Melanoma patient derived xenografts acquire distinct Vemurafenib resistance mechanisms

Variable clinical responses, tumor heterogeneity, and drug resistance reduce long-term survival outcomes for metastatic melanoma patients. To guide and accelerate drug development, we characterized tumor responses for five melanoma patient derived xenograft models treated with Vemurafenib. Three BRAF^V600E models showed acquired drug resistance, one BRAF^V600E model had a complete and durable response, and a BRAF^V600V model was expectedly unresponsive. In progressing tumors, a variety of resistance mechanisms to BRAF inhibition were uncovered, including mutant BRAF alternative splicing, NRAS mutation, COT (MAP3K8) overexpression, and increased mutant BRAF gene amplification and copy number. The resistance mechanisms among the patient derived xenograft models were similar to the resistance pathways identified in clinical specimens from patients progressing on BRAF inhibitor therapy. In addition, there was both inter- and intra-patient heterogeneity in resistance mechanisms, accompanied by heterogeneous pERK expression immunostaining profiles. MEK monotherapy of Vemurafenib-resistant tumors caused toxicity and acquired drug resistance. However, tumors were eradicated when Vemurafenib was combined the MEK inhibitor. The diversity of drug responses among the xenograft models; the distinct mechanisms of resistance; and the ability to overcome resistance by the addition of a MEK inhibitor provide a scheduling rationale for clinical trials of next-generation drug combinations.     

p53 Reactivation by PRIMA-1Met (APR-246) sensitises V600E/KBRAF melanoma to vemurafenib

Intrinsic and acquired resistance of metastatic melanoma to ^V600E/KBRAF and/or MEK inhibitors, which is often caused by activation of the PI3K/AKT survival pathway, represents a major clinical challenge. Given that p53 is capable of antagonising PI3K/AKT activation we hypothesised that pharmacological restoration of p53 activity may increase the sensitivity of BRAF-mutant melanoma to MAPK-targeted therapy and eventually delay and/or prevent acquisition of drug resistance. To test this possibility we exposed a panel of vemurafenib-sensitive and resistant (innate and acquired) ^V600E/KBRAF melanomas to a ^V600E/KBRAF inhibitor (vemurafenib) alone or in combination with a direct p53 activator (PRIMA-1^Met/APR-246). Strikingly, PRIMA-1^Met synergised with vemurafenib to induce apoptosis and suppress proliferation of ^V600E/KBRAF melanoma cells in vitro and to inhibit tumour growth in vivo. Importantly, this drug combination decreased the viability of both vemurafenib-sensitive and resistant melanoma cells irrespectively of the TP53 status. Notably, p53 reactivation was invariably accompanied by PI3K/AKT pathway inhibition, the activity of which was found as a dominant resistance mechanism to BRAF inhibition in our lines. From all various combinatorial modalities tested, targeting the MAPK and PI3K signalling pathways through p53 reactivation or not, the PRIMA-1^Met/vemurafenib combination was the most cytotoxic. We conclude that PRIMA-1^Met through its ability to directly reactivate p53 regardless of the mechanism causing its deactivation, and thereby dampen PI3K signalling, sensitises ^V600E/KBRAF-positive melanoma to BRAF inhibitors.     

Open-label,multicentre safety study of vemurafenib in 3219 patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive metastatic melanoma: 2-year follow-up data and long-term responders' analysis

BackgroundThe orally available BRAF kinase inhibitor vemurafenib is an effective and tolerable treatment option for patients with metastatic melanoma harbouring BRAF^V600 mutations. We assessed the safety of vemurafenib in a large population of patients with few alternative treatment options; we report updated 2-year safety.MethodsThis was an open-label, multicentre study of vemurafenib (960 mg bid) in patients with previously treated or untreated BRAF mutation-positive metastatic melanoma (cobas^® 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test). The primary end-point was safety; efficacy end-points were secondary. An exploratory analysis was performed to assess safety outcomes in patients with long duration of response (DOR) (≥12 or ≥24 months).ResultsAfter a median follow-up of 32.2 months (95% CI, 31.1–33.2 months), 3079/3219 patients (96%) had discontinued treatment. Adverse events (AEs) were largely consistent with previous reports; the most common all-grade treatment-related AEs were arthralgia (37%), alopecia (25%) and hyperkeratosis (23%); the most common grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs were squamous cell carcinoma of the skin (8%) and keratoacanthoma (8%). In the exploratory analysis, patients with DOR ≥12 months (n = 287) or ≥24 months (n = 133) were more likely to experience grade 3/4 AEs than the overall population. No new specific safety signals were observed with longer vemurafenib exposure.ConclusionsAfter 2 years' follow-up, safety was maintained in this large group of patients with BRAF^V600 mutation-positive metastatic melanoma who are more representative of routine clinical practice than typical clinical trial populations. These data suggest that long-term vemurafenib treatment is effective and tolerable without the development of new safety signals.     

Long-term outcome in BRAFV600E melanoma patients treated with vemurafenib: Patterns of disease progression and clinical management of limited progression

IntroductionVemurafenib induces tumour regression in most patients with BRAF^V600E-mutant melanoma; eventually, most experience progressive disease (PD). Long-term follow-up of patients with BRAF^V600E melanoma treated in the phase 1 vemurafenib trial is reported.MethodsPatients received vemurafenib 240–1120 mg (dose escalation cohort) or 960 mg (extension cohort) orally twice daily. Clinical response was evaluated every 8 weeks by Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST). Patients with PD amenable to local therapy (surgery or radiotherapy) were allowed to continue vemurafenib after progression. Overall survival (OS) from time of treatment initiation and from PD was estimated. Sites of PD were recorded.ResultsForty-eight patients (escalation cohort, n = 16; extension cohort, n = 32) received therapeutic doses of vemurafenib (⩾240 mg twice daily). Forty-four patients had PD by the time of this analysis and four remained progression free (follow-up time, 1.2–56.1 months). Median OS was 14 months (range, 1.2–56.1); 3- and 4-year melanoma-specific survival rate in the extension cohort was 26% and 19%, respectively. Median OS was 26.0 months (range, 7.7–56.1) among 20 patients who continued vemurafenib after local therapy. Median treatment duration beyond initial PD was 3.8 months (range, 1.1–26.6). In the extension cohort, six and five patients were alive after 3 and 4 years, respectively, on vemurafenib monotherapy.ConclusionsSome patients with melanoma achieved long-term survival with vemurafenib monotherapy. Continuation of vemurafenib after PD might be beneficial in some patients because remaining disease might continue to respond to BRAF inhibition.     

Melanoma en pacientes receptores de un trasplante de órgano sólido

In this review, we analyze the 3 clinical scenarios related to the development of melanoma in solid organ transplant recipients: melanoma in patients with a history of the tumor prior to a transplant, de novo melanoma following a transplant, and melanoma of donor origin. The main factors to consider in organ-transplant candidates with a history of melanoma are tumor stage, presence or absence of residual disease, and time from diagnosis to transplantation. Solid organ transplant recipients have a greater risk of melanoma than immunocompetent individuals. Mortality is also higher in this population, especially in patients with advanced melanoma, as treatment is especially challenging. Clinical history and physical examination provide the most useful information for preventing donor-to-recipient transmission of melanoma. Donor-derived melanoma has a very poor prognosis.     

B-Raf inhibitor vemurafenib in combination with temozolomide and fotemustine in the killing response of malignant melanoma cells

In the treatment of metastatic melanoma, a highly therapy-refractory cancer, alkylating agents are used and, for the subgroup of BRAF^V600E cancers, the B-Raf inhibitor vemurafenib. Although vemurafenib is initially beneficial, development of drug resistance occurs leading to tumor relapse, which necessitates the requirement for combined or sequential therapy with other drugs, including genotoxic alkylating agents. This leads to the question whether vemurafenib and alkylating agents act synergistically and whether chronic vemurafenib treatment alters the melanoma cell response to alkylating agents. Here we show that a) BRAF^V600E melanoma cells are killed by vemurafenib, driving apoptosis, b) BRAF^V600E melanoma cells are neither more resistant nor sensitive to temozolomide/fotemustine than non-mutant cells, c) combined treatment with vemurafenib plus temozolomide or fotemustine has an additive effect on cell kill, d) acquired vemurafenib resistance of BRAF^V600E melanoma cells does not affect MGMT, MSH2, MSH6, PMS2 and MLH1, nor does it affect the resistance to temozolomide and fotemustine, e) metastatic melanoma biopsies obtained from patients prior to and after vemurafenib treatment did not show a change in the MGMT promoter methylation status and MGMT expression level. The data suggest that consecutive treatment with vemurafenib and alkylating drugs is a reasonable strategy for metastatic melanoma treatment.     

Is there still a role for cytotoxic chemotherapy after targeted therapy and immunotherapy in metastatic melanoma?A case report and literature review

Metastatic melanoma has long been considered to have a very poor prognosis and to be chemo-resistant. However,a subgroup of patients with metastatic melanoma presents remarkable responses to chemotherapeutic agents, even in the absence of a response to modern targeted therapies and immunotherapies; accordingly, determining predictive biomarkers of the response to chemotherapies for metastatic melanoma remains a priority to guide treatment in these patients. We report a case study of a patient with B-Raf proto-oncogene serine/threonine kinase-mutated metastatic melanoma harbouring many genetic mutations. The patient did not respond to prior targeted therapies or immunotherapies but experienced a dramatic objective radiological and clinical response to subsequent dacarbazine-based chemotherapy. In the era of targeted therapies and immunotherapies for metastatic melanoma, cytotoxic chemotherapies may still represent an interesting therapeutic weapon in a well-defined subgroup of patients presenting with specific genetic and molecular features.