Search

Background: BRAF (v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1)/MEK (mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase) inhibitors are used for melanoma treatment. Unfortunately, patients treated with this combined therapy develop resistance to treatment quite quickly, but the mechanisms underlying this phenomenon are not yet fully understood. Here, we report and characterize two melanoma cell lines (WM9 and Hs294T) resistant to BRAF (vemurafenib) and MEK (cobimetinib) inhibitors. Methods: Cell viability was assessed via the XTT test. The level of selected proteins as well as activation of signaling pathways were evaluated using Western blotting. The expression of the chosen genes was assessed by RT-PCR. The distribution of cell cycle phases was analyzed by flow cytometry, and confocal microscopy was used to take photos of spheroids. The composition of cytokines secreted by cells was determined using a human cytokine array. Results: The resistant cells had increased survival and activation of ERK kinase in the presence of BRAF/MEK inhibitors. The IC50 values for these cells were over 1000 times higher than for controls. Resistant cells also exhibited elevated activation of AKT, p38, and JNK signaling pathways with increased expression of EGFR, ErbB2, MET, and PDGFRβ receptors as well as reduced expression of ErbB3 receptor. Furthermore, these cells demonstrated increased expression of genes encoding proteins involved in drug transport and metabolism. Resistant cells also exhibited features of epithelial-mesenchymal transition and cancer stem cells as well as reduced proliferation rate and elevated cytokine secretion. Conclusions: In summary, this work describes BRAF/MEK-inhibitor-resistant melanoma cells, allowing for better understanding the underlying mechanisms of resistance. The results may thus contribute to the development of new, more effective therapeutic strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Histiocytic sarcoma (HS) is a rare and highly aggressive cancer in humans and dogs. In dogs, it has a high prevalence in certain breeds, such as Bernese mountain dogs (BMDs) and flat-coated retrievers. Hemophagocytic histiocytic sarcoma (HHS) is a unique form of HS that presents with erythrophagocytosis. Due to its rareness, the study of HHS is very limited, and mutations in canine HHS patients have not been studied to date. In previous work, our research group identified two major PTPN11/SHP2 driver mutations, E76K and G503V, in HS in dogs. Here, we report additional mutations located in exon 3 of PTPN11/SHP2 in both HS and HHS cases, further supporting that this area is a mutational hotspot in dogs and that mutations in tumors and liquid biopsies should be evaluated utilizing comprehensive methods such as Sanger and NextGen sequencing. The overall prevalence of PTPN11/SHP2 mutations was 55.8% in HS and 46.2% in HHS. In addition, we identified mutations in KRAS, in about 3% of HS and 4% of HHS cases. These findings point to the shared molecular pathology of activation of the MAPK pathway in HS and HHS cases. We evaluated the efficacy of the highly specific MEK inhibitor, cobimetinib, in canine HS and HHS cell lines. We found that the IC50 values ranged from 74 to 372 nM, which are within the achievable and tolerable ranges for cobimetinib. This finding positions cobimetinib as a promising potential candidate for future canine clinical trials and enhances our understanding of the molecular defects in these challenging cancers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background BRAF (v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1)/MEK (mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase) inhibitors are used for melanoma treatment. Unfortunately, patients treated with this combined therapy develop resistance to treatment quite quickly, but the mechanisms underlying this phenomenon are not yet fully understood. Here, we report and characterize two melanoma cell lines (WM9 and Hs294T) resistant to BRAF (vemurafenib) and MEK (cobimetinib) inhibitors. Methods Cell viability was assessed via the XTT test. The level of selected proteins as well as activation of signaling pathways were evaluated using Western blotting. The expression of the chosen genes was assessed by RT-PCR. The distribution of cell cycle phases was analyzed by flow cytometry, and confocal microscopy was used to take photos of spheroids. The composition of cytokines secreted by cells was determined using a human cytokine array. Results The resistant cells had increased survival and activation of ERK kinase in the presence of BRAF/MEK inhibitors. The IC50 values for these cells were over 1000 times higher than for controls. Resistant cells also exhibited elevated activation of AKT, p38, and JNK signaling pathways with increased expression of EGFR, ErbB2, MET, and PDGFRβ receptors as well as reduced expression of ErbB3 receptor. Furthermore, these cells demonstrated increased expression of genes encoding proteins involved in drug transport and metabolism. Resistant cells also exhibited features of epithelial-mesenchymal transition and cancer stem cells as well as reduced proliferation rate and elevated cytokine secretion. Conclusions In summary, this work describes BRAF/MEK-inhibitor-resistant melanoma cells, allowing for better understanding the underlying mechanisms of resistance. The results may thus contribute to the development of new, more effective therapeutic strategies.

A novel approach for synthesis of Cobimetinib was reported, avoiding usage of a strong base in any of the steps with a chiral substrate. An efficient kinetic resolution of racemic key intermediate - tert-butyl 2-(3-hydroxyazetidin-3-yl)piperidine-1-carboxylate with L-tartaric acid was developed, by which enantiopure S-enantiomer was obtained as the corresponding diastereomeric tartrate salt, followed by peptide coupling with 3,4-difluoro-2-(2-fluoro-4-iodo-anilino) benzoic acid in mild conditions and avoiding the use of corresponding haloanhydrides, affording Boc-protected Cobimetinib. In the end, Cobimetinib was obtained in a total yield of 28.2%, calculated based on the S-enantiomer of the racemic key intermediate, via acid-mediated removal of Boc-protective group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) is a rare disease that belongs to the group of Dendritic and histiocytic neoplasms. Only 2000 cases have been reported worldwide. It can present with a wide range of symptoms, making a differential diagnosis especially difficult. The primary and most important diagnostic tool is a biopsy of the affected organ/tissue. Nowadays the analysis of different mutations affecting the BRAF and MAPK pathways makes it possible to use targeted treatments, such as vemurafenib, dabrafenib, or cobimetinib. Objective: Our aim is to present the results of three male patients treated in our hematology department. Results: Our BRAF mutation-positive patient presented with retroperitoneal tissue proliferation and diabetes insipidus. The initial therapy of choice was dabrafenib. After 3 months of treatment, 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)/computed tomography (CT) scans showed regression, and after 2 years of treatment, no disease activity was detected. In our second patient, a recurrent febrile state (not explained by other reasons) and diabetes insipidus suggested the diagnosis. A femoral bone biopsy confirmed BRAF-negative ECD. The first-line therapy was interferon-alpha. After 3 months of treatment, no response was observed on 18FDG-PET/CT, and treatment with cobimetinib was started. The control 18FDG-PET/CT imaging was negative. Our third patient was evaluated for dyspnea, and a CT scan showed fibrosis with hilar lymphadenomegaly. A lung biopsy confirmed BRAF-negative ECD. We started treatment with interferon-alpha, but unfortunately, no improvement was observed. Second-line treatment with cobimetinib resulted in a partial metabolic response (PMR) according to control 18FDG-PET/CT. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that an appropriately chosen treatment can lead to a good therapeutic response, but dose reduction may be necessary due to side effects. With advanced targeted therapeutic treatment options, survival and quality of life are significantly improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We report a case of congenital multisystem Langerhans cell histiocytosis with cutaneous and hematopoietic involvement. After the failure of first‐line (vinblastine and prednisolone) and second‐line (vincristine and cytarabine) therapies, treatment with cobimetinib, a mitogen‐activated protein kinase (MEK) inhibitor, led to the remission of disease and a sustained response after 11 months of ongoing treatment. Protein kinase inhibitors targeting BRAF or MEK could represent a promising future therapeutic option, also in children with LCH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Histiocytic sarcoma (HS) is a rare and highly aggressive cancer in humans and dogs. In dogs, it has a high prevalence in certain breeds, such as Bernese mountain dogs (BMDs) and flat-coated retrievers. Hemophagocytic histiocytic sarcoma (HHS) is a unique form of HS that presents with erythrophagocytosis. Due to its rareness, the study of HHS is very limited, and mutations in canine HHS patients have not been studied to date. In previous work, our research group identified two major PTPN11/SHP2 driver mutations, E76K and G503V, in HS in dogs. Here, we report additional mutations located in exon 3 of PTPN11/SHP2 in both HS and HHS cases, further supporting that this area is a mutational hotspot in dogs and that mutations in tumors and liquid biopsies should be evaluated utilizing comprehensive methods such as Sanger and NextGen sequencing. The overall prevalence of PTPN11/SHP2 mutations was 55.8% in HS and 46.2% in HHS. In addition, we identified mutations in KRAS, in about 3% of HS and 4% of HHS cases. These findings point to the shared molecular pathology of activation of the MAPK pathway in HS and HHS cases. We evaluated the efficacy of the highly specific MEK inhibitor, cobimetinib, in canine HS and HHS cell lines. We found that the IC50 values ranged from 74 to 372 nM, which are within the achievable and tolerable ranges for cobimetinib. This finding positions cobimetinib as a promising potential candidate for future canine clinical trials and enhances our understanding of the molecular defects in these challenging cancers.

Histiocytoses encompass a group of exceptionally rare disorders characterized by the abnormal infiltration of tissues by histocytes. Among these, Erdheim–Chester disease (ECD) stands out as a multisystem histiocytosis that typically affects bones and various other tissues. Historically, the treatment of ECD has been challenging. However, recent breakthroughs in our understanding, particularly the discovery of somatic mutations in the RAS-MAPK pathway, have opened new opportunities for targeted therapy in a significant subset of patients with ECD and other histiocytoses. In this report, we present the case of a patient with ECD harboring a previously unidentified microduplication in the NRAS gene in a small fraction of skin cells. This discovery played a pivotal role in tailoring an effective therapeutic approach involving kinase inhibitors downstream of NRAS. This case underscores the crucial role of deep sequencing of tissue samples in ECD, enabling the delivery of personalized targeted therapy to patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

IntroductionErdheim-Chester disease (ECD) is a rare disease that belongs to the group of Dendritic and histiocytic neoplasms. Only 2000 cases have been reported worldwide. It can present with a wide range of symptoms, making a differential diagnosis especially difficult. The primary and most important diagnostic tool is a biopsy of the affected organ/tissue. Nowadays the analysis of different mutations affecting the BRAF and MAPK pathways makes it possible to use targeted treatments, such as vemurafenib, dabrafenib, or cobimetinib.ObjectiveOur aim is to present the results of three male patients treated in our hematology department.ResultsOur BRAF mutation-positive patient presented with retroperitoneal tissue proliferation and diabetes insipidus. The initial therapy of choice was dabrafenib. After 3 months of treatment, 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET)/computed tomography (CT) scans showed regression, and after 2 years of treatment, no disease activity was detected. In our second patient, a recurrent febrile state (not explained by other reasons) and diabetes insipidus suggested the diagnosis. A femoral bone biopsy confirmed BRAF-negative ECD. The first-line therapy was interferon-alpha. After 3 months of treatment, no response was observed on 18FDG-PET/CT, and treatment with cobimetinib was started. The control 18FDG-PET/CT imaging was negative. Our third patient was evaluated for dyspnea, and a CT scan showed fibrosis with hilar lymphadenomegaly. A lung biopsy confirmed BRAF-negative ECD. We started treatment with interferon-alpha, but unfortunately, no improvement was observed. Second-line treatment with cobimetinib resulted in a partial metabolic response (PMR) according to control 18FDG-PET/CT.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate that an appropriately chosen treatment can lead to a good therapeutic response, but dose reduction may be necessary due to side effects. With advanced targeted therapeutic treatment options, survival and quality of life are significantly improved.

BackgroundWe sought to identify patient subgroups with distinct postprogression overall survival (ppOS) outcomes and investigate the impact of original treatment assignment and initial postprogression treatment (ppRx) on ppOS.MethodsRecursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was performed to model relationships between prespecified covariates and ppOS in patients with BRAFV600-mutated metastatic melanoma who had experienced progressive disease (PD) following treatment with cobimetinib plus vemurafenib, vemurafenib monotherapy, or dacarbazine in the BRIM-2, BRIM-3, BRIM-7, and coBRIM studies. Prognostic subgroups identified by RPA were then applied to pooled treatment cohorts. The primary endpoint was ppOS, defined as time from first PD to death from any cause.ResultsRPA identified baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), baseline disease stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at PD, and ppRx as significant prognostic factors for ppOS. Median ppOS was longest in patients with normal baseline LDH, stage M1c disease at baseline, and ppRx with immunotherapy or targeted therapy (12.2 months; 95% CI 10.3-16.1) and shortest in those with elevated baseline LDH > 2 × upper limit of normal (2.3 months; 95% CI 1.8-2.7). Original treatment assignment did not impact ppOS. Across treatment cohorts, patients treated with immunotherapy or targeted therapy after PD had better ppOS than those given other treatments.ConclusionA combination of factors at baseline (LDH, disease stage) and PD (performance status, ppRx) impact ppOS outcomes. ppRx with immunotherapy or targeted therapy is an independent prognostic factor for improved overall survival following progression regardless of original treatment. Trial registration The trials included in this analysis are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00949702 (BRIM-2), NCT01006980 (BRIM-3), NCT01271803 (BRIM-7), and NCT01689519 (coBRIM).

Langerhans cells histiocytosis is a variant of malignant histiocytosis. The course and symptoms vary. patients with localized forms have a better prognosis, because local therapy is effective. patients with multifocal forms of histiocytosis receive systemic drug therapy, which cures some of the patients. This review provides up-to-date data about typical presentation of the organ involvement, diagnosis, course and therapy of various forms of Langerhans cells histiocytosis.

Histiocytoses encompass a group of exceptionally rare disorders characterized by the abnormal infiltration of tissues by histocytes. Among these, Erdheim–Chester disease (ECD) stands out as a multisystem histiocytosis that typically affects bones and various other tissues. Historically, the treatment of ECD has been challenging. However, recent breakthroughs in our understanding, particularly the discovery of somatic mutations in the RAS-MAPK pathway, have opened new opportunities for targeted therapy in a significant subset of patients with ECD and other histiocytoses. In this report, we present the case of a patient with ECD harboring a previously unidentified microduplication in the NRAS gene in a small fraction of skin cells. This discovery played a pivotal role in tailoring an effective therapeutic approach involving kinase inhibitors downstream of NRAS. This case underscores the crucial role of deep sequencing of tissue samples in ECD, enabling the delivery of personalized targeted therapy to patients.

BackgroundFollowing the increased survival of patients with metastatic melanoma thanks to immunotherapy and targeted therapy, neoadjuvant approaches are being investigated to address the unmet needs of unresponsive and intolerant patients. We aim to investigate the efficacy of neoadjuvant plus adjuvant combined or sequenced vemurafenib, cobimetinib and atezolizumab in patients with high-risk, resectable BRAF-mutated and wild-type melanoma.MethodsThe study is a phase II, open-label, randomized non-comparative trial in patients with stage IIIB/C/D surgically resectable, BRAF-mutated and wild-type melanoma, with three possible treatments: (1) vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily from day 1 to 42; (2) vemurafenib 720 mg twice daily from day 1 to 42; (3) cobimetinib 60 mg once daily from day 1 to 21 and from day 29 to 42; and (4) atezolizumab 840 mg for two cycles (day 22 and day 43).Patients will be randomized to three different arms: A) BRAF-mutated patients will receive over 6 weeks (1) + (3); B) BRAF-mutated patients will receive over 6 weeks (2) + (3) + (4); C) BRAF wild-type patients will receive over 6 weeks (3) + (4). All patients will also receive atezolizumab 1200 mg every 3 weeks for 17 cycles after surgery and after a second screening period (up to 6 weeks).DiscussionNeoadjuvant therapy for regional metastases may improve operability and outcomes and facilitate the identification of biomarkers that can guide further lines of treatment. Patients with clinical stage III melanoma may especially benefit from neoadjuvant treatment, as the outcomes of surgery alone are very poor. It is expected that the combination of neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment may reduce the incidence of relapse and improve survival.Clinical trial registrationeudract.ema.europa.eu/protocol.htm, identifier 2018-004841-17.

Simple Summary: A decade ago, the diagnosis of metastatic melanoma was mostly a death sentence. This has changed since new therapies became widely available in the clinical setting. In addition to checkpoint inhibitors, targeted therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors is standard care for BRAF-mutated melanoma, which accounts for almost half of all melanoma cases. The second largest group of melanoma patients, whose tumors harbor a mutation in the NRAS gene, demonstrates only a limited response to targeted therapy with MEK inhibitors. The aim of this investigation was to directly compare all possible BRAF/MEK inhibitor combinations in addition to the currently applied regimens. The analyzed data suggested that the combination of the BRAF inhibitor encorafenib and the MEK inhibitor trametinib demonstrated the highest anti-tumor activity in both, BRAF- and NRAS-mutated melanoma. This combination is not presently used in patient treatment, and therefore, deserves an opportunity to become part of clinical trials. BRAFV600 mutations in melanoma are targeted with mutation-specific BRAF inhibitors in combination with MEK inhibitors, which have significantly increased overall survival, but eventually lead to resistance in most cases. Additionally, targeted therapy for patients with NRASmutant melanoma is difficult. Our own studies showed that BRAF inhibitors amplify the effects of MEK inhibitors in NRASmutant melanoma. This study aimed at identifying a BRAF and MEK inhibitor combination with superior anti-tumor activity to the three currently approved combinations. We, thus, assessed anti-proliferative and pro-apoptotic activities of all nine as well as resistance-delaying capabilities of the three approved inhibitor combinations in a head-to-head comparison in vitro. The unconventional combination encorafenib/trametinib displayed the highest activity to suppress proliferation and induce apoptosis, acting in an additive manner in BRAFmutant and in a synergistic manner in NRASmutant melanoma cells. Correlating with current clinical studies of approved inhibitor combinations, encorafenib/binimetinib prolonged the time to resistance most efficiently in BRAFmutant cells. Conversely, NRASmutant cells needed the longest time to establish resistance when treated with dabrafenib/trametinib. Together, our data indicate that the most effective combination might not be currently used in clinical settings and could lead to improved overall responses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background / Aim: Up until ten years ago stage four melanoma was considered a disease with extremely poor prognosis. Standard therapy during this period of time was dacarbazine chemotherapy. Patients with better performance status were treated with immunotherapy cytokine IL-2. In the last ten years eight medications have been approved by the FDA for the therapy of melanoma. The goal of this study was to determine objective response rate (ORR), median overall survival (OS), median progression free survival (PFS) and safety in patients with advanced and metastatic cutaneous melanoma treated with targeted therapy and immunotherapy at the University Clinical Centre of the Republic of Srpska (Centre). Methods: A non-randomised observational retrospective/prospective trial was conducted to investigate first experiences with the use of targeted therapy and immunotherapy at the Centre and compare the results with the literature data. A total of 23 patients received BRAF targeted therapy for the treatment of metastatic cutaneous melanoma in the first line of treatment. Nine patients received vemurafenib, fourteen patients received a combination of BRAF/MEK inhibitor. Nine patients were treated with pembrolizumab immunotherapy. The trial was performed in a period from May 2017 until December 2020. Results: In patients receiving vemurafenib ORR was 44.4 %, median PFS was 5 months (95 % CI, 1 to 11) and the median OS was 9 months (95 % CI, 2 to 17). In the vemurafenib/cobimetinib group ORR was 71.4 %. Median PFS was 9 months and median OS was 12 months. ORR in patients receiving pembrolizumab was 22.9 %, median PFS was 3 months (95 % CI, 1 to 11) and the median OS was 4.5 months (95 % CI, 2 to 12). Results in all three groups were inferior compared to the results from the literature except for ORR in patients receiving vemurafenib and vemurafenib/cobimetinib. Adverse events were tolerable and manageable and were similar to those described in the literature. Conclusion: Based on the experience with the targeted and immunotherapy in the Centre, which was presented in this study, it was concluded that in conditions when there is limited access to drugs, the greatest benefit have the patients who meet the inclusion criteria in clinical trials.

BackgroundIn the coBRIM study, cobimetinib plus vemurafenib (C+V) significantly improved survival outcomes vs placebo and vemurafenib (P+V) in patients with advanced/metastatic BRAFV600-mutated melanoma. An analysis of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) from coBRIM is reported.MethodsPatients completing the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) at baseline and ⩾1 time point thereafter constituted the analysis population. Change from baseline ⩾10 points was considered clinically meaningful.ResultsMean baseline scores for all QLQ-C30 domains were similar between arms. Most on-treatment scores for QLQ-C30 domains were also comparable between arms. A transient deterioration in role function in cycle 1 day 15 (C1D15; -14.7 points) in the P+V arm and improvement in insomnia in the C+V arm at C2D15 (-12.4 points) was observed. Among patients who experienced a ⩾10-point change from baseline (responders), between-group differences were greatest for insomnia (16%), social functioning (10%), fatigue (9%) and pain (7%), all favouring C+V. Diarrhoea, photosensitivity reaction, pyrexia, and rash did not meaningfully affect global health status (GHS). Serous retinopathy was associated with a transient decrease in GHS at C1D15 assessment.ConclusionsIn patients with advanced/metastatic BRAFV600-mutated melanoma, treatment with C+V maintained HRQOL compared with P+V, with superior efficacy.

Mª del Carmen Álamo,1 Sebastian Ochenduszko,2 Guillermo Crespo,3 Mónica Corral,4 Juana Oramas,5 Pilar Sancho,6 Javier Medina,7 Fernando Garicano,8 Pedro López,9 Begoña Campos Balea,10 Analia Rodríguez Garzotto,11 Eva Muñoz-Couselo12,13 1Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Sevilla, Spain; 2Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Dr. Peset, Valencia, Spain; 3Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario de Burgos, Burgos, Spain; 4Oncology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa, Zaragoza, Spain; 5Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain; 6Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Sevilla, Spain; 7Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Salud, Toledo, Spain; 8Oncology Department, Hospital de Galdakao, Bizkaia, Spain; 9Oncology Department, Complejo Hospitalario General de Jaén, Jaén, Spain; 10Oncology Department, Hospital Lucus Augusti, Lugo, Spain; 11Medical Department and Strategy, Roche S.A, Madrid, Spain; 12Oncology Department, Hospital Universitario Vall d´Hebron, Barcelona, Spain; 13VHIO Vall d’Hebron Institute on Oncology, Barcelona, SpainCorrespondence: Eva Muñoz-CouseloOncology Department, Hospital Universitario Vall d´Hebron, Passeig de la Vall d’Hebron, 119, Barcelona, 08035, SpainEmail emunoz@vhio.netBackground: The combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors delays the onset of resistance and provides more sustained and dramatic responses in comparison with a BRAF inhibitor in monotherapy. The objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the combination therapy with vemurafenib/cobimetinib in terms of durability, and to describe differential characteristics in patients associated to durable responses in real-world settings.Patients and Methods: Retrospective, observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study involving 41 patients with advanced melanoma harboring a BRAFV600 mutation who initiated a combination therapy with vemurafenib/cobimetinib between May 2018 and March 2019. Participants were differentiated regarding the durability of the response: durable (complete response, CR, or a partial response, PR, for at least 12 months) and non-durable (stable disease, SD, progressive disease, PD, or CR/PR < 12 months). Secondary endpoints included treatment adherence, labor productivity, anxiety/depression, and safety profile.Results: During the combination therapy, 12 patients (29.3%) had a CR, 19 a PR (46.3%), 5 showed SD (12.2%), and 5 had PD. A total of 12 patients (29.3%) were considered as achieving a durable response and 29 (70.7%) as a non-durable one. Practically all sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were similar between patients. Body mass index was the only differential factor (with higher body mass index achieving a non-durable response). The treatment adherence was 100% in patients with durable response and 66.7% in those with non-durable.Conclusion: The combination treatment with vemurafenib/cobimetinib results in an important impact on long-term survival, leading to a steady CR in one-third of the patients.Keywords: vemurafenib, cobimetinib, BRAF, metastatic melanoma, durable response, clinical practice

BackgroundMetastatic melanoma is an aggressive form of skin cancer with a high mortality rate and the fastest growing global incidence rate of all malignancies. The introduction of BRAF/MEK inhibitor combinations has yielded significant increases in PFS and OS for melanoma. However, at present, no direct comparisons between different BRAF/MEK combinations have been conducted. In light of this, an indirect treatment comparison was performed between two BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination therapies for metastatic melanoma, dabrafenib plus trametinib and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib, in order to understand the relative efficacy and toxicity profiles of these therapies.MethodsA systematic literature search identified two randomized trials as suitable for indirect comparison: the coBRIM trial of vemurafenib plus cobimetinib versus vemurafenib and the COMBI-v trial of dabrafenib plus trametinib versus vemurafenib. The comparison followed the method of Bucher et al. and analyzed both efficacy (overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS], and overall response rate [ORR]) and safety outcomes (adverse events [AEs]).ResultsThe indirect comparison revealed similar efficacy outcomes between both therapies, with no statistically significant difference between therapies for OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 - 1.30), PFS (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.79 - 1.40), or ORR (risk ratio [RR] 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 - 1.10). Dabrafenib plus trametinib differed significantly from vemurafenib plus cobimetinib with regard to the incidence of treatment-related AE (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87 - 0.97), any AE grade ≥3 (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.60 - 0.85) or dose interruption/modification (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 - 0.99). Several categories of AEs occurred significantly more frequently with vemurafenib plus cobimetinib, while some occurred significantly more frequently with dabrafenib plus trametinib. For severe AEs (grade 3 or above), four occurred significantly more frequently with vemurafenib plus cobimetinib and no severe AE occurred significantly more frequently with dabrafenib plus trametinib.ConclusionsThis indirect treatment comparison suggested that dabrafenib plus trametinib had comparable efficacy to vemurafenib plus cobimetinib but was associated with reduced adverse events.

BackgroundSerous chorioretinopathy has been associated with MEK inhibitors, including cobimetinib. We describe the clinical features of serous retinopathy observed with cobimetinib in patients with BRAF V600-mutated melanoma treated in the Phase III coBRIM study.MethodsIn the coBRIM study, 493 patients were treated in two randomly assigned treatment groups: cobimetinib and vemurafenib (n = 247) or vemurafenib (n = 246). All patients underwent prospective ophthalmic examinations at screening, at regular intervals during the study, and whenever ocular symptoms developed. Patients with serous retinopathy were identified in the study database using a group of relevant and synonymous adverse event terms.ResultsEighty-six serous retinopathy events were reported in 70 patients (79 events in 63 cobimetinib and vemurafenib-treated patients vs seven events in seven vemurafenib-treated patients). Most patients with serous retinopathy identified by ophthalmic examination had no symptoms or had mild symptoms, among them reduced visual acuity, blurred vision, dyschromatopsia, and photophobia. Serous retinopathy usually occurred early during cobimetinib and vemurafenib treatment; median time to onset was 1.0 month. Most events were managed by observation and continuation of cobimetinib without dose modification and resolved or were resolving by the data cutoff date (19 Sept 2014).ConclusionsCobimetinib treatment was associated with serous retinopathy in patients with BRAF V600-mutated melanoma. Retinopathy was generally asymptomatic or mild. Periodic ophthalmologic evaluations at regular intervals and at the manifestation of any visual disturbance are recommended to facilitate early detection and resolution of serous retinopathy while patients are taking cobimetinib. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01689519). First received: September 18, 2012.

Introduction: Chemoresistance remains the main cause of treatment failure in cervical cancer and novel therapeutic strategies are required. Cobimetinib, a potent yet selective inhibitor of MEK1 and 2, is currently used to treat melanoma clinically. In this work, we identified cobimetinib as a promising candidate for treating cervical cancer. Methods: The in vitro and in vivo efficacies of cobimetinib were examined using cervical cancer cell cultures and xenograft mouse model. Its combination with paclitaxel was analyzed using the combination index. Immunoblotting was performed on MAPK and ERK pathways. Results: Cobimetinib displays a potent anti-cervical cancer activity in a panel of cell lines regardless of cellular origin and HPV presence, and its combination with paclitaxel is synergistic in inhibiting cervical cancer cells. This is achieved by the growth inhibition and caspase-dependent apoptosis induction, through inhibiting MAPK/ERK activation. In addition, paclitaxel activates ERK in cervical cancer cells, and this can be reversed by cobimetinib. We finally confirm the efficacy of cobimetinib alone and its combination with paclitaxel in the cervical cancer xenograft mouse model. Discussion/Conclusion: Our preclinical findings will accelerate the initialization of clinical trials to use combination of cobimetinib and paclitaxel for treating cervical cancer. Our work also emphasizes the therapeutic value of targeting MAPK/ERK to overcome chemoresistance in cervical cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The combination of vemurafenib, a proto-oncogene B-Raf inhibitor (BRAFi) and cobimetinib, an inhibitor of mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEKi) has shown to improve survival in patients with BRAF V600-mutated melanoma. BRAF mutations are also frequently detected driver mutations in other tumor types, including thyroid carcinoma. Since thyroid carcinoma is not a labeled indication for BRAF/MEKi, a cohort for patients with BRAF V600-mutated thyroid carcinoma was opened within the Drug Rediscovery Protocol (DRUP), a national ongoing pan-cancer multi-drug trial, in which patients receive off-label treatment with approved drugs based on their molecular tumor profile. Results: Here, we present two patients with BRAF-mutated thyroid carcinoma, who were successfully treated with vemurafenib/cobimetinib administered via a feeding tube. Plasma concentrations of vemurafenib and cobimetinib were determined. A partial response was observed in both patients, but they experienced significant toxicity. Conclusion: Our cases show that vemurafenib/cobimetinib treatment is effective in BRAF V600-mutated thyroid carcinoma, also when administered via a feeding tube. Although serious side effects occurred in both patients, we hypothesize that this was not attributable to the administration route. Therefore, administration of vemurafenib/cobimetinib by feeding tube is feasible and effective. Trial registration: Clinical trial identification: NCT02925234. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Craniopharyngioma (CP) is an intracranial benign tumor that behaves aggressively due to its location, infiltration of the surrounding nervous tissue and high capacity for recurrence. Treatment of choice is surgery followed or not by radiotherapy. Recent advances in molecular biology techniques and the better understanding of the genetic alterations of the two histological types of CP have open new therapeutic perspectives with targeted drugs. Adamantinomatous CP (ACP) is associated with activating mutations of the CTNNB1 gene. Such mutations are accompanied by intracellular accumulation of β-catenin, an oncogenic protein that activates the intracellular Wnt/ β-catenin signaling pathway, which regulates the transcription of genes involved in cell proliferation. Therefore, the use of molecular therapies directed against the activation of the Wnt/ β-catenin pathway could be an attractive and promising therapeutic option in the management of ACPs. On the other hand, papillary CP (PCP) is associated with activating mutations in the BRAF gene. This gene encodes a BRAF protein that plays an important role in the intracellular mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathway, which also regulates cell proliferation. The use of BRAF inhibitors either in monotherapy or in combination with mitogen-activated protein kinase (MEK) inhibitors has demonstrated therapeutic efficacy in isolated clinical cases of relapsed PCPs. A preliminary report of a recent phase II clinical trial has shown a therapeutic response in 93.7% of patients with BRAFV600E -mutated PCP, with an 85% reduction in tumor size. In the present review we comment on the efficacy and safety of the different drugs being used in patients with PCP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Opinion statement: Modern therapy of advanced melanoma offers effective targeted therapeutic options in the form of BRAF plus MEK inhibition for patients with BRAF V600 mutations. For patients lacking these mutations, checkpoint inhibition remains the only first-line choice for treatment of metastatic disease. However, approximately half of patients do not respond to immunotherapy, requiring effective options for a second-line treatment. Advances in genetic profiling have found other possible target molecules, especially a wide array of rare non-V600 BRAF mutations which may respond to available targeted therapy. More information on the characteristics of such mutants is needed to further assess the efficacy of targeted therapies in the metastatic and adjuvant setting of advanced melanoma. Thus, it may be helpful to classify known BRAF mutations by their kinase activation status and dependence on alternative signaling pathways. While BRAF V600 mutations appear to have an overall more prominent role of kinase activity for tumor growth, non-V600 BRAF mutations show great differences in kinase activation and, hence, response to BRAF plus MEK inhibition. When BRAF-mutated melanomas rely on additional signaling molecules such as RAS for tumor growth, greater benefit may be expected from MEK inhibition than BRAF inhibition. In other cases, mutations of c-kit or NRAS may serve as important pharmacological targets in advanced melanoma. However, since benefit from currently available targeted therapies for non-V600 mutants is usually inferior regarding response and long-term outcome, checkpoint inhibitors remain the standard recommended first-line therapy for these patients. Herein, we review the current clinical data for characteristics and response to targeted therapy of melanomas lacking a V600 BRAF mutation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The phase III IMspire150 study (NCT02908672) demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) with atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) versus placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group) in patients with BRAF V600-mutated advanced melanoma. We report exploratory biomarker analyses to optimize targeting of patients who are more likely to benefit from triplet combination therapy. Five hundred fourteen patients were randomized to atezolizumab (n = 256) or control (n = 258). Outcomes were evaluated in subgroups defined by key biomarkers, including programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and interferon-γ (IFN-γ) gene signature. Exploratory recursive partitioning analysis was then used to model associations between PFS and baseline covariates, including key biomarkers. PFS benefit for atezolizumab versus control was greater in patients with high TMB [≥10 mutations/Mb; hazard ratio (HR) 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-1.02; P = 0.067] versus low TMB (<10 mutations/Mb; HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.65-1.30; P = 0.64) and similar between patients with strong IFN-γ (≥median; HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.54-1.06) versus weak IFN-γ (

Helena Pópulo,1– 3 Beatriz Domingues,1,2 Cristina Sampaio,1,2 José Manuel Lopes,1– 4 Paula Soares1– 3 1Institute of Molecular Pathology and Immunology, IPATIMUP, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal; 2Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde, Universidade do Porto, Porto, Portugal; 3Department of Pathology, Medical Faculty, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal; 4Department of Pathology, Hospital São João, Porto, PortugalCorrespondence: Helena PópuloInstitute of Molecular Pathology and Immunology, IPATIMUP, University of Porto, Rua Júlio Amaral de Carvalho, 45, Porto, 4200-135, PortugalTel +351 225570700Fax +351 225570799Email hpopulo@ipatimup.ptBackground: Melanoma accounts for only 1% of all skin malignant tumors; however, it is the deadliest form of skin cancer. Since 2011, FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approved several novel therapeutic strategies, such as MAPK pathway targeted therapies, to treat cutaneous melanoma patients. However, their improvements in overall survival were limited, due to the development of resistance.Methods: In this work, several combinations of therapies, including the metabolic modulator DCA, were tested in melanoma cell lines, considering that MAPK and PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathways are deregulated and interconnected in melanoma and that the presence of the Warburg effect in melanoma cells may influence the response to therapy. The effect of the treatments was assessed in the proliferation and survival of melanoma cell lines with different genetic profiles. Also, the possibility to overcome resistance to the treatment with vemurafenib was tested.Results: In general, higher decrease in cell viability and cell proliferation and increase in apoptosis were obtained after the combination treatments, comparing with single treatments, in all the studied cell lines. The combination of cobimetinib and everolimus appear to be the best treatment option. The BRAFV600E -vemurafenib resistant melanoma cell line showed to retain sensitivity to both everolimus and DCA.Discussion and Conclusion: Our results suggest that the combination of MAPK pathway inhibitors with mTOR pathway inhibitors and DCA should be considered as therapeutic options to treat melanoma patients, as the combinations potentiated the effects of each drug alone. In a cell line resistant to vemurafenib, we verified that combined MAPK inhibitors with inhibition of mTOR pathway and/or DCA metabolism modulation might constitute possible strategies in order to overcome resistance to MAPK inhibition.Keywords: melanoma, vemurafenib, cobimetinib, everolimus, DCA, metabolism

Vemurafenib ha probado ser una herramienta útil en el tratamiento de melanoma metastásico con mutación BRAF-V600E. Los efectos adversos incluyen artralgias, fatiga y toxicidad cutánea, siendo infrecuente la paniculitis. Presentamos el caso de una paciente de 43 años con melanoma metastásico que desarrolla lesiones subcutáneas dolorosas en miembros inferiores y superiores, asociadas a clínica sistémica después de 2 semanas de inicio de tratamiento con Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib. La histología demostró paniculitis linfocitaria septal y lobulillar. La paciente tuvo mala tolerancia al tratamiento anti diana a dosis plenas, requiriendo su ajuste, generando una corticodependencia para controlar sintomatología, y que finalmente obligó a la descontinuación de la terapia dirigida contra melanoma.  A la fecha, se han descrito 29 casos en la literatura de paniculitis asociada a vemurafenib, siendo la mayoría paniculitis neutrofílicas con adecuado control de sintomatología asociando antiinflamatorios no esteroidales y/o corticoides orales sin requerir en su mayoría modificación de la terapia contra melanoma; sin embargo hay que tener presente que pueden haber casos con mala evolución que obligan a la reducción de dosis de vemurafenib y descontinuar el tratamiento, como ha ocurrido en nuestro reporte.Vemurafenib has proven to be a useful tool in the treatment of metastatic melanoma with BRAF-V600E mutation. Adverse effects include arthralgia, fatigue, and skin toxicity; panniculitis is a rare complication. We present the case of a 43-year-old patient with metastatic melanoma who developed painful subcutaneous nodules of the lower and upper limbs and associated systemic clinical symptoms after 2 weeks of treatment with vemurafenib plus cobimetinib. Histology showed a septal and lobular lymphocytic panniculitis.The patient had poor tolerance of the full-dose treatment, requiring its adjustment. Systemic corticosteroids were required to control symptomatology, which finally forced the discontinuation of the medication.To date, 29 cases have been described in the literature of panniculitis associated with vemurafenib. Most of these have been neutrophilic panniculitis, but adequate control of symptoms is usually achieved with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and/or oral corticosteroids without requiring modification of melanoma therapy. However, it must be borne in mind that there may be cases that force the reduction and discontinuation ofvemurafenib treatment. We believe that this histological variant of lymphocytic panniculitis and its poor response to decrease in vemurafenib makes this case unusual and instructive.

Objective Cobimetinib, a MEK1/2 inhibitor, was administered to patients with advanced solid tumors to assess safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and anti-tumor activity. Methods For dose-escalation, a 3 + 3 design was used. Oral cobimetinib was administered once daily on a 21-day on/7-day off (21/7) or a 14-day on/14-day off (14/14) schedule. Serial plasma samples were collected for pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis on Day 1 and at steady state. In expansion stages, patients with RAS or RAF mutant tumors were treated at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the 21/7 or 14/14 schedule. Results Ninety-seven patients received cobimetinib. In the 21/7 dose escalation, 36 patients enrolled in 8 cohorts (0.05 mg/kg-80 mg). Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were Grade 4 hepatic encephalopathy, Grade 3 diarrhea, and Grade 3 rash. In the 14/14 dose escalation, 20 patients enrolled in 4 cohorts (60-125 mg). DLTs were Grade 3 rash and Grade 3 blurred vision associated with presence of reversible subretinal fluid. The MTD was 60 mg on 21/7 schedule and 100 mg on 14/14 schedule. Cobimetinib PK showed dose-proportional increases in exposure. The most frequent adverse events attributed to cobimetinib were diarrhea, rash, fatigue, edema, nausea, and vomiting. In patients treated at the 60-mg (21/7) or 100-mg (14/14) dose, one unconfirmed complete response and 6 confirmed partial responses were observed. All responses occurred in melanoma patients; 6 harbored the BRAF(V600E) mutation. Conclusions Cobimetinib is generally well tolerated and durable responses were observed in BRAF(V600E) mutant melanoma patients. Evaluation of cobimetinib in combination with other therapies is ongoing.

Despite advances in early detection as described in part 1 of this continuing medical education series, melanoma continues to be a large contributor to cutaneous cancer-related mortality. In a subset of patients with unresectable or metastatic disease, surgical clearance is often not possible; therefore, systemic and local therapies are considered. The second article in this series provides dermatologists with an up-to-date working knowledge of the treatment options that may be prescribed by oncologists for patients with unresectable stage III, stage IV, and recurrent melanoma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Progressive nodular histiocytosis is a rare variant of non‐Langerhans cell histiocytosis that affects the skin and mucous membranes and displays a progressive clinical course and poor response to treatment. We describe a case of severe progressive nodular histiocytosis harboring a KRAS p.G12S mutation in a 9‐year‐old boy, refractory to chemotherapy, who was successfully treated with the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib. This is the first report of the use of MEK inhibition for this histiocytosis subtype in a pediatric patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The treatment of metastatic melanoma has been revolutionized by the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors and BRAF/MEK inhibition. Nevertheless, almost half of patients will progress or show primary resistance to treatment. The combination of BRAF/MEK and immune checkpoint inhibition might achieve higher response rates and improve long-term disease control. The IMspire150 trial investigated the combination of atezolizumab, cobimetinib and vemurafenib versus cobimetinib and vemurafenib alone. This review covers the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab, cobimetinib and vemurafenib for patients with advanced or metastatic BRAF mutant melanoma. The combination is compared with the current standard of care including BRAF/MEK inhibition and treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Atezolizumab plus cobimetinib and vemurafenib showed superior progression-free survival in metastatic melanoma compared to cobimetinib and vemurafenib alone. Triplet therapy might be an option in situations of urgent need for disease control, when oncologists choose BRAF/MEK inhibition over immune checkpoint inhibition as first line treatment. At this time results are not mature yet, and longer follow-up including overall survival data is needed. The future role of this combination will also be determined by a comparison with the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract is missing (Short communication)

Rosai-Dorfman-Destombes disease (RDD) or sinus histiocytosis with massive lymphadenopathy is a rare non-Langerhans cell histiocytosis of unknown cause. The disease often manifests as bilateral painless cervical lymphadenopathy associated with systemic symptoms such as fever and weight loss. Extranodal disease is also frequent and can involve any organ, mostly skin, nasal cavity, bone, and retro-orbital tissue. Swelling of cartilaginous tissues such as ear helix or laryngeal structures may mimic the entity known as relapsing polychondritis. Although spontaneous remission is the most expected evolution, some cases require systemic treatment with prednisone, methotrexate or cytotoxic agents, with variable success rates. In this respect, since somatic variants in genes involved in the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway have been observed to play a pathogenic role in RDD, the use of therapies targeting these pathogenic variants seems to be a reasonable strategy. Here we present a case of RDD with extensive extranodal involvement that showed a rapid and complete response to the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib

The treatment of melanoma has improved markedly over the last several years with the advent of more targeted therapies. Unfortunately, complex compensation mechanisms, such as those of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway, have limited the clinical benefit of these treatments. Recently, a better understanding of melanoma resistance mechanisms has given way to intelligently designed multidrug regimes. Herein, we review the extensive pathways of BRAF inhibitor (vemurafenib and dabrafenib) resistance. We also review the advantages of dual therapy, including the addition of an MEK inhibitor (cobimetinib or trametinib), which has proven to increase progression-free survival when compared to BRAF inhibitor monotherapy. Finally, this review touches on future treatment strategies that are being developed for advanced melanoma, including the possibility of triple therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors and the work on optimizing sequential therapy.

Background: The combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors delays the onset of resistance and provides more sustained and dramatic responses in comparison with a BRAF inhibitor in monotherapy. The objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the combination therapy with vemurafenib/cobimetinib in terms of durability, and to describe differential characteristics in patients associated to durable responses in real-world settings. Patients and Methods: Retrospective, observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study involving 41 patients with advanced melanoma harboring a BRAFV600 mutation who initiated a combination therapy with vemurafenib/cobimetinib between May 2018 and March 2019. Participants were differentiated regarding the durability of the response: durable (complete response, CR, or a partial response, PR, for at least 12 months) and non-durable (stable disease, SD, progressive disease, PD, or CR/PR < 12 months). Secondary endpoints included treatment adherence, labor productivity, anxiety/depression, and safety profile. Results: During the combination therapy, 12 patients (29.3%) had a CR, 19 a PR (46.3%), 5 showed SD (12.2%), and 5 had PD. A total of 12 patients (29.3%) were considered as achieving a durable response and 29 (70.7%) as a non-durable one. Practically all sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were similar between patients. Body mass index was the only differential factor (with higher body mass index achieving a non-durable response). The treatment adherence was 100% in patients with durable response and 66.7% in those with non-durable. Conclusion: The combination treatment with vemurafenib/cobimetinib results in an important impact on long-term survival, leading to a steady CR in one-third of the patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background We sought to identify patient subgroups with distinct postprogression overall survival (ppOS) outcomes and investigate the impact of original treatment assignment and initial postprogression treatment (ppRx) on ppOS. Methods Recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was performed to model relationships between prespecified covariates and ppOS in patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma who had experienced progressive disease (PD) following treatment with cobimetinib plus vemurafenib, vemurafenib monotherapy, or dacarbazine in the BRIM-2, BRIM-3, BRIM-7, and coBRIM studies. Prognostic subgroups identified by RPA were then applied to pooled treatment cohorts. The primary endpoint was ppOS, defined as time from first PD to death from any cause. Results RPA identified baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), baseline disease stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status at PD, and ppRx as significant prognostic factors for ppOS. Median ppOS was longest in patients with normal baseline LDH, stage M1c disease at baseline, and ppRx with immunotherapy or targeted therapy (12.2 months; 95% CI 10.3–16.1) and shortest in those with elevated baseline LDH > 2 × upper limit of normal (2.3 months; 95% CI 1.8–2.7). Original treatment assignment did not impact ppOS. Across treatment cohorts, patients treated with immunotherapy or targeted therapy after PD had better ppOS than those given other treatments. Conclusion A combination of factors at baseline (LDH, disease stage) and PD (performance status, ppRx) impact ppOS outcomes. ppRx with immunotherapy or targeted therapy is an independent prognostic factor for improved overall survival following progression regardless of original treatment. Trial registration The trials included in this analysis are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00949702 (BRIM-2), NCT01006980 (BRIM-3), NCT01271803 (BRIM-7), and NCT01689519 (coBRIM).

Background: The poor outcome of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) necessitates new treatments. Cobimetinib is a MEK inhibitor and approved for the treatment of melanoma. This work investigated the efficacy of cobimetinib alone and in combination with anti-RCC drugs. Methods: Proliferation and apoptosis assays were performed, and combination index was analyzed on RCC cell lines (CaKi-2, 786-O, A-704, ACHN and A489) and xenograft models. Immunoblotting analysis was conducted to investigate the MAPK pathway. Results: Cobimetinib was active against RCC cells, with IC50 at 0.006-0.8μM, and acted synergistically with standard-of-care therapy. Cobimetinib at nontoxic doses prevented tumor formation, inhibited tumor growth and enhanced efficacy of 5-fluorouracil, sorafenib and sunitinib via suppressing Raf/MEK/ERK, leading to MAPK pathway inhibition. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate the potent anti-RCC activity of cobimetinib and its synergism with RCC standard-of-care drugs, and confirm the underlying mechanism of the action of cobimetinib. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: The lack of effective treatment options for advanced non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (NCCRCC) is a critical unmet clinical need. Applying a high-throughput drug screen to multiple human kidney cancer cells, we identify the combination of the VEGFR-MET inhibitor cabozantinib and the SRC inhibitor dasatinib acts synergistically in cells to markedly reduce cell viability. Importantly, the combination is well tolerated and causes tumor regression in vivo. Transcriptional and phosphoproteomic profiling reveals that the combination converges to downregulate the MAPK-ERK signaling pathway, a result not predicted by single-agent analysis alone. Correspondingly, the addition of a MEK inhibitor synergizes with either dasatinib or cabozantinib to increase its efficacy. This study, by using approved, clinically relevant drugs, provides the rationale for the design of effective combination treatments in NCCRCC that can be rapidly translated to the clinic.

BackgroundThe combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors has become standard of care in the treatment of metastatic BRAF V600-mutated melanoma. Clinical factors for an early prediction of tumor response are rare. The present study investigated the association between the development of an early exanthema induced by vemurafenib or vemurafenib plus cobimetinib and therapy outcome.MethodsThis multicenter retrospective study included patients with BRAF V600-mutated irresectable AJCC-v8 stage IIIC/D to IV metastatic melanoma who received treatment with vemurafenib (VEM) or vemurafenib plus cobimetinib (COBIVEM). The development of an early exanthema within six weeks after therapy start and its grading according to CTCAEv4.0 criteria was correlated to therapy outcome in terms of best overall response, progression-free (PFS), and overall survival (OS).ResultsA total of 422 patients from 16 centers were included (VEM, n=299; COBIVEM, n=123). 20.4% of VEM and 43.1% of COBIVEM patients developed an early exanthema. In the VEM cohort, objective responders (CR/PR) more frequently presented with an early exanthema than non-responders (SD/PD); 59.0% versus 38.7%; p=0.0027. However, median PFS and OS did not differ between VEM patients with or without an early exanthema (PFS, 6.9 versus 6.0 months, p=0.65; OS, 11.0 versus 12.4 months, p=0.69). In the COBIVEM cohort, 66.0% of objective responders had an early exanthema compared to 54.3% of non-responders (p=0.031). Median survival times were significantly longer for patients who developed an early exanthema compared to patients who did not (PFS, 9.7 versus 5.6 months, p=0.013; OS, not reached versus 11.6 months, p=0.0061). COBIVEM patients with a mild early exanthema (CTCAEv4.0 grade 1-2) had a superior survival outcome as compared to COBIVEM patients with a severe (CTCAEv4.0 grade 3-4) or non early exanthema, respectively (p=0.047). This might be caused by the fact that 23.6% of patients with severe exanthema underwent a dose reduction or discontinuation of COBIVEM compared to only 8.9% of patients with mild exanthema.ConclusionsThe development of an early exanthema within 6 weeks after treatment start indicates a favorable therapy outcome upon vemurafenib plus cobimetinib. Patients presenting with an early exanthema should therefore be treated with adequate supportive measures to provide that patients can stay on treatment.