Combined MEK Research Articles

Phase 2 study of anti-EGFR rechallenge therapy with panitumumab with or without trametinib in advanced colorectal cancer.

3520 Background: In RAS/RAF WT colorectal cancer (CRC), rechallenge with anti-EGFR therapy (EGFRi) in patients (pts) with prior response leads to clinical benefit, with response rates up to 30% in prior trials. However, secondary MTs in the MAPK signaling pathway have been implicated in resistance to EGFRi. We designed a phase 2 trial to evaluate the efficacy of EGFRi rechallenge +/- a MEK inhibitor (trametinib) based on pre-treatment ctDNA MTs. Methods: This trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of EGFRi rechallenge +/- trametinib in pts with RAS/BRAF WT, MSS, treatment refractory mCRC who achieved clinical benefit with prior EGFRi based therapy for ≥16 weeks with subsequent progression. Pre study ctDNA was used to enroll in one of 3 arms: Arm A: Pts with an acquired EGFR ECD MT but absence of RAS/BRAF/MAP2K1 or with absence of any acquired resistance MT (Arm C) at time of study initiation received panitumumab 6 mg/kg IV Q2 wks. Arm B: Pts with an acquired RAS/BRAF/MAP2K1 MT received panitumumab 4.8 mg/kg plus trametinib 1.5 mg PO daily. Pts in Arms A and C were allowed to cross over on progression. The primary endpoint was ORR by RECIST v1.1. Results: 54 pts were enrolled, with 52 evaluable for efficacy. Median age is 59 yrs (range, 37-78), and 23 (46%) are female. Median number of prior therapies was 3. Three, 20, and 31 pts were enrolled in Arms A, B, C, respectively. Grade 3 TREAs occurred in 29 (54%) pts (all receiving the doublet regimen) and included acneiform rash in 17 (31%) and others occurring in < 5% of pts. There were no grade 4 TRAEs. In pts with no acquired MTs (Arm C), ORR was 20% (6/30) (95% CI, 0.07-0.37), DCR 67% (20/30) (95% CI, 0.45- 0.81), and median PFS and OS 4.1 mo and 11.2 mo, respectively. The median DOR was 5.5 mo. 22 patients crossed over to add trametinib at time of progression, without any responses. In contrast, in pts with acquired RAS/RAF/MAP2K1 MTs (Arm B), there were no responses, with DCR of 63% (12/19) (95% CI, 0.36-0.81), and median PFS and OS 2.1 mo and 5.9 mo, respectively. Only 3 pts were identified with EGFR ECD MTs (Arm A), and ORR is 0% (0/3) in this cohort, with DCR 67% (2/3) (95% CI, 0.09-0.99). Pts with PR had a longer median interval from prior EGFRi and longer time on prior EGFRi than those with SD+PD (5.5 vs 3.6 mo; p = 0.03, and 9.5 vs. 8.8 mo; p = 0.03, respectively). Conclusions: CtDNA guided rechallenge leads to responses in 20% of pts without acquired resistance MTs, with DCR of 67%. This exceeds current third line standard options. While panitumumab has the potential to block EGFR ECD mutations arising from cetuximab, these mutations in isolation were uncommon and there were no signals of efficacy. Although the acneiform rash induced by the combination of MEK and EGFR inhibition was manageable with close dermatologic management, the combination failed to improve outcomes for pts with acquired resistance. Alternative approaches to downstream MAPK blockade should be explored to improve outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT03087071.

SO-38 Clinical efficacy and single-cell analysis of combined BRAF, MEK, and PD-1 inhibition in BRAFV600E colorectal cancer patients

While combinations of BRAF inhibitors with EGFR and/or MEK inhibitors have improved efficacy in BRAFV600E colorectal cancer (CRC), response rates remain low and durability is limited. Preclinical and correlative studies suggest that targeting BRAF signaling in combination with immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) could enhance activity.

Toxicity and outcomes of BRAF and MEK inhibitor “ramp-up” dosing strategies for patients with melanoma: A real-world institutional experience.

e21600 Background: Combination BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) and MEK inhibitor (MEKi) therapy is a widely accepted treatment option for patients (pts) with BRAF-V600E mutant melanoma. Although effective, these combinations exhibit high rates of adverse events (AEs), with 44% - 66% requiring dose modification or interruption and up to 26% discontinuing due to AEs in the adjuvant setting. Enhanced tolerance to BRAFi/MEKi is expected to improve pts quality of life and potentially enhance clinical outcomes. Clinicians at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center (RPCCC) have implemented a dose escalation regimen upon initiation of BRAFi/MEKi in efforts to enhance the tolerance of these combinations for pts with BRAF-V600E mutant melanoma in the adjuvant and advanced setting. Here we present a retrospective analysis of the toxicity profiles and outcomes associated with this “ramp-up” approach. Methods: Pts presenting to RPCCC in Buffalo, NY for management of stage III or IV melanoma harboring BRAF-V600E mutations were retrospectively observed from 1/2012 to 12/2020. Pts starting BRAFi/MEKi combinations, regardless of prior lines of therapy, were included unless concurrently receiving immune checkpoint inhibition. The “ramp-up” regimen involves a 25% dose of BRAFi and 50% dose of MEKi, which is gradually increased over 4 weekly intervals until full dose is achieved. Pts started on full-dose BRAFi/MEKi were included as a comparison arm. Observations included 1) demographics, 2) treatment regimens and disruptions, 3) rate and severity of AEs, 4) outcomes including best overall response rates (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 88 pts were analyzed (21 and 35 receiving “ramp-up” BRAFi/MEKi in the adjuvant and advanced (unresectable stage III or stage IV) setting, respectively, and 32 received full-dose (non-ramp-up) BRAFi/MEKi in the advanced setting). Demographics were similar except pts in the “ramp-up” cohorts were higher in average age (62.0 vs 56.0, p = 0.032) than pts starting at full-dose. Pts receiving adjuvant BRAFi/MEKi at “ramp-up” dosing exhibited a 4.8% (n = 1) rate of grade 3 or higher (Gr3+) AEs and 33.3% (n = 7) AE-related discontinuation rate (9.9 month average time to discontinuation). In the advanced setting, “ramp-up” vs full-dose treated pts exhibited Gr3+ AE rates of 25.7% (n = 9) vs 43.8% (n = 14; p = 0.197) and AE-related discontinuation rates of 34.4% (n = 12) vs 40.6% (n = 13; p = 0.592), respectively. Trends in overall AEs, ORR, PFS, and OS were similar to historical observations across all groups. Conclusions: This real-world analysis suggests that “ramp-up” incremental dosing of BRAFi/MEKi for pts with melanoma in the adjuvant and advanced setting may improve the tolerance and toxicity profiles of these agents without compromising their clinical efficacy, and may be of particular utility in pts with advanced age.

Antitumor activity of KIN-2787, a next-generation pan-RAF inhibitor, in combination with MEK inhibition in preclinical models of human NRAS mutant melanoma.

e15099 Background: NRAS mutations which activate MAPK signaling represent oncogenic driver alterations in approximately 20% melanoma cases in the US. NRAS mutant melanomas are uniquely dependent upon CRAF rather than BRAF for activation of downstream MEK/ERK signaling. In BRAF mutant melanoma, approved RAF-targeted therapies are commonly used in combination with a MEK inhibitor which provides clinical benefit by inhibition of two targets within the oncogenic MAPK signaling pathway. Emerging data with pan-RAF inhibitors in early clinical development suggests benefit with and without combined MEK inhibition, yet no approved targeted therapy exists for NRAS mutant melanoma patients. KIN-2787 is a novel, orally available pan-RAF inhibitor designed to be effective in RAF-dependent cancers, regardless of isoform. Methods: Kinome profiling was evaluated by radiometric enzyme assay at Reaction Biology across 688 kinases (including wild type, atypical, and mutant). Cellular activity was assessed by suppression of downstream MAPK pathway signaling and cell growth inhibition in human tumor cell lines. Combination cell growth inhibition studies were performed in 9x5 dose matrices with KIN-2787 and binimetinib, respectively. Extended cell growth inhibition effects were assessed by Incucyte imaging. In vivo KIN-2787 and combination efficacy was evaluated in NRAS mutant xenograft models. Results: Kinome profiling of KIN-2787 revealed exquisite selectivity with only 2 of 669 non-RAF family kinases inhibited > 75% at 1 M KIN-2787 and retained ̃10x and 70x selectivity window against those two kinases, DDR1 and p38b, respectively, relative to RAF kinases. We previously reported KIN-2787 activity across BRAF, NRAS, and KRAS mutant tumor cell lines with greatest sensitivity in Class II and III dimer-driven BRAF models. Here, we evaluated NRAS mutant, BRAF WT melanoma for combination potential with binimetinib. Melanoma tumor cell lines bearing NRAS hotspot mutations demonstrated synergistic benefit with KIN-2787 combined with binimetinib. Daily KIN-2787 plus binimetinib treatment in NRAS mutant melanoma xenograft models resulted in significant tumor growth inhibition benefit relative to either agent alone and was associated with added MAPK pathway biomarker suppression. Conclusions: KIN-2787 is a highly selective, potent, next-generation, pan-RAF inhibitor with activity across BRAF and RAS mutant human tumor cell models. Preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies using KIN-2787 in combination with binimetinib demonstrated significant combination benefit in NRAS mutant melanoma models. Taken together with its unique selectively, these data support use of KIN-2787 in combination therapy in this patient segment. A Phase 1/1b dose escalation and expansion clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of KIN-2787 is ongoing (NCT04913285).

An integrative gene expression signature analysis identifies CMS4 KRAS-mutated colorectal cancers sensitive to combined MEK and SRC targeted therapy

BackgroundOver half of colorectal cancers (CRCs) are hard-wired to RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway oncogenic signaling. However, the promise of targeted therapeutic inhibitors, has been tempered by disappointing clinical activity, likely due to complex resistance mechanisms that are not well understood. This study aims to investigate MEK inhibitor-associated resistance signaling and identify subpopulation(s) of CRC patients who may be sensitive to biomarker-driven drug combination(s).MethodsWe classified 2250 primary and metastatic human CRC tumors by consensus molecular subtypes (CMS). For each tumor, we generated multiple gene expression signature scores measuring MEK pathway activation, MEKi “bypass” resistance, SRC activation, dasatinib sensitivity, EMT, PC1, Hu-Lgr5-ISC, Hu-EphB2-ISC, Hu-Late TA, Hu-Proliferation, and WNT activity. We carried out correlation, survival and other bioinformatic analyses. Validation analyses were performed in two independent publicly available CRC tumor datasets (n = 585 and n = 677) and a CRC cell line dataset (n = 154).ResultsHere we report a central role of SRC in mediating “bypass”-resistance to MEK inhibition (MEKi), primarily in cancer stem cells (CSCs). Our integrated and comprehensive gene expression signature analyses in 2250 CRC tumors reveal that MEKi-resistance is strikingly-correlated with SRC activation (Spearman P < 10–320), which is similarly associated with EMT (epithelial to mesenchymal transition), regional metastasis and disease recurrence with poor prognosis. Deeper analysis shows that both MEKi-resistance and SRC activation are preferentially associated with a mesenchymal CSC phenotype. This association is validated in additional independent CRC tumor and cell lines datasets. The CMS classification analysis demonstrates the strikingly-distinct associations of CMS1-4 subtypes with the MEKi-resistance and SRC activation. Importantly, MEKi + SRCi sensitivities are predicted to occur predominantly in the KRAS mutant, mesenchymal CSC-like CMS4 CRCs.ConclusionsLarge human tumor gene expression datasets representing CRC heterogeneity can provide deep biological insights heretofore not possible with cell line models, suggesting novel repurposed drug combinations. We identified SRC as a common targetable node–-an Achilles’ heel–-in MEKi-targeted therapy-associated resistance in mesenchymal stem-like CRCs, which may help development of a biomarker-driven drug combination (MEKi + SRCi) to treat problematic subpopulations of CRC.

Adaptive translational reprogramming of metabolism limits the response to targeted therapy in BRAFV600 melanoma

Despite the success of therapies targeting oncogenes in cancer, clinical outcomes are limited by residual disease that ultimately results in relapse. This residual disease is often characterized by non-genetic adaptive resistance, that in melanoma is characterised by altered metabolism. Here, we examine how targeted therapy reprograms metabolism in BRAF-mutant melanoma cells using a genome-wide RNA interference (RNAi) screen and global gene expression profiling. Using this systematic approach we demonstrate post-transcriptional regulation of metabolism following BRAF inhibition, involving selective mRNA transport and translation. As proof of concept we demonstrate the RNA processing kinase U2AF homology motif kinase 1 (UHMK1) associates with mRNAs encoding metabolism proteins and selectively controls their transport and translation during adaptation to BRAF-targeted therapy. UHMK1 inactivation induces cell death by disrupting therapy induced metabolic reprogramming, and importantly, delays resistance to BRAF and MEK combination therapy in multiple in vivo models. We propose selective mRNA processing and translation by UHMK1 constitutes a mechanism of non-genetic resistance to targeted therapy in melanoma by controlling metabolic plasticity induced by therapy.

A randomized phase II trial of MEK and CDK4/6 inhibitors vesus tipiracil/trifluridine (TAS-102) in metastatic KRAS/NRAS mutant (mut) colorectal cancer (CRC).

116 Background: Constitutively activating KRAS or NRAS muts occur in ̃50% of CRC, increasing RAF-MEK-ERK signaling and causing overexpression of cyclin D1, which binds to cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) to drive cell cycle progression. Combination MEK and CDK4/6 inhibitors caused tumor regression in patient-derived xenografts of KRAS mut CRC. We hypothesized that binimetinib and palbociclib (B+P) would improve progression-free survival (PFS) compared to TAS-102 in refractory KRAS/NRAS mut mCRC. Methods: ACCRU-GI-1618 was a multicenter, randomized phase II clinical trial (NCT03981614). Key inclusion criteria were KRAS/NRAS mut mCRC, with prior fluoropyrimidine/ oxaliplatin/ irinotecan/ anti-VEGF therapy. There was a 6-patient safety run-in with binimetinib 30 mg po BID D1-28 and palbociclib 100 mg po daily D1-21. After, patients were randomized 1:1 to B+P vs TAS-102 (stratified by KRAS mut type and prior regorafenib use), with optional crossover at progression. The primary endpoint was PFS; 73 PFS events (from a sample size of 112) provided 90% power to detect improvement of PFS (hazard ratio = 0.5, i.e. median PFS of 2 vs. 4 months) with 1-sided α = 0.05. A prespecified interim analysis for futility was planned after 37 PFS events were observed, with completion of accrual if 1-sided stratified log-rank p-value &lt; 0.551. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) are estimated by stratified Cox proportional hazards models. Results: After the safety run-in, 93 patients at 6 sites were randomized; 82 (41 B+P, 41 TAS-102) comprise the primary analysis population (eligible, consented, and started treatment). In this population, median age was 52 years, 50% female, 68% left-sided, 79% with KRAS codon 12/13 mut, 12% with prior regorafenib. Enrollment was halted at interim analysis as the futility boundary was crossed (1-sided p = 0.67). At final analysis, 68 subjects had a PFS event (34 in each arm). Median PFS was 2.1 mo (95% CI 2.0-3.0) with B+P vs 2.1 mo (2.0-2.4) with TAS-102; HR 0.86 (0.52-1.44). 4-mo PFS rate was 22.2% (11.9-41.6) with B+P vs 10.6% (3.8-30.0) with TAS-102. With 37 OS events (14 in B+P arm), median OS was 7.7 mo (5.1-NE) with B+P vs 6.6 mo (4.8-8.9) with TAS-102; HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.39-1.51). TAS-102 had greater grade 3-4 hematologic AEs (46% vs 22%), and B+P had more grade 3-4 non-hematologic AEs (47% vs 32%). Grade 3-4 AEs more common with B+P were fatigue (8% vs 0%), oral mucositis (6% vs 0%), and nausea (4% vs 2%). Though 63% of patients on B+P had acneiform rash, only 2% was grade 3-4. Grade 1-2 diarrhea occurred in 35% of B+P and 24% of TAS-102 patients. No new safety signal was observed. Conclusions: B+P did not significantly improve median PFS or OS compared to TAS-102 in KRAS/NRAS mut mCRC. Subgroup analyses and translational studies are ongoing to determine which subgroups may be more likely to attain 4-mo PFS or identify mechanisms of resistance. Clinical trial information: NCT03981614.

Clonal dynamics of BRAF-driven drug resistance in EGFR-mutant lung cancer

Activation of MAPK signaling via BRAF mutations may limit the activity of EGFR inhibitors in EGFR-mutant lung cancer patients. However, the impact of BRAF mutations on the selection and fitness of emerging resistant clones during anti-EGFR therapy remains elusive. We tracked the evolution of subclonal mutations by whole-exome sequencing and performed clonal analyses of individual metastases during therapy. Complementary functional analyses of polyclonal EGFR-mutant cell pools showed a dose-dependent enrichment of BRAFV600E and a loss of EGFR inhibitor susceptibility. The clones remain stable and become vulnerable to combined EGFR, RAF, and MEK inhibition. Moreover, only osimertinib/trametinib combination treatment, but not monotherapy with either of these drugs, leads to robust tumor shrinkage in EGFR-driven xenograft models harboring BRAFV600E mutations. These data provide insights into the dynamics of clonal evolution of EGFR-mutant tumors and the therapeutic implications of BRAF co-mutations that may facilitate the development of treatment strategies to improve the prognosis of these patients.

Phase 1 Clinical Trial of Trametinib and Ponatinib in Patients With NSCLC Harboring KRAS Mutations

IntroductionSomatic KRAS mutations occur in 25% of patients with NSCLC. Treatment with MEK inhibitor monotherapy has not been successful in clinical trials to date. Compensatory activation of FGFR1 was identified as a mechanism of trametinib resistance in KRAS-mutant NSCLC, and combination therapy with trametinib and ponatinib was synergistic in in vitro and in vivo models. This study sought to evaluate this drug combination in patients with KRAS-mutant NSCLC. MethodsA phase 1 dose escalation study of trametinib and ponatinib was conducted in patients with advanced NSCLC with KRAS mutations. A standard 3-plus-3 dose escalation was done. Patients were treated with the study therapy until intolerable toxicity or disease progression. ResultsA total of 12 patients with KRAS-mutant NSCLC were treated (seven at trametinib 2 mg and ponatinib 15 mg, five at trametinib 2 mg and ponatinib 30 mg). Common toxicities observed were rash, diarrhea, and fever. Serious adverse events potentially related to therapy were reported in five patients, including one death in the study and four cardiovascular events. Serious events were observed at both dose levels. Of note, 75% (9 of 12) were assessable for radiographic response and no confirmed partial responses were observed. The median time on study was 43 days. ConclusionsIn this phase 1 study, in patients with KRAS-mutant advanced NSCLC, combined treatment with trametinib and ponatinib was associated with cardiovascular and bleeding toxicities. Exploring the combination of MEK and FGFR1 inhibition in future studies is potentially warranted but alternative agents should be considered to improve safety and tolerability.

RAF1 amplification drives a subset of bladder tumors and confers sensitivity to MAPK-directed therapeutics.

Bladder cancer is a genetically heterogeneous disease, and novel therapeutic strategies are needed to expand treatment options and improve clinical outcomes. Here, we identified a unique subset of urothelial tumors with focal amplification of the RAF1 (CRAF) kinase gene. RAF1-amplified tumors had activation of the RAF/MEK/ERK signaling pathway and exhibited a luminal gene expression pattern. Genetic studies demonstrated that RAF1-amplified tumors were dependent upon RAF1 activity for survival, and RAF1-activated cell lines and patient-derived models were sensitive to available and emerging RAF inhibitors as well as combined RAF plus MEK inhibition. Furthermore, we found that bladder tumors with HRAS- or NRAS-activating mutations were dependent on RAF1-mediated signaling and were sensitive to RAF1-targeted therapy. Together, these data identified RAF1 activation as a dependency in a subset making up nearly 20% of urothelial tumors and suggested that targeting RAF1-mediated signaling represents a rational therapeutic strategy.

EXTH-42. COMBINATION OF MAPK PATHWAY INHIBITORS AND IMMUNE CHECKPOINT BLOCKADE IN BRAF-MUTANT HIGH-GRADE GLIOMA

Abstract BACKGROUND Despite successes, clinical MAPK pathway inhibitors show limited anti-tumor activity in the majority of patients with BRAF-mutant high-grade glioma. Because of the presence of higher fraction of CD8+ tumor-infiltrating T cells in MAPK pathway-altered glioma, we explored the possibility that combined BRAF and MEK inhibition with immune checkpoint blockade enhances anti-tumor response. METHODS We engineered mice to carry BRAF V600E expression and CDKN2A deletion in various hemispheric areas. We treated syngeneic tumor-bearing mice with dabrafenib, trametinib, anti-PD-L1 and anti-CTLA-4 antibodies, and analyzed the tumor immune infiltrate by high-dimensional single-cell mass cytometry (CyTOF). RNA sequencing and Gene Set Enrichment Analysis were conducted using patient-derived BRAF-mutant glioma lines upon the inhibitor treatment. RESULTS The transcriptome analysis demonstrated that antigen processing and presentation feature is strongly enriched upon dual MAPK pathway inhibition. Consistent with these molecular changes, dabrafenib and trametinib treatment led to dynamic changes in tumor-infiltrating immune cells, including CD8+ and CD4+ T cells. In line with this, combination of MAPK pathway and immune checkpoint inhibitors elicit a significant survival benefit over MAPK pathway inhibition alone in mice with orthotopic BRAF-mutant glioma. CONCLUSIONS Clinically relevant molecular targeted therapy by dabrafenib and trametinib and immune checkpoint blockade synergize in pre-clinical models.

Erlotinib and Trametinib in Patients With EGFR-Mutant Lung Adenocarcinoma and Acquired Resistance to a Prior Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor.

Patients with metastatic EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma and acquired resistance to an EGFR TKI received combination erlotinib 75 mg and trametinib 1.5 mg daily until progression or unacceptable side effects. The primary objective was objective response rate determined using RECIST version 1.1. Twenty-three patients were accrued; patients had received a median of two lines of prior TKI therapy (61% prior osimertinib), and 48% had acquired EGFR T790M. We confirmed one partial response (1/23, 4%, 95% CI, 0 to 22). The median progression-free survival was 1.8 months, and the median overall survival was 21 months. Diarrhea (87%), acneiform rash (87%), and fatigue (52%) were the most common treatment-related adverse events. Two patients who had tumor shrinkage both harbored a BRAF fusion. Addition of trametinib to erlotinib in the acquired resistance setting in an unselected population is not efficacious. Future studies should focus on targeted therapies in molecularly selected populations. Acquired BRAF fusions in patients with EGFR-sensitizing mutations may be a molecular subset where EGFR and MEK combination therapy could be studied further.

Activating Immune Recognition in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma via Autophagy Inhibition, MEK Blockade, and CD40 Agonism

Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) have not yet benefitted from the revolution in cancer immunotherapy due in large part to a dominantly immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. MEK inhibition combined with autophagy inhibition leads to transient tumor responses in some patients with PDA. We examined the functional effects of combined MEK and autophagy inhibition on the PDA immune microenvironment and the synergy of combined inhibition of MEK and autophagy with CD40 agonism (aCD40) against PDA using immunocompetent model systems.We implanted immunologically "cold" murine PDA cells orthotopically in wide type C57BL/6J mice. We administered combinations of inhibitors of MEK1/2, inhibitors of autophagy, and aCD40 and measured anticancer efficacy and immune sequelae using mass cytometry and multiplexed immunofluorescence imaging analysis to characterize the tumor microenvironment. We also used human and mouse PDA cell lines and human macrophages in vitro to perform functional assays to elucidate the cellular effects induced by the treatments.We find that coinhibition of MEK (using cobimetinib) and autophagy (using mefloquine), but not either treatment alone, activates the STING/type I interferon pathway in tumor cells that in turn activates paracrine tumor associated macrophages toward an immunogenic M1-like phenotype. This switch is further augmented by aCD40. Triple therapy (cobimetinib + mefloquine + aCD40) achieved cytotoxic T-cell activation in an immunologically "cold" mouse PDA model, leading to enhanced antitumor immunity.MEK and autophagy coinhibition coupled with aCD40 invokes immune repolarization and is an attractive therapeutic approach for PDA immunotherapy development.

Phase I/II trial of concurrent extracranial palliative radiation therapy with Dabrafenib and Trametinib in metastatic BRAF V600E/K mutation-positive cutaneous Melanoma

BackgroundConcurrent treatment with BRAF inhibitors and palliative radiation therapy (RT) could be associated with increased toxicity, especially skin toxicity. Current Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) consensus guideline recommend ceasing BRAF inhibitors during RT. There is a lack of data regarding concurrent RT with combined BRAF and MEK inhibitors. This single-arm phase I/II trial was designed to assess the safety and tolerability of palliative RT with concurrent Dabrafenib and Trametinib in patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma. Materials and methodsPatients received Dabrafenib and Trametinib before and during palliative RT to soft tissue, nodal or bony metastases. The RT dose was escalated stepwise during the study period. Toxicity data including clinical photographs of the irradiated area was collected for up to 12 months following completion of RT. ResultsBetween June 2016 to October 2019, ten patients were enrolled before the study was stopped early due to low accrual rate. Six patients were treated at level 1 (20 Gy in 5 fractions, any location) and 4 patients at level 2a (30 Gy in 10 fractions with no abdominal viscera exposed). All alive patients completed one year of post-RT follow-up. Of the 82 adverse events (AEs) documented, the majority (90%) were grade 1 and 2. Eight grade 3 events (10%) occurred in five patients, only one was treatment-related (grade 3 fever due to Dabrafenib and Trametinib). No patients experienced grade 3 or 4 RT related toxicities, including skin toxicities. One serious AE was documented in relation to a grade 3 fever due to Dabrafenib and Trametinib requiring hospitalisation. ConclusionsThe lack of grade 3 and 4 RT-related toxicities in our study suggests that Dabrafenib and Trametinib may be continued concurrently during fractionated non-visceral palliative RT to extracranial sites.

Targeting mTOR signaling overcomes acquired resistance to combined BRAF and MEK inhibition in BRAF-mutant melanoma

Targeting MAPK pathway using a combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors is an efficient strategy to treat melanoma harboring BRAF-mutation. The development of acquired resistance is inevitable due to the signaling pathway rewiring. Combining western blotting, immunohistochemistry, and reverse phase protein array (RPPA), we aim to understanding the role of the mTORC1 signaling pathway, a center node of intracellular signaling network, in mediating drug resistance of BRAF-mutant melanoma to the combination of BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) and MEK inhibitor (MEKi) therapy. The mTORC1 signaling pathway is initially suppressed by BRAFi and MEKi combination in melanoma but rebounds overtime after tumors acquire resistance to the combination therapy (CR) as assayed in cultured cells and PDX models. In vitro experiments showed that a subset of CR melanoma cells was sensitive to mTORC1 inhibition. The mTOR inhibitors, rapamycin and NVP-BEZ235, induced cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in CR cell lines. As a proof-of-principle, we demonstrated that rapamycin and NVP-BEZ235 treatment reduced tumor growth in CR xenograft models. Mechanistically, AKT or ERK contributes to the activation of mTORC1 in CR cells, depending on PTEN status of these cells. Our study reveals that mTOR activation is essential for drug resistance of melanoma to MAPK inhibitors, and provides insight into the rewiring of the signaling networks in CR melanoma.

Abstract 324: Unbiased proteomic and phosphoproteomic analysis identifies response signatures and novel susceptibilities after combined MEK and mTOR inhibition in BRAFV600E mutant glioma

Abstract The mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway is one of the most frequently altered pathways in cancer. It is involved in the control of cell proliferation, invasion, metabolism, and can cause resistance to therapy. A number of aggressive malignancies including melanoma, colon cancer, and glioma, are driven by a constitutively activating missense mutation (V600E) in the BRAF component of the pathway. MEK inhibition is initially effective in targeting these cancers, but reflexive activation of mTOR signaling contributes to frequent therapy resistance. We have previously demonstrated that combination treatment with the MEK inhibitor trametinib and the dual mTORC1/2 inhibitor TAK228 improves survival and decreases vascularization in a BRAFV600E mutant glioma model. To elucidate the mechanism of action of this combination therapy and understand the ensuing tumor response, we performed comprehensive unbiased proteomic and phosphoproteomic characterization of BRAFV600E mutant glioma xenografts after short-course treatment with trametinib and TAK228. We identified 13,313 proteins and 30,928 localized phosphosites, of which 12,526 proteins and 17,444 phosphosites were quantified across all samples (data available via ProteomeXchange; identifier PXD022329). We identified distinct response signatures for each monotherapy and combination therapy and validated that combination treatment inhibited activation of the MAPK and mTOR pathways. Combination therapy also increased apoptotic signaling, suppressed angiogenesis signaling, and broadly suppressed the activity of the cyclin-dependent kinases. In addition, combination therapy had a profound impact on cancer cell metabolic pathways, increasing the expression of proteins (and their activating phosphorylations) involved in glycolysis, the tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle, nucleotide biosynthesis, and DNA replication. In response to combination therapy, both receptor tyrosine kinase and histone deacetylase proteins were activated. This study reports a detailed (phospho)proteomic analysis of the response of BRAFV600E mutant glioma to combined MEK and mTOR pathway inhibition and identifies new targets for the development of rational combination therapies for aggressive BRAF-driven tumors. Citation Format: Micah J. Maxwell, Antje Arnold, Heather Sweeney, Ljun Chen, Tung-Shing M. Lih, Michael Schnaubelt, Charles G. Eberhart, Jeffrey A. Rubens, Hui Zhang, David J. Clark, Eric H. Raabe. Unbiased proteomic and phosphoproteomic analysis identifies response signatures and novel susceptibilities after combined MEK and mTOR inhibition in BRAFV600E mutant glioma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr 324.

Abstract 2036: Plasticity and vulnerability associated with extrachromosomal and intrachromosomal BRAF amplifications

Abstract Cancer cells display two modes of focal amplifications (FA): extrachromosomal double minutes (DMs/ecDNAs) and intrachromosomal homogenously staining regions (HSRs). Understanding the plasticity of these two modes is critical for preventing targeted therapy resistance. We developed a combined BRAF plus MEK inhibitor resistance melanoma model that bears high BRAF amplifications through both ecDNA and HSR modes, and investigated FA dynamics in the context of drug resistance plasticity. Cells harboring FAs displayed mode switching between ecDNAs and HSRs, from both de novo genetic changes and selection of pre-existing subpopulations. We found that copy number plasticity is not exclusive to ecDNAs. Single cell-derived clones with HSRs also exhibit BRAF copy number and corresponding HSR length plasticity that allows them to respond to dose reduction and recover from drug addiction. In addition, upon kinase inhibitor escalation, we observed reproducible selection for cells with BRAF kinase domain duplications residing on ecDNAs. Whole genome sequencing of sublines with different FA formats allowed fine reconstructions of BRAF amplicon and revealed conserved structures during the transitions due to drug dose manipulations. The amplification boundaries in our cell line model were found consistent with those in clinically observed cases of combined BRAF/MAPK inhibitor resistance. RNA-seq and CRISPR screening performed on parental, ecDNA and HSR sublines revealed distinct biology and vulnerabilities associated with each kind of FA. Vulnerabilities for genes involved in ecDNA maintenance in DNA repair pathways identified in our model are consistent with previous reports, such as a role for DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK/PRKDC). Our screen reveals many new targets. In sum, the karyotypic plasticity of FAs allows cancer cells to respond to drug dose challenges through a myriad of mechanisms, including increases or decreases in DMs, shortening of HSRs, and acquisition of secondary resistance mechanisms. The cellular vulnerabilities identified in our study provide roadmaps for therapeutically targeting each kind of FA mode. Citation Format: Kai Song, Jenna Minami, Trevor Ridgley, Arthur Huang, Rachana Jayaraman, William Crosson, Jesus Salazar, Eli Pazol, Senaratne Niroshi, Rao Nagesh, Kim Paraiso, Thomas Graeber. Plasticity and vulnerability associated with extrachromosomal and intrachromosomal BRAF amplifications [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr 2036.

First line immunotherapy extends brain metastasis free survival, improves overall survival, and reduces the incidence of brain metastasis in patients with advanced melanoma.

BackgroundRecent advances in targeted therapy and immunotherapy have improved the prognosis of melanoma patients but brain metastasis remains a major challenge. Currently, it is unclear how existing therapies can be best used to prevent or treat brain metastasis in melanoma patients.AimsWe aimed to assess brain metastasis free survival (BMFS), overall survival (OS), incidence of brain metastases, and sequencing strategies of immunotherapy and targeted therapy in patients with BRAF‐mutated advanced melanoma.Methods and resultsWe retrospectively analyzed 683 patients with BRAF‐mutated advanced melanoma treated with first line (1L) immunotherapy (N = 266) or targeted therapy (N = 417). The primary outcome was BMFS. Secondary outcomes included OS of all patients and incidence of brain metastases in patients without documented brain metastases prior to 1L therapy. The median BMFS was 13.7 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 12.4–16.0] among all patients. The median BMFS for patients receiving 1L immunotherapy was 41.9 months [95% CI: 22.8–not reached (NR)] and targeted therapy was 11.0 months (95% CI: 8.8–12.5). Median OS results were qualitatively similar to BMFS results. The cumulative incidence of brain metastases for patients receiving 1L targeted therapy was higher than for patients receiving 1L immunotherapy (P < .001). Patients receiving 1L anti‐CTLA4 plus anti‐PD1 combination immunotherapy only or followed by second line (2L) targeted therapy had better BMFS (HR 0.40, 95% CI: 0.24–0.67, P = .001), improved OS (HR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.30–0.81, P = .005), and reduced incidence of brain metastases (HR 0.47, 95% CI: 0.24–0.67, P = .047) than patients receiving 1L combination BRAF and MEK targeted therapy followed by 2L immunotherapy.ConclusionPatients with advanced BRAF mutant melanoma treated with 1L immunotherapy have significantly longer BMFS and OS, and reduced incidence of brain metastases, compared with those treated with 1L targeted therapy. Further studies evaluating the ability of immunotherapy and targeted therapy to improve OS and prevent brain metastases are warranted

ERK signaling mediates resistance to immunomodulatory drugs in the bone marrow microenvironment.

Immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) have markedly improved patient outcome in multiple myeloma (MM); however, resistance to IMiDs commonly underlies relapse of disease. Here, we identify that tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor-associated factor 2 (TRAF2) knockdown (KD)/knockout (KO) in MM cells mediates IMiD resistance via activation of noncanonical nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) and extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) signaling. Within MM bone marrow (BM) stromal cell supernatants, TNF-α induces proteasomal degradation of TRAF2, noncanonical NF-κB, and downstream ERK signaling in MM cells, whereas interleukin-6 directly triggers ERK activation. RNA sequencing of MM patient samples shows nearly universal ERK pathway activation at relapse on lenalidomide maintenance therapy, confirming its clinical relevance. Combination MEK inhibitor treatment restores IMiD sensitivity of TRAF2 KO cells both in vitro and in vivo. Our studies provide the framework for clinical trials of MEK inhibitors to overcome IMiD resistance in the BM microenvironment and improve patient outcome in MM.

Sarcoid-like reaction in a BRAF V600E-mutated metastatic melanoma patient during treatment with BRAF/MEK-targeted therapy.

Treatment with combined BRAF and MEK inhibition is widely accepted as a first-line treatment option for patients with advanced BRAF V600E mutant melanoma. It is generally well-tolerated and has limited side-effects. However, we report a case of a sarcoid-like syndrome induced by treatment with dabrafenib/trametinib (D/T) in a patient with stage IV-M1d melanoma. Sarcoid-like syndrome is a known side-effect of immune checkpoint-inhibition therapy but has only rarely been described in BRAF/MEK inhibition. However, recognizing this side-effect is important because of potential misinterpretation as progressive disease and influence on treatment. We describe a 48-year-old female patient who initially presented with solitary brain metastasis and diffuse lung lesions. She was treated with D/T to which she had an initial response in all lesions. One year later, new hilar and mediastinal lymphadenopathies were detected. Imaging was suggestive of the sarcoid-like syndrome. An endoscopic biopsy of the enlarged lymph node showed no melanoma cells. Treatment was continued. Three months later, the patient experienced a drop in hemoglobin, which prompted further investigations into possible occult intestinal metastasis. Video capsule examination revealed a metastatic lesion in the small intestine. A treatment switch to the combination of checkpoint inhibitors nivolumab and ipilimumab successfully treated both lung and small intestine lesions. After the third dose of this combination therapy, she developed an immune-related pneumonitis. Treatment with corticosteroids resolved the pneumonitis and decreased metabolism in the sarcoid-like syndrome. The treatment was not restarted afterward. She remains free of the disease up to today, 2.5 years after diagnosis.