BRAF inhibitor discontinuation and rechallenge in advanced melanoma patients with a complete initial treatment response

Anti-MAPK Targeted Therapy for Ameloblastoma: Case Report with a Systematic Review

Ameloblastoma, a benign yet aggressive odontogenic tumor known for its recurrence and the severe morbidity from radical surgeries, may benefit from advancements in targeted therapy. We present a case of a 15-year-old girl with ameloblastoma successfully treated with targeted therapy and review the literature with this question: Is anti-MAPK targeted therapy safe and effective for treating ameloblastoma? This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO, adhered to PRISMA guidelines, and searched multiple databases up to December 2023, identifying 13 relevant studies out of 647 records, covering 23 patients treated with MAPK inhibitor therapies. The results were promising as nearly all patients showed a positive treatment response, with four achieving complete radiological remission and others showing substantial reductions in primary, recurrent, and metastatic ameloblastoma sizes. Side effects were mostly mild to moderate. This study presents anti-MAPK therapy as a significant shift from invasive surgical treatments, potentially enhancing life quality and clinical outcomes by offering a less invasive yet effective treatment alternative. This approach could signify a breakthrough in managing this challenging tumor, emphasizing the need for further research into molecular-targeted therapies.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Managing stage 4 ameloblastoma with dual BRAF/MEK inhibition: A case report with 8-year clinical follow-up

We present 8-year follow-up on the first patient with stage 4 ameloblastoma carrying a BRAF V600E mutation treated with dual BRAF/MEK inhibition (BRAF/MEKi). He experienced a durable clinical response while on dabrafenib (BRAFi) and trametinib (MEKi) without toxicity nor evidence for drug-resistant tumor progression. He was asymptomatic when he self-discontinued therapy after 4 years of sustained clinical response. He did not return for follow-up until 2.5 years later with onset of painful mandibular tumor recurrence associated with recurrent bilateral lung metastases. He was rechallenged with dabrafenib/trametinib and experienced another prompt tumor response and remains in a second durable clinical remission (currently > 16 months) on continuous dual targeted therapy. We discuss the implications of this case study for future treatment strategies.

Should Targeted Therapy Be Continued in BRAF-Mutant Melanoma Patients after Complete Remission?

BACKGROUND

Targeted therapy is used to treat patients with a BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma and is continued until disease progression or severe toxicity. No robust data on the management of patients achieving a complete remission (CR) are available.

MAIN OBJECTIVE

To determine the relapse rate in the first year after targeted therapy discontinuation in patients in CR.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVES

To determine the relapse rates throughout the follow-up and to identify prognostic factors for relapse at 1 year.

METHODS

A retrospective, monocentric observational study was conducted in patients with advanced melanoma included in the RIC-Mel database who discontinued targeted therapy after achieving a CR confirmed by CT scan and PET/CT scan.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients were included. Seventeen (58.6%) patients were treated with BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) alone and 12 (41.4%) with a BRAFi combined with a MEK inhibitor (BRAFi + MEKi). The median treatment duration was 9.7 months. The relapse rates after discontinuation were 69% at 12 months (BRAFi: 70.6%; BRAFi + MEKi: 66.7%) and 76% at 36 months (BRAFi: 76.5%; BRAFi + MEKi: 75%). A non-significant trend towards a higher risk of relapse was found in women (p = 0.1; RR 3.36; 95% CI 0.77-17.07), in patients with an LDH level greater than the upper limits of normal (p = 0.58; RR 2.43; 95% CI 0.10-56.71), and when more than two metastatic sites were involved (p = 0.19; RR 4.6; 95% CI 0.46-46.51). After relapse, targeted therapy was resumed in 17 patients (7 with BRAFi; 10 with BRAFi + MEKi) with a response rate of 53%.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-life study provided long-term data in patients who discontinued targeted therapy after CR. Most patients experienced a relapse in the first year after targeted therapy discontinuation, of whom 50% were in the first 3 months. After targeted therapy resumption, 53% of relapsing patients achieved an objective response. Patients should be followed during the first year after treatment discontinuation. In addition, patients with less than 3 metastatic sites, a baseline LDH level with normal ranges, men, and patients responding rapidly to treatment would be more likely to maintain a CR after treatment discontinuation.

Review BRAF inhibition and the spectrum of granulomatous reactions

BRAF-inhibitors have emerged as a promising targeted therapy for malignancies with BRAF mutations, particularly metastatic melanoma. However, granulomatous reactions including sarcoidosis and sarcoid-like-reactions have been reported as a consequence of BRAF-inhibition. It is important to adequately characterise these granulomatous reactions including cutaneous manifestations and systemic involvement, in order to guide investigations and management. A literature review was conducted to characterise the spectrum of granulomatous reactions associated with BRAF-inhibitors - identifying 55 reactions affecting 51 patients, with 37 reactions limited to cutaneous involvement. Further, possible correlation with cancer response, mechanisms of granuloma formation, as well as a proposed workup and management approach for these granulomatous reactions are presented.

Nanotechnology Addressing Cutaneous Melanoma: The Italian Landscape

Cutaneous melanoma is one of the most aggressive solid tumors, with a low survival for the metastatic stage. Currently, clinical melanoma treatments include surgery, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy and radiotherapy. Of note, innovative therapeutic regimens concern the administration of multitarget drugs in tandem, in order to improve therapeutic efficacy. However, also, if this drug combination is clinically relevant, the patient's response is not yet optimal. In this scenario, nanotechnology-based delivery systems can play a crucial role in the clinical treatment of advanced melanoma. In fact, their nano-features enable targeted drug delivery at a cellular level by overcoming biological barriers. Various nanomedicines have been proposed for the treatment of cutaneous melanoma, and a relevant number of them are undergoing clinical trials. In Italy, researchers are focusing on the pharmaceutical development of nanoformulations for malignant melanoma therapy. The present review reports an overview of the main melanoma-addressed nanomedicines currently under study in Italy, alongside the state of the art of melanoma therapy. Moreover, the latest Italian advances concerning the pre-clinical evaluation of nanomedicines for melanoma are described.

Liquid biopsy and radiological response predict outcomes following discontinuation of targeted therapy in patients with BRAF mutated melanoma

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of patients with metastatic melanoma discontinuing BRAF-targeted therapy for cumulative toxicity after sustained response are unknown.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective case series analysis conducted at a single Cancer Center in Italy included patients with BRAF mutated metastatic melanoma treated with a BRAF inhibitor as a single agent or in combination with a MEK inhibitor between June 1, 2011 and January 1, 2020 and interrupting treatment after achieving complete response (CR) or long-lasting partial response (PR - i.e. > 12 months) due to cumulative toxicity.

RESULTS

We included 24 patients with a median treatment duration of 59.4 months (95%CI 55.4-63.4 - range 12-88). CR and PR were achieved in 71% and 29% of patients, respectively. At a median follow-up after treatment discontinuation of 37.8 months (95%CI 33.7-41.9), 12-months progression free survival after discontinuation (dPFS) rate was 70.8% (95%CI 54.8 - 91.6) and 24-months dPFS rate was 58.3% (95%CI 41.6 - 81.8). Baseline patients and tumor characteristics as well as treatment duration and best response did not significantly impact on dPFS. Patients with CR and negative circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) at time of discontinuation had a significantly improved dPFS compared to patients with either radiological residual disease or ctDNA positivity (P = 0.007). No patient in CR with undetectable ctDNA experienced progression.

CONCLUSION

The risk of progression is high even in patients with sustained sensitivity to BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Integration of liquid biopsy in clinical trials investigating optimal management of patients with sustained sensitivity to BRAF/MEK inhibitors is warranted.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Outcomes of patients with metastatic melanoma discontinuing BRAF-targeted therapy for cumulative toxicity are unknown. We analyzed patients with sustained responses (median treatment duration 59.4 months). Twelve and 24-months progression free survival following discontinuation were 70.8% and 58.3% respectively. Complete response and negative ctDNA at time of discontinuation are promising prognostic biomarkers in this setting.

Discontinuation of BRAF/MEK-Directed Targeted Therapy after Complete Remission of Metastatic Melanoma-A Retrospective Multicenter ADOReg Study

The advent of BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAFi/MEKi) has significantly improved progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients with advanced BRAF-V600-mutant melanoma. Long-term survivors have been identified particularly among patients with a complete response (CR) to BRAF/MEK-directed targeted therapy (TT). However, it remains unclear which patients who achieved a CR maintain a durable response and whether treatment cessation might be a safe option in these patients. Therefore, this study investigated the impact of treatment cessation on the clinical course of patients with a CR upon BRAF/MEK-directed-TT. We retrospectively selected patients with BRAF-V600-mutant advanced non-resectable melanoma who had been treated with BRAFi ± MEKi therapy and achieved a CR upon treatment out of the multicentric skin cancer registry ADOReg. Data on baseline patient characteristics, duration of TT, treatment cessation, tumor progression (TP) and response to second-line treatments were collected and analyzed. Of 461 patients who received BRAF/MEK-directed TT 37 achieved a CR. TP after initial CR was observed in 22 patients (60%) mainly affecting patients who discontinued TT (n = 22/26), whereas all patients with ongoing TT (n = 11) maintained their CR. Accordingly, patients who discontinued TT had a higher risk of TP compared to patients with ongoing treatment (p < 0.001). However, our data also show that patients who received TT for more than 16 months and who discontinued TT for other reasons than TP or toxicity did not have a shorter PFS compared to patients with ongoing treatment. Response rates to second-line treatment being initiated in 21 patients, varied between 27% for immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) and 60% for BRAFi/MEKi rechallenge. In summary, we identified a considerable number of patients who achieved a CR upon BRAF/MEK-directed TT in this contemporary real-world cohort of patients with BRAF-V600-mutant melanoma. Sustained PFS was not restricted to ongoing TT but was also found in patients who discontinued TT.

The current landscape of single-cell transcriptomics for cancer immunotherapy

Immunotherapies such as immune checkpoint blockade and adoptive cell transfer have revolutionized cancer treatment, but further progress is hindered by our limited understanding of tumor resistance mechanisms. Emerging technologies now enable the study of tumors at the single-cell level, providing unprecedented high-resolution insights into the genetic makeup of the tumor microenvironment and immune system that bulk genomics cannot fully capture. Here, we highlight the recent key findings of the use of single-cell RNA sequencing to deconvolute heterogeneous tumors and immune populations during immunotherapy. Single-cell RNA sequencing has identified new crucial factors and cellular subpopulations that either promote tumor progression or leave tumors vulnerable to immunotherapy. We anticipate that the strategic use of single-cell analytics will promote the development of the next generation of successful, rationally designed immunotherapeutics.

Clinical Implications of Acquired BRAF Inhibitors Resistance in Melanoma

Understanding the role of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway-activating mutations in the development and progression of melanoma and their possible use as therapeutic targets has substantially changed the management of this neoplasm, which, until a few years ago, was burdened by severe mortality. However, the presence of numerous intrinsic and extrinsic mechanisms of resistance to BRAF inhibitors compromises the treatment responses’ effectiveness and durability. The strategy of overcoming these resistances by combination therapy has proved successful, with the additional benefit of reducing side effects derived from paradoxical activation of the MAPK pathway. Furthermore, the use of other highly specific inhibitors, intermittent dosing schedules and the association of combination therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors are promising new therapeutic strategies. However, numerous issues related to dose, tolerability and administration sequence still need to be clarified, as is to be expected from currently ongoing trials. In this review, we describe the clinical results of using BRAF inhibitors in advanced melanoma, with a keen interest in strategies aimed at overcoming resistance.

Stopping targeted therapy for complete responders in advanced BRAF mutant melanoma

BRAF inhibitors revolutionised the management of melanoma patients and although resistance occurs, there is a subgroup of patients who maintain durable disease control. For those cases with durable complete response (CR) it is not clear whether it is safe to cease therapy. Here we identified 13 patients treated with BRAF +/- MEK inhibitors, who cease therapy after prolonged CR (median = 34 months, range 20-74). Recurrence was observed in 3/13 (23%) patients. In the remaining 10 patients with sustained CR off therapy, the median follow up after discontinuation was 19 months (range 8-36). We retrospectively measured ctDNA levels using droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) in longitudinal plasma samples. CtDNA levels were undetectable in 11/13 cases after cessation and remained undetectable in patients in CR (10/13). CtDNA eventually became detectable in 2/3 cases with disease recurrence, but remained undetectable in 1 patient with brain only progression. Our study suggests that consideration could be given to ceasing targeted therapy in the context of prolonged treatment, durable response and no evidence of residual disease as measured by ctDNA.

Melanoma stem cell maintenance and chemo-resistance are mediated by CD133 signal to PI3K-dependent pathways

Melanoma stem cells (MSCs) are characterized by their unique cell surface proteins and aberrant signaling pathways. These stemness properties are either in a causal or consequential relationship to melanoma progression, treatment resistance and recurrence. The functional analysis of CD133⁺ and CD133^- cells in vitro and in vivo revealed that melanoma progression and treatment resistance are the consequences of CD133 signal to PI3K pathway. CD133 signal to PI3K pathway drives two downstream pathways, the PI3K/Akt/MDM2 and the PI3K/Akt/MKP-1 pathways. Activation of PI3K/Akt/MDM2 pathway results in the destabilization of p53 protein, while the activation of PI3K/Akt/MKP-1 pathway results in the inhibition of mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPKs) JNK and p38. Activation of both pathways leads to the inhibition of fotemustine-induced apoptosis. Thus, the disruption of CD133 signal to PI3K pathway is essential to overcome Melanoma resistance to fotemustine. The pre-clinical verification of in vitro data using xenograft mouse model of MSCs confirmed the clinical relevance of CD133 signal as a therapeutic target for melanoma treatment. In conclusion, our study provides an insight into the mechanisms regulating MSCs growth and chemo-resistance and suggested a clinically relevant approach for melanoma treatment.

A novel chalcone derivative has antitumor activity in melanoma by inducing DNA damage through the upregulation of ROS products

Background

Melanoma is one of the most aggressive tumors with the remarkable characteristic of resistance to traditional chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Although targeted therapy and immunotherapy benefit advanced melanoma patient treatment, BRAFi (BRAF inhibitor) resistance and the lower response rates or severe side effects of immunotherapy have been observed, therefore, it is necessary to develop novel inhibitors for melanoma treatment.

Methods

We detected the cell proliferation of lj-1-59 in different melanoma cells by CCK 8 and colony formation assay. To further explore the mechanisms of lj-1-59 in melanoma, we performed RNA sequencing to discover the pathway of differential gene enrichment. Western blot and Q-RT-PCR were confirmed to study the function of lj-1-59 in melanoma.

Results

We found that lj-1-59 inhibits melanoma cell proliferation in vitro and in vivo, induces cell cycle arrest at the G2/M phase and promotes apoptosis in melanoma cell lines. Furthermore, RNA-Seq was performed to study alterations in gene expression profiles after treatment with lj-1-59 in melanoma cells, revealing that this compound regulates various pathways, such as DNA replication, P53, apoptosis and the cell cycle. Additionally, we validated the effect of lj-1-59 on key gene expression alterations by Q-RT-PCR. Our findings showed that lj-1-59 significantly increases ROS (reactive oxygen species) products, leading to DNA toxicity in melanoma cell lines. Moreover, lj-1-59 increases ROS levels in BRAFi -resistant melanoma cells, leading to DNA damage, which caused G2/M phase arrest and apoptosis.

Conclusions

Taken together, we found that lj-1-59 treatment inhibits melanoma cell growth by inducing apoptosis and DNA damage through increased ROS levels, suggesting that this compound is a potential therapeutic drug for melanoma treatment.

Intracranial antitumor activity with encorafenib plus binimetinib in patients with melanoma brain metastases: A case series

Background

Sixty percent of patients with stage IV melanoma may develop brain metastases, which result in significantly increased morbidity and a poor overall prognosis. Phase 3 studies of melanoma usually exclude patients with untreated brain metastases; therefore, clinical data for intracranial responses to treatments are limited.

Methods

A multicenter, retrospective case series investigation of consecutive BRAF‐mutant patients with melanoma brain metastases (MBMs) treated with a combination of BRAF inhibitor encorafenib and MEK inhibitor binimetinib was conducted to evaluate the antitumor response. Assessments included the intracranial, extracranial, and global objective response rates (according to the modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1); the clinical benefit rate; the time to response; the duration of response; and safety.

Results

A total of 24 patients with stage IV BRAF‐mutant MBMs treated with encorafenib plus binimetinib in 3 centers in the United States were included. Patients had received a median of 2.5 prior lines of treatment, and 88% had prior treatment with BRAF/MEK inhibitors. The intracranial objective response rate was 33%, and the clinical benefit rate was 63%. The median time to a response was 6 weeks, and the median duration of response was 22 weeks. Among the 21 patients with MBMs and prior BRAF/MEK inhibitor treatment, the intracranial objective response rate was 24%, and the clinical benefit rate was 57%. Similar outcomes were observed for extracranial and global responses. The safety profile for encorafenib plus binimetinib was similar to that observed in patients with melanoma without brain metastases.

Conclusions

Combination therapy with encorafenib plus binimetinib elicited intracranial activity in patients with BRAF‐mutant MBMs, including patients previously treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Further prospective studies are warranted and ongoing.

All clinical trials to date with encorafenib and binimetinib (US Food and Drug Administration–approved in June 2018 for BRAF‐mutated metastatic melanoma) have excluded untreated melanoma brain metastases. This case series provides the first clinical evidence of intracranial activity of the combination of encorafenib plus binimetinib in patients with BRAF‐mutant melanoma with active brain metastases. Intracranial clinical activity is observed for the first time in patients previously treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors, a population that has not been previously investigated.

Management of metastatic cutaneous melanoma: updates in clinical practice

In recent years, several drugs have been approved for the treatment of patients with metastatic cutaneous melanoma, completely reshaping the landscape of this aggressive disease. Immune therapy with cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 and programmed cell death-1 inhibitors yielded significant and durable responses, achieving long-term disease control in up to 40% of the patients. BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi), in combination with MEK inhibitors, also resulted in improved overall survival compared with single-agent BRAFi in patients with BRAFV600-mutated metastatic melanoma. The optimized sequencing and duration of treatment, however, is yet to be found. In this article, we thoroughly review current data and discuss how to best sequence the various treatment modalities available at present, based on four distinct clinical presentations commonly seen in clinic. In addition, we review treatment options beyond checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy, which may be required by patients failing such effective treatments.

The efficacy of re-challenge with BRAF inhibitors after previous progression to BRAF inhibitors in melanoma: A retrospective multicenter study

BRAF and MEK inhibition is efficient in patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma, but due to acquired resistance the duration of response (DoR) is often only short-lived. In this retrospective multicenter study with 60 patients suffering from inoperable or metastatic melanoma we evaluated the efficacy of re-challenge with a BRAF inhibitor (BRAF2) with or without MEK-inhibition after progressive disease upon previous treatment with a BRAF inhibitor (BRAF1) with or without MEK inhibition.

Treatment with BRAF1 led to a disease control rate (DCR) of 90% with 12% complete responses (CR), 58% partial responses (PR) and 20% stable diseases (SD), the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 9.9 and DoR 10.7 months. BRAF2 with (68%) or without (32%) additional MEK inhibition was initiated after a median interval of 3.4 months. DCR after re-challenge with BRAF2 was 57%, 8% CR, 20% PR and 28% SD, median PFS was 5.0 and DoR 14.0 months. The duration of the treatment interval or the treatment in the interval did not influence the DCR or PFS to BRAF2. The only predictive factor for response to BRAF2 was previous response to BRAF1; all patients with CR to BRAF1 achieved disease control with BRAF2, but only 60% of the patients with PR to BRAF1 (p=0.002). Addition of MEK inhibition to BRAF2 after treatment with BRAF1 as monotherapy did not significantly increase the DCR or PFS compared to patients treated solely with mono- or combination therapy.

In conclusion re-challenge with a BRAF inhibitor is a meaningful therapeutic option for patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma.