BRAF-targeted Therapy Research Articles

Current Treatment of Melanoma Brain Metastasis.

With greater understanding of underlying biology and development of effective BRAF-targeted therapy and immunotherapy, along with remarkable advances in local treatment such as stereotactic radiosurgery, melanoma brain metastasis (MBM) is witnessing continually improving outcome, with 1-year overall survival rate approaching 85%. Given disease complexity and myriad treatment options, all patients with MBM should ideally be evaluated in a multidisciplinary setting to allow an individualized treatment approach based on prognostic groups, molecular classification, number and size of brain metastasis, and performance status. With improving outcome, pendulum has now swayed to focus more on effective treatment modalities with minimal neurological toxicity while maintaining quality of life. Surgery is usually considered in symptomatic and large MBMs, while stereotactic radiosurgery considered in 1-4 lesions, and now also being explored for up to 15 brain metastases for improved local control. The role of whole brain radiotherapy is diminishing given its neurocognitive toxicities and is reserved for patients with diffuse brain involvement. Cytotoxic chemotherapy has largely been ineffective without evidence for survival benefit. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have become the cornerstone of management for melanoma brain metastasis with durable intracranial tumor control and excellent toxicity profile. For patients with asymptomatic MBMs, ipilimumab and nivolumab have shown intracranial response near 60% and provides comparable clinical benefit in MBMs as for extracranial metastases. For patients with driver BRAF mutation, BRAFi-/MEKi-targeted agents are proven to be effective in MBM with high rate intracranial responses (44-59%). However, the durability of intracranial responses induced by BRAFi/MEKi seems to be shorter than that of extracranial disease. Emerging data support novel combination of systemic therapy and stereotactic radiosurgery, which appears to be safe and effective; however, potential benefits and risks should be evaluated prospectively. Promising ongoing trials will further expand therapeutic evidence in MBM, and patients should be encouraged to participate in clinical trials.

Disrupting ATF4 Expression Mechanisms Provides an Effective Strategy for BRAF-Targeted Melanoma Therapy.

SummaryBRAF V600 mutation influences cellular signaling pathways for melanoma development. However, the role of oncogenic BRAF in adaptive stress response pathways is not fully understood. Here, we show that oncogenic BRAF plays an essential role in the induction of ATF4 following the activation of general control non-derepressible 2 (GCN2) kinase during nutrient stress and BRAF-targeted, therapeutic stress. Under GCN2 activation, BRAF ensures ATF4 induction by utilizing mTOR and eIF4B as downstream regulators. In contrast to the MEK-ERK pathway, this signaling pathway remains temporarily active even during treatment with BRAF inhibitors, thereby enabling the transient induction of ATF4. We also identify a chemical compound that prevents BRAF inhibitor-induced activation of the GCN2-ATF4 pathway and produces synergistic cell killing with BRAF inhibitors. Our findings establish a collaborative relationship between oncogenic BRAF and the GCN2-ATF4 signaling pathway, which may provide a novel therapeutic approach to target the adaptive stress response.

Treatment Options for Advanced Melanoma After Anti-PD-1 Therapy.

While anti-PD-1 antibodies have been a breakthrough in the treatment of patients with advanced melanoma, a substantial proportion of patients are still refractory to or progress after treatment with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. Here, we review the post anti-PD-1 therapy alternatives that may be possible for patients with unresectable or metastatic stage 3 or 4 melanoma. Currently available treatment options include BRAF-targeted and MEK inhibitor-targeted therapies for those with BRAFV600 mutant melanoma, while for patients with BRAF-WT melanoma or those who have already received prior BRAF-targeted therapy, options include anti-CTLA-4 therapy, alone or in combination with anti-PD-1 therapy, or for selected patients, clinical trials that may incorporate other immune checkpoint inhibitors or co-stimulatory agonists, oncolytic virotherapies, adoptive cellular therapies, or other novel agents. Participation in clinical trials is critical in order to delineate what more effective treatment options are and which group of patients after receiving prior anti-PD-1 therapy.

Clinical Trials of Rare Benign Pathologies in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

Numerous rare benign pathologies exist in the field of oral and maxillofacial surgery that currently are managed with resection. Because of the benign nature of these pathologies, the mortality is low; however, patients live with significant morbidity after surgery. 1 Peacock Z.S. Ji Y.D. Cost and lack of insurance coverage are prohibitive to having dental implants after resections for benign mandibular neoplasms. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2017; 123: 645 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (4) Google Scholar Although numerous advances have occurred in maxillary and mandibular reconstruction after surgical resection, insurance reimbursement to fully restore patients to their previous quality of life has remained a barrier. 1 Peacock Z.S. Ji Y.D. Cost and lack of insurance coverage are prohibitive to having dental implants after resections for benign mandibular neoplasms. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2017; 123: 645 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (4) Google Scholar Targeted therapies could be of benefit in treating these tumors in lieu of surgical resection or as possible neoadjuvant therapies. 2 Kaye F.J. Ivey A.M. Drane W.E. et al. Clinical and radiographic response with combined BRAF-targeted therapy in stage 4 ameloblastoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015; 107: 378 Crossref PubMed Scopus (75) Google Scholar Recent case reports have suggested that targeted therapies might offer benefit to some patients with benign pathologies. 2 Kaye F.J. Ivey A.M. Drane W.E. et al. Clinical and radiographic response with combined BRAF-targeted therapy in stage 4 ameloblastoma. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015; 107: 378 Crossref PubMed Scopus (75) Google Scholar Because of the rarity of these tumors, clinical trials can be difficult to perform without multicenter collaboration.

A Review of the Molecular Pathways Involved in Resistance to BRAF Inhibitors in Patients with Advanced-Stage Melanoma.

Melanoma is an aggressive malignancy of melanocytes and most commonly arises in the skin. In 2002, BRAF gene mutations were identified in melanoma, and this finding resulted in the development of several small-molecule molecular inhibitors that specifically targeted the BRAF V600E mutation. The development of targeted therapies for advanced-stage melanoma, including tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) of the BRAF (V600E) kinase, vemurafenib and dabrafenib, have been approved for the treatment of advanced melanoma leading to improved clinical outcomes. However, the development of BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) resistance has significantly reduced the therapeutic efficacy after prolonged treatment. Recent studies have identified the molecular mechanisms for BRAFi resistance. This review aims to describe the impact of BRAFi resistance on the pathogenesis of melanoma, the current status of molecular pathways involved in BRAFi resistance, including intrinsic resistance, adaptive resistance, and acquired resistance. This review will discuss how an understanding of the mechanisms associated with BRAFi resistance may aid the identification of useful strategies for overcoming the resistance to BRAF-targeted therapy in patients with advanced-stage melanoma.

Frequency of BRAF V600E immunoexpression in ameloblastomas: a multi-institutional analysis of 86 cases in Latin America and comprehensive review of the literature.

Paracoccidioidomycosis (PCM) is the leading cause of death among systemic mycoses in Brazil. On the other hand, oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) is the most prevalent malignant neoplasm of the mouth. Both lesions rarely affect the tongue dorsum and may share similar clinical characteristics. This study aimed to retrieve cases of single oral ulcers diagnosed as PCM or OSCC. A cross-sectional retrospective study was conducted. All patients who had a single ulcer on dorsum of the tongue and confirmed diagnosis of PCM or OSCC were evaluated. A total of 9 patients (5 women and 4 men) were evaluated, 5 patients had OSCCs (mean age = 69,8 years old), and 4 patients PCM (mean age = 51 years old). Most of the lesions were infiltrated and indurated in the palpation exam. Duration ranged from 1 to 12 months (mean time of 5.2 months and 4.7 months for OSCC and PCM, respectively). OSCC was the main clinical diagnosis hypothesis. Although uncommon, PCM and OSCC should be considered as a differential diagnosis hypothesis in infiltrated ulcers on the tongue dorsum. Incisional biopsy is mandatory to confirm the diagnosis and indicate the appropriate treatment.

A TLR7 agonist strengthens T and NK cell function during BRAF-targeted therapy in a preclinical melanoma model.

Therapeutic success of targeted therapy with BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) for melanoma is limited by resistance development. Observations from preclinical mouse models and recent insights into the immunological effects caused by BRAFi give promise for future development of combination therapy for human melanoma. In our study, we used the transplantable D4M melanoma mouse model with the BRAFV600E mutation and concomitant PTEN loss in order to characterize alterations in tumor‐infiltrating effector immune cells when tumors become resistant to BRAFi. We found that BRAFi‐sensitive tumors displayed a pronounced inflammatory milieu characterized by high levels of cytokines and chemokines accompanied by an infiltration of T and NK cells. The tumor‐infiltrating effector cells were activated and produced high levels of IFN‐γ, TNF‐α and granzyme B. When tumors became resistant and progressively grew, they reverted to a low immunogenic state similar to untreated tumors as reflected by low mRNA levels of proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines and fewer tumor‐infiltrating T and NK cells. Moreover, these T and NK cells were functionally impaired in comparison to their counterparts in BRAFi‐sensitive tumors. Their effector cell function could be restored by additional peritumoral treatment with the TLR7 agonist imiquimod, a clinically approved agent for nonmelanoma skin cancer. Indeed, resistance to BRAFi therapy was delayed and accompanied by high numbers of activated T and NK cells in tumors. Thus, combining BRAFi with an immune stimulating agent such as a TLR ligand could be a promising alternative approach for the treatment of melanoma.

BRAF-Targeted Therapy for

BRAF V600E mutation in metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) is a poor prognostic factor that leads to resistance to EGFR-targeted therapy. Recent studies

Neoadjuvant BRAF-targeted therapy in regionally advanced and oligometastatic melanoma.

Current management of locoregional and oligometastatic melanoma is typically with surgery; however, some patients are unable to undergo resection due to location/size of their tumors and/or the anticipated morbidity of the surgery. While there are currently no established guidelines for neoadjuvant therapy in melanoma, neoadjuvant BRAF-targeted therapy may make resection more feasible. A retrospective analysis was conducted of 23 patients with BRAFV600-mutant, stage III/IV melanoma treated with BRAF-targeted therapy prior to surgery, with no adjuvant treatment. Surgical specimens, preoperative imaging, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Results: Ten of 23 patients (44%) attained a pathologic complete response (pCR), with no correlation between RECIST response based on preoperative imaging and pathologic response. After a median of 43-month follow-up, only 1 patient (10%) with a pCR recurred, while 8 of 13 (62%) patients without a pCR recurred. Patients with a pCR had significantly improved relapse-free (RFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to patients with residual tumor. Neoadjuvant BRAF-targeted therapy is associated with a high pCR rate in patients with stage III-IV melanoma, which may correlate with improved RFS and OS.

The Role of BRAF-Targeted Therapy for Advanced Melanoma in the Immunotherapy Era.

The treatment of advanced melanoma has changed dramatically in recent years with several new drugs having been approved for the treatment of melanoma since 2011. This review aims to evaluate the role of BRAF-targeted therapy for advanced melanoma in the immunotherapy era. Currently, in patients with BRAF wild-type advanced melanoma, anti-PD-1 (nivolumab or pembrolizumab) is the main treatment. The combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) is also an important option for these patients, resulting in a better outcome, but with less favorable toxicity profile. In patients with BRAF mutations, three regimens of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors are now approved (vemurafenib plus cobimetinib, dabrafenib plus trametinib, and encorafenib plus binimetinib), which achieve rapid antitumor responses and a significant survival benefit. In these patients, as well as in BRAF wild-type patients, immunotherapy can be also effective and is regularly used. Immunotherapy and targeted therapy have become the new standards of care, substantially improving survival rates. However, many questions still remain unanswered, such as what is the best first- and second-line treatment and the best treatment sequence. New combinations of drugs, targeted therapy combined with immunotherapy, and sequencing approaches are now underway in many ongoing clinical trials.

Abstract 2894: Overcoming intrinsic resistance to BRAF-inhibitors by modulating redox balance inBRAF-mutated melanoma cells

Abstract Post-resistant tumor analyses or static measurements provide most of our current knowledge of tumor recurrence. Unfortunately, these studies neither elucidate critical events that precede resistance nor explain the dynamics of drug response in cancer cells. Filling this knowledge gap may engender key advances in cancer therapy. Therefore, we coupled single-cell time-lapse microscopy, bioinformatics, and mathematical modeling to study the dynamics of drug response in BRAF-mutated melanoma cells. We recently reported a novel non-quiescent idling state that melanoma cells exhibit under continued drug exposure. Although Idling cells exhibit a constant population size, they continue to divide and die at the level of the single cell. We speculate that idling state, primed to acquire resistance, could be a new type of drug tolerance, and may constitute the bulk of minimum residual disease (MRD)often seen in the clinic in remission. Melanoma cells we considered, exhibited heterogeneous responses prior to convergence to idling state. These differential responses in melanoma can be defined within a mathematical framework of epigenetic landscape: initial heterogeneity reflects an early re-equilibration among distinct phenotypic basins while idling is a final equilibrated state. Thus, describing the molecular signatures that define basins in BRAF-mutated melanoma landscape, both drug-naïve and drug-induced, would provide rational strategies to alter the landscape and enhance the clinical benefits. To this end, we utilized single-cell-derived clones to find gene-signatures that correlate to drug-sensitivity and discovered that drug-naïve landscape could be defined with respect to distinct redox metabolism. We further confirmed and validated these signatures in CCLE dataset across a range of BRAF-mutated melanoma cells. Specifically, the antioxidants such as NADPH and GSH provide an early survival advantage to melanoma cells under BRAF-inhibition. We show that modulating expression of these metabolic genes changes the initial landscape, and synergizes with BRAF-inhibitors. The enhanced effects of combination can be mitigated by antioxidants specific to glutathione redox balance. These observations suggest that disruption of redox balance, in combination with BRAF-inhibition, may improve the outcomes of BRAF-targeted therapy. Additionally, this strategy will maximize initial cell killing, and hence reduce the number of cells that constitute MRD or idling state. Taken together, our work provides a unifying view of how melanomas respond to BRAF-inhibition and suggest that targeted landscaping is a rational way to suppress both an initial tumor and idling cells. Citation Format: B. Bishal Paudel, Leonard A. Harris, Keisha N. Hardeman, Corey E. Hayford, Christian T. Meyer, Arwa A. Abugable, Darren R. Tyson, Joshua P. Fessel, Vito Quaranta. Overcoming intrinsic resistance to BRAF-inhibitors by modulating redox balance inBRAF-mutated melanoma cells [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 2894.

Retrospective analysis of patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN) positive melanoma (MEL) who received adjuvant nivolumab (NIVO) without completion lymph node dissection (CLND).

9590 Background: Until recently, most patients (pts) with SLN+ MEL underwent CLND, a procedure mandated in published trials of adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy to date. Following MSLT-II, this practice has dramatically changed with most pts now undergoing surveillance or adjuvant therapy without CLND. In addition, pts with in-transit/satellite MEL were excluded or not reported in these prior adjuvant studies. Our aim was to explore real-world outcomes of adjuvant NIVO in these pts. Methods: We carried out a single center retrospective analysis of stage 3 MEL pts who received adjuvant NIVO. Results: 32 pts with SLN+ MEL who did not undergo a CLND and started adjuvant NIVO within 3 months of surgery were included. Median age was 60 (26-77); per AJCC v7, 12 pts had Stage 3A, 11 stage 3B, and 9 pts had Stage 3C MEL. One was acral MEL; 18 had an ulcerated primary. 6 pts had BRAF-mutant MEL, 20 had BRAF-WT, and 6 unknown. NIVO treatment was 240 mg Q2wks or 480 mg Q4wks, up to one year. 21 pts developed grade 1/2 immune-related adverse events (irAEs), and 1 pt stopped NIVO due to toxicity (fatigue). With median follow-up of 7 months, only 1 pt had a recurrence, which was in the in SLN+ nodal basin; pt was rendered disease-free with surgery. The relapse-free rate (RFS) rate at 1 year was 95% (95% CI, 71-100). Of 21 pts with in-transit/satellite recurrent MEL (median age 68 [29-84]) who started adjuvant NIVO (no prior drug treatment), 5 had BRAF-mutant MEL, 14 BRAF-WT, 2 unknown; two were acral-lentiginous. 3 pts had recurrences: 2 regional and 1 distant mets, treated with surgery, TVEC, or BRAF-targeted therapy. Median follow-up was 8 months from NIVO start; 1-year RFS was 72% (95% CI 32-91). 15 pts developed irAEs; in 12, these were grade 1-2 and in 3, were grade 3 that led to discontinuation. Conclusions: While preliminary, these findings suggest that adjuvant anti-PD-1 therapy may be effective in SLN+ pts who forego CLND prior to adjuvant treatment, as 1-year RFS rate appears similar to rates in the published adjuvant anti-PD-1 trials that mandated CLND. This therapy may be similarly effective in pts with resected in-transit/satellite stage 3 melanoma. Further follow-up will be presented.

Overcoming acquired osimertinib-resistance in EGFR-mutant advanced non-small lung cancer mediated by activating BRAF V600E mutation.

e20682 Background: There is growing insight in the mechanisms underlying resistance to the 3rdgeneration EGFR inhibitor osimertinib. Unlike resistance to 1stgeneration inhibitors, these mechanisms not necessarily lead to sequential targeted therapy approaches. Here we report on the treatment of two patients with acquired resistance to osimertinib with a new detected BRAF V600E mutation as resistance mechanism. Methods: We identified two patients with EGFR-T790M-mutant advanced NSCLC with progression on osimertinib and detection of a new BRAFV600E mutation in a tumor rebiopsy by next-generation sequencing (NGS). No other known resistance mechanism beside T790M loss in one patient was found. Osimertinib was discontinued and BRAF-targeted combination therapy with dabrafenib and trametinib at standard dose was initiated. We monitored the clinical course with sequential 18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) / computed tomography (CT) assessing maximum standard uptake value (SUVmax), sequencing based liquid biopsies and tumor marker assessment. Results: Patient (1) with EGFR del19 (E746_A750del), preserved T790M mutation and acquired BRAF V600E mutation showed reduction in FDG uptake of 18% after 2 weeks of dabrafenib/trametinib that demonstrated a slight increase of 12% in a FDG-PET/CT scan 4 weeks thereafter and combination treatment has been continued. Patient (2) with EGFR del19 (E746_A750del), T790M loss and new BRAF V600E mutation showed continuous metabolic (+8% and + 39%, respectively) and morphologic progression after 2 and 4 weeks of dabrafenib and trametinib. A tumor rebiopsy showed no additional molecular changes. We changed the treatment to osimertinib and dabrafenib combination and observed an impressive metabolic response (-33%) after 2 weeks by FDG-PET/CT. Conclusions: BRAF V600E mutation has recently been described as a novel molecular resistance mechanism in osimertinib-resistant EGFR-mutant NSCLC. We describe one patient where combined BRAF/MEK inhibition with no additional EGFR-inhibition resulted in a preliminary feasible tumor control, but confirmatory CT staging is pending. In a second patient, co-inhibition of EGFR and BRAF pathway with osimertinib and dabrafenib was needed to overcome BRAF-mediated osimertinib resistance resulting in an impressive early tumor response that was not observed to either single-target inhibition of EGFR or BRAF. FDG-PET/CT was able to monitor tumor dynamics. Updated data will be presented.

Utilizing data from patient-derived xenograft mouse models of human tumors to inform clinical decision making in Molecular Tumor Boards (MTB) deliberations.

e14660 Background: Molecular Tumor Boards (MTB) are often the critical decision-making step in identifying genome-guided treatments for patients with difficult-to-treat cancers, e.g. BRAF mutated metastatic colon cancers. A common challenge for MTBs is prioritizing between two or more actionable variants in a tumor. A potential solution to this challenge is to incorporate drug response in Patient-derived xenografts (PDX) models into MTB deliberations. The goal of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using PDX models to elucidate drug-effectiveness in BRAF-mutated cancer as an example of a common clinical scenario. Methods: We selected BRAF-mutated PDX models from the JAX PDX resource based on the presence of an activating BRAF mutation and a second actionable variant from the JAX Cancer Treatment Profile (CTP). Somatic mutation data from PDX tumors were presented to members of the Intermountain MTB. PDX models were then treated with drugs recommended by the MTB; outcomes based on tumor growth inhibition (TGI) were shared with the MTB. Results: Gene/variant targets, associated drugs for the 2nd mutation and responses are described in the table. The MTB members determined that PDX data presented in TGI format is helpful in MTB deliberations. Activity of BRAF-targeted therapy was expected while the low activity of olaparib in the BRCA1-mutated colon cancer model was unexpected. The MTB then discussed molecular mechanisms that contributed to these outcomes. Conclusions: The pilot study demonstrated that utilizing PDX drug response data as an additional molecular annotation for MTB deliberations is feasible. Future studies will further optimize this process. [Table: see text]

Comprehensive Clinical Trial Data Summation for BRAF-MEK Inhibition and Checkpoint Immunotherapy in Metastatic Melanoma.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors, along with BRAF and MEK inhibitors, have dramatically changed the management of and outlook for patients with metastatic melanoma. Analyses of long-term follow-up data and subanalyses based on disease characteristics may inform clinical decision making. Reports of clinical trials in metastatic melanoma published between January 1, 2012, and August 30, 2018, were identified using PubMed (terms: melanoma AND [dabrafenib OR trametinib OR vemurafenib OR cobimetinib OR encorafenib OR ipilimumab OR nivolumab OR pembrolizumab]) and were systematically reviewed. Relevant congress proceedings were also assessed. Efficacy data from key phase III trials were analyzed and trends identified. Substantial improvements in objective response rates, progression-free survival, and overall survival were documented across 14 identified publications. Subgroup findings supported that patients with lower disease burden derive greater benefit than patients with more advanced disease, limiting the value of disease burden in the clinical decision-making process. However, these agents consistently conferred benefits despite the presence of poor prognostic features. Several clinically relevant questions remain, including how best to sequence immune checkpoint inhibitors and combination targeted therapy. This research, coupled with ongoing investigations, including those on predictive biomarkers, suggests that the treatment decision-making process is likely to become more nuanced. The management of melanoma has been rapidly advancing with new classes of agents, including immune checkpoint and BRAF inhibitors. With long-term follow-up, their impact on response rates and survival outcomes is well documented. Additional findings from subgroup analyses suggest that patients with lower disease burden derive greater benefit, yet both consistently confer benefit in patients with higher disease burden. Currently, there is a paucity of data to guide first-line treatment selection between immunotherapy and BRAF-targeted therapy in clinical practice or to estimate their impact when sequenced. Gaining these insights will facilitate a more nuanced management approach.

BRAF Targeting Sensitizes Resistant Melanoma to Cytotoxic T Cells.

BRAF and MEK inhibitors (BRAFi and MEKi) are actively used for the treatment of metastatic melanoma in patients with BRAFV600E mutation in their tumors. However, the development of resistance to BRAFi and MEKi remains a difficult clinical challenge with limited therapeutic options available to these patients. In this study, we investigated the mechanism and potential therapeutic utility of combination BRAFi and adoptive T-cell therapy (ACT) in melanoma resistant to BRAFi. Investigations were performed in vitro and in vivo with various human melanoma cell lines sensitive and resistant to BRAFi as well as patient-derived xenografts (PDX) derived from patients. In addition, samples were evaluated from patients on a clinical trial of BRAFi in combination with ACT. Herein we report that in human melanoma cell lines, senstitive and resistant to BRAFi and in PDX from patients who progressed on BRAFi and MEKi therapy, BRAFi caused transient upregulation of mannose-6-phosphate receptor (M6PR). This sensitized tumor cells to CTLs via uptake of granzyme B, a main component of the cytotoxic activity of CTLs. Treatment of mice bearing resistant tumors with BRAFi enhanced the antitumor effect of patients' TILs. A pilot clinical trial of 16 patients with metastatic melanoma who were treated with the BRAFi vemurafenib followed by therapy with TILs demonstrated a significant increase of M6PR expression on tumors during vemurafenib treatment. BRAF-targeted therapy sensitized resistant melanoma cells to CTLs, which opens new therapeutic opportunities for the treatment of patients with BRAF-resistant disease.See related commentary by Goff and Rosenberg, p. 2682.

Cutaneous Melanoma, Version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Cutaneous melanoma have been significantly revised over the past few years in response to emerging data on immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies and BRAF-targeted therapy. This article summarizes the data and rationale supporting extensive changes to the recommendations for systemic therapy as adjuvant treatment of resected disease and as treatment of unresectable or distant metastatic disease.

KIT as an Oncogenic Driver in Melanoma: An Update on Clinical Development.

Metastatic melanoma is a heterogenous disease that has served as a model for the development of both targeted therapy and immunotherapy. KIT-mutated melanoma represents a rare subset, most commonly arising from acral, mucosal, and chronically sun-damaged skin. Additionally, KIT alterations are enriched in the triple wild-type subtype of cutaneous melanoma. Activating alterations of KIT-a transmembrane receptor tyrosine kinase important for cell development, growth, and differentiation-have been shown to be critical to oncogenesis across many tumor subtypes. Following the successes of BRAF-targeted therapy in melanoma and KIT-targeted therapy in gastrointestinal stromal tumors, small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting KIT have been examined in KIT-mutated melanoma. KIT inhibitors that have been investigated in relevant clinical trials in advanced melanoma include imatinib, sunitinib, dasatinib, and nilotinib. In these studies, selected patients with KIT-mutated melanoma were shown to be responsive to therapy with KIT inhibition, especially patients with L576P and K642E mutations. This has led to the incorporation of KIT-targeted therapy in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for systemic therapy for metastatic or unresectable melanoma. Current research and development efforts include novel KIT-targeted therapies and testing KIT inhibitors in combination with immunotherapy.

Phase I Study of the BRAF Inhibitor Vemurafenib in Combination With the Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Inhibitor Everolimus in Patients With BRAF-Mutated Malignancies.

Parallel activation of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-mammalian target of rapamycin pathway represents a mechanism of primary and acquired resistance to BRAF-targeted therapy, but the two pathways have yet to be cotargeted in humans. We performed a phase I study to evaluate the safety and activity of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib in combination with the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus in BRAF-mutated advanced solid tumors. We performed a 3+3 dose-escalation study with escalating doses of both oral (PO) vemurafenib administered twice a day and PO everolimus administered daily. Twenty patients with advanced cancers were enrolled. The median adult age was 64 years (range, 17 to 85 years); two pediatric patients were 10 and 13 years old. Patients were heavily pretreated with prior BRAF or MEK inhibitors (n = 11), phase I clinical trial therapy (n = 10), surgery (n = 18), radiation therapy (n = 11), and chemotherapy (n=13). One of the two pediatric patients initially experienced grade 3 rash, but after dermatologic intervention, the patient remains on trial with partial response and no dose reduction at time of analysis. Four dose-limiting toxicities (rash, n = 1; fatigue, n = 3) were observed at dose level 2. Therefore, dose level 1 (vemurafenib 720 mg PO twice a day and everolimus 5 mg PO daily) was the maximum-tolerated dose. Overall, four patients (22%) had a partial response and nine patients (50%) had stable disease as best response. One pediatric patient with pleomorphic xanthroastrocytoma remains on protocol with continued clinical response after 38 cycles. The combination of vemurafenib 720 mg PO twice a day and everolimus 5 mg PO daily is safe and well tolerated and has activity across histologies, with partial responses noted in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, melanoma, optic nerve glioma, and xanthroastrocytoma, including patients who previously experienced progression on BRAF and/or MEK inhibitor therapy. Further investigation in a larger cohort of molecularly matched patients is warranted.

Concordance of somatic mutation profiles (BRAF,NRAS, and TERT) and tumoral PD-L1 in matched primary cutaneous and metastatic melanoma samples

Despite the efficacy of BRAF-targeted and PD-L1-related immune therapies in tackling metastatic melanoma, a significant number of patients exhibit resistance. Given this, the objective of the current study was to ascertain concordance of somatic mutations in BRAF/NRAS/TERT and immunohistochemical PD-L1 and CD8 in matched primary cutaneous and metastatic melanoma. A total of 43 archival paired samples with sufficient material for genetic and immunohistochemical analyses met the criteria for inclusion in the study. Immunohistochemistry was performed for PD-L1 and CD8 and direct-DNA Sanger sequencing for BRAF/NRAS/TERT promoter mutational analyses. Agreement between paired samples was assessed using Cohen κ. Poor concordance among primary and corresponding metastases was noted in BRAF (9/42 cases discordant, κ = 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-0.77; P = .0013), TERT promoter mutations (13/41 cases discordant, κ = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.04-0.62; P = .033), tumoral PD-L1 immunoexpression (9/43 cases discordant, κ = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.07-0.72; P = .0099), and immunoexpression of CD8+ T lymphocytes (12/43 cases discordant, κ = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.19-0.69; P = .002). Although NRAS1 and NRAS2 were highly concordant (42/43 and 39/43 cases, respectively), discordant NRAS2 mutational status was associated with a median time to metastasis of 90 versus 455 days for pairs with concordant status (P = .07). Although limited by sample size, our findings suggest that consideration be given to mutational analysis of metastatic tissue rather than the primary to guide BRAF-targeted therapy and question the roles of TERT promoter mutations and PD-L1 as predictive biomarkers in malignant melanoma.