanoma staging is a critical tool to assist clinical decision-making and prognostic assessment. It is used for clinical trial design, eligibility, stratification, and analysis. The current standard for regional lymph nodes staging is represented by the sentinel lymph node excision biopsy procedure. For staging of distant metastases, PET-CT has the highest sensitivity and diagnostic odds ratio. Similar trend is observed during melanoma surveillance. The advent of immunotherapy, which has improved patient outcome, however, has determined new issues for radiologists, partly due to atypical response patterns, partly due to adverse reactions that must be identified as soon as possible for the correct management of the patient. The main objectives of the new ir-criteria are to standardize the assessment between different trials. However, these ir-criteria do not take into account all cases of atypical response patterns, as hyperprogression or dissociated responses. None of these criteria has actually been uniformly adopted in routine. The immune-related adverse events (irAEs) can involve various organs from head to toe. It is crucial for radiologists to know the imaging appearances of this condition, to exclude recurrent or progressive disease and for pneumonitis, since it could be potentially life-threatening toxicity, resulting in pneumonitis-related deaths in early phase trials, to allow a proper patient management.

Immunomodulatory Properties of PI3K/AKT/mTOR and MAPK/MEK/ERK Inhibition Augment Response to Immune Checkpoint Blockade in Melanoma and Triple-Negative Breast Cancer

Hyperactivation of PI3K/AKT/mTOR and MAPK/MEK/ERK signaling pathways is commonly observed in many cancers, including triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and melanoma. Moreover, the compensatory upregulation of the MAPK/MEK/ERK pathway has been associated with therapeutic resistance to targeted inhibition of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway, and vice versa. The immune-modulatory effects of both PI3K and MAPK inhibition suggest that inhibition of these pathways might enhance response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). ICIs have become the standard-of-care for metastatic melanoma and are recently an option for TNBC when combined with chemotherapy, but alternative options are needed when resistance develops. In this review, we present the current mechanistic understandings, along with preclinical and clinical evidence, that outline the efficacy and safety profile of combinatorial or sequential treatments with PI3K inhibitors, MAPK inhibitors, and ICIs for treatment of malignant melanoma and metastatic TNBC. This approach may present a potential strategy to overcome resistance in patients who are a candidate for ICI therapy with tumors harboring either or both of these pathway-associated mutations.

A Decade of Success in Melanoma Immunotherapy and Targeted Therapy: What Every Radiologist Should Know

ABSTRACT

Treatment strategies for malignant melanoma have rapidly evolved over the past decade. Because of its propensity to develop advanced stage and metastatic disease, melanoma has contributed to the majority of mortalities among patients with skin cancer. The development of novel therapeutics such as immunotherapy and targeted molecular therapies has revolutionized the treatment of patients with advanced stage and metastatic malignant melanoma. Immune checkpoint inhibitors, BRAF/MEK inhibitors, and other revolutionary therapies have demonstrated remarkable success in the treatment of this common malignancy. Along with these advancements in systemic therapies, imaging has continued to play a critical role in the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with malignant melanoma. As the use of these novel therapies continues to expand, knowledge of the evolving therapeutic landscape of melanoma is becoming critical for radiologists. In this review, we provide a primer for radiologists outlining the evolution of immunotherapy and targeted therapy in the treatment of melanoma. We discuss the critical role of imaging in evaluation of treatment response, including a summary of current imaging response guidelines. Last, we summarize the essential role of imaging in the evaluation of potential adverse events seen in patients with malignant melanoma undergoing treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

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

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

STARBOARD: encorafenib + binimetinib + pembrolizumab for first-line metastatic/unresectable BRAF V600-mutant melanoma

Despite the significant progress in the treatment of unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma, there remains two primary treatment options: targeted therapy and immunotherapy. Targeted therapy or immunotherapy alone is associated with efficacy limitations including efficacy limited to select patient subsets. With separate mechanisms of action and different response patterns, the combination of targeted agents and immunotherapy to treat patients with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma may further improve patient outcomes. Current treatment guidelines recommend treatment with targeted agents alone, immunotherapy, or the combination of targeted agents and immunotherapy. The randomized, double-blind STARBOARD trial aims to evaluate efficacy and safety of encorafenib, binimetinib and pembrolizumab in treatment-naive patients with metastatic or unresectable locally advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma in comparison to pembrolizumab.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Trial registration number

NCT02967692.

Acceptability of Drugs in the Treatment of Unresectable/Metastatic BRAF V600-Mutant Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background

Although many novel regimens have entered the treatment paradigm for unresectable/metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma, there is still a lack of head-to-head comparison in terms of security. We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the risk of adverse events (AEs) across different treatments and to provide an acceptability ranking for patients.

Methods

A systematic literature review was conducted in Embase, PubMed, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and Clinical Trials.gov with a time frame from database inception to December 24, 2021. We retrieved evidence on the cumulative incidence of any-grade AEs means grades 1-5 AEs (regardless of severity) and severe AEs based on the pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% credible intervals (95% CrI).

Results

Twelve publications and thirteen treatments enrolling 5,803 patients were included. For any-grade AEs, the acceptability of combined dabrafenib and trametinib is superior to the combination of vemurafenib and cobimetinib (RR: 0.94; Crl: 0.89, 0.98). Furthermore, nivolumab combined with ipilimumab increases any-grade AEs than single-agent ipilimumab (RR: 0.90; Crl: 0.83, 0.96) or nivolumab (RR: 0.90; Crl: 0.84, 0.97). For severe AEs, dabrafenib has the best acceptability than single-agent vemurafenib (RR: 0.66; Crl: 0.50, 0.87) or encorafenib (RR: 0.64; Crl: 0.43, 0.94). In addition, ipilimumab (SUCRA: 0.87) ranks first in the acceptability for any-grade AEs, and nivolumab (SUCRA: 0.95) ranks first in the acceptability for severe AEs. The ranking of the combination of vemurafenib and cobimetinib (SUCRA: 0.66) is superior to encorafenib in combination with binimetinib (SUCRA: 0.39) and combination of vemurafenib and cobimetinib (SUCRA: 0.18).

Conclusions

We identified the lowest AE risk treatment options for BRAF V600-mutant melanoma patients. In general, immunotherapy (ipilimumab or nivolumab) has better acceptability than most targeted therapies, and triplet therapies are related with the worst acceptability. Moreover, single-agent dabrafenib can be used as the first choice in monotherapy, and the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib is the preferred combination therapy. Overall, the combination of immunotherapy drugs increases any-grade and severe AEs than a single agent, whereas the condition of targeted therapy drugs cannot be simply generalized. Therefore, this information can facilitate evidence-based decision-making and support optimizing treatment and outcomes in clinical practice.

Melanoma Brain Metastases: An Update on the Use of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors and Molecularly Targeted Agents

Brain metastases from melanoma are no longer uniformly associated with dismal outcomes. Impressive tumor tissue-based (craniotomy) translational research has consistently shown that distinct patient subgroups may have a favorable prognosis. This review provides a historical overview of the standard-of-care treatments until the early 2010s. It subsequently summarizes more recent advances in understanding the biology of melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) and treating patients with MBMs, mainly focusing upon prospective clinical trials of BRAF/MEK and PD-1/CTLA-4 inhibitors in patients with previously untreated MBMs. These additional systemic treatments have provided effective complementary treatment approaches and/or alternatives to radiation and craniotomy. The current role of radiation therapy, especially in conjunction with systemic therapies, is also discussed through the lens of various retrospective studies. The combined efficacy of systemic treatments with radiation has improved overall survival over the last 10 years and has sparked considerable research interest regarding optimal dosing and sequencing of radiation treatments with systemic treatments. Finally, the review describes ongoing clinical trials in patients with MBMs.

Evolving Treatment Approaches to Mucosal Melanoma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review mainly focuses on the unique features and the development of available therapeutic options for mucosal melanoma in different treatment settings, i.e., neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and palliative.

RECENT FINDINGS

Mucosal melanoma is distinct from cutaneous melanoma in epidemiology, clinical features, and molecular landscape, characterized by more aggressive biological behavior, lower mutational burden, more chromosomal structure variants, unique driver mutation profile, and distinct tumor microenvironment. Systemic therapy is generally less effective to mucosal melanoma than its cutaneous counterpart. Therapeutic landscape for mucosal melanoma has evolved substantially in recent years: with new targeted therapy options as well as combination therapies built on the backbone of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies available (esp. anti-angiogenic agent and PD-1/PD-L1 combination), which, based on early phase trial data, seem to be promising. Mucosal melanoma is unique and distinct from cutaneous subtype. Unraveling the unique features of mucosal melanoma is a key to improve clinical outcomes.

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

BACKGROUND

Currently, limited data on targeted therapy and immunotherapy sequencing in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma is available. Targeted therapy and immunotherapy are expected to be comparable in terms of overall survival (OS) when used as second-line therapies; therefore, understanding the characteristics of patients who completed sequential treatment is needed.

METHODS

The primary objective of this study was to analyze the efficacy of BRAFi/MEKi activity as second-line therapy in patients with advanced melanoma. We also aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of patients with advanced melanoma who were treated sequentially with immunotherapy and targeted therapy. We enrolled 97 patients treated between 1st December 2015 and 31st December 2020 with first-line immunotherapy with programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibitors; and for the second-line treatment with at least one cycle of BRAFi/MEKi therapy with follow-up through 31 January 2022.

RESULTS

Median OS since first-line treatment initiation was 19.9 months and 12.8 months since initiation of BRAFi/MEKi treatment. All BRAFi/MRKi combinations were similarly effective. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.5 months since initiation of any BRAFi/MEKi treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

BRAFi/MEKi therapy is effective in the second-line in advanced and metastatic melanoma patients. For the first time, the efficacy of all BRAFi/MEKi combinations as second-line therapy is shown.

The Current State of Treatment and Future Directions in Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma

Malignant melanoma is the leading cause of death among cutaneous malignancies. While its incidence is increasing, the most recent cancer statistics show a small but clear decrease in mortality rate. This trend reflects the introduction of novel and more effective therapeutic regimens, including the two cornerstones of melanoma therapy: immunotherapies and targeted therapies. Immunotherapies exploit the highly immunogenic nature of melanoma by modulating and priming the patient's own immune system to attack the tumor. Treatments combining immunotherapies with targeted therapies, which disable the carcinogenic products of mutated cancer cells, have further increased treatment efficacy and durability. Toxicity and resistance, however, remain critical challenges to the field. The present review summarizes past treatments and novel therapeutic interventions and discusses current clinical trials and future directions.

Die Systemtherapie des malignen Melanoms

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