Explore the vast range of titles available.

Approximately 50% of melanomas harbor an activating mutation. Combined BRAF and MEK inhibitors such as dabrafenib and trametinib, vemurafenib and cobimetinib, and encorafenib and binimetinib are US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved to treat patients with -mutated advanced melanoma. Both genetic and epigenetic alterations play a major role in resistance to BRAF inhibitors by reactivation of the MAPK and/or the PI3K-Akt pathways. The role of BRAF inhibitors in modulating the immunomicroenvironment and perhaps enhancing the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors is gaining interest. This article provides a comprehensive review of mechanisms of resistance to BRAF and MEK inhibitors in melanoma and summarizes landmark trials that led to the FDA approval of BRAF and MEK inhibitors in metastatic melanoma.

Background Pediatric low-grade gliomas (PLGG) are the most frequent brain tumors in children. Up to 50% will be refractory to conventional chemotherapy. It is now known that the majority of PLGG have activation of the MAPK/ERK pathway. The same pathway is also activated in plexiform neurofibromas (PNs) which are low-grade tumors involving peripheral nerves in patients with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). These lesions are known to be refractory to chemotherapy. Specific MEK inhibitors such as trametinib are now available and have been approved for other cancers harboring mutations in the MAPK/ERK pathway such as melanoma. We have observed significant responses to trametinib in patients with refractory PLGG in our institutions and results from the phase I study are promising. The treatment appears not only efficacious but is also usually well tolerated. We hypothesize that we will observe responses in the majority of refractory PLGG and PN treated with trametinib in this phase 2 study. Methods The primary objective is to determine the objective response rate of trametinib as a single agent for treatment of progressing/refractory tumors with MAPK/ERK pathway activation. The TRAM-01 study is a phase II multicentric open-label basket trial including four groups. Group 1 includes NF1 patients with progressing/refractory glioma. Group 2 includes NF1 patients with plexiform neurofibroma. Group 3 includes patients with progressing/refractory glioma with KIAA1549-BRAF fusion. Group 4 includes other patients with progressing/refractory glioma with activation of the MAPK/ERK pathway. Eligible patients for a given study group will receive daily oral trametinib at full dose for a total of 18 cycles of 28 days. A total of 150 patients will be enrolled in seven Canadian centers. Secondary objectives include the assessment of progression-free survival, overall survival, safety and tolerability of trametinib, serum levels of trametinib and evaluation of quality of life during treatment. Discussion Trametinib will allow us to target directly and specifically the MAPK/ERK pathway. We expect to observe a significant response in most patients. Following our study, trametinib could be integrated into standard treatment of PLGG and PN. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03363217 December 6, 2017.

IntroductionA hallmark of pediatric low-grade glioma (pLGG) is aberrant signaling of the mitogen activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway. Hence, inhibition of MAPK signaling using small molecule inhibitors such as MEK inhibitors (MEKi) may be a promising strategy.MethodsIn this multi-center retrospective centrally reviewed study, we analyzed 18 patients treated with the MEKi trametinib for progressive pLGG as an individual treatment decision between 2015 and 2019. We have investigated radiological response as per central radiology review, molecular classification and investigator observed toxicity.ResultsWe observed 6 partial responses (PR), 2 minor responses (MR), and 10 stable diseases (SD) as best overall responses. Disease control rate (DCR) was 100% under therapy. Responses were observed in KIAA1549:BRAF- as well as neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1)-driven tumors. Median treatment time was 12.5 months (range: 2 to 27 months). Progressive disease was observed in three patients after cessation of trametinib treatment within a median time of 3 (2–4) months. Therapy related adverse events occurred in 16/18 patients (89%). Eight of 18 patients (44%) experienced severe adverse events (CTCAE III and/or IV; most commonly skin rash and paronychia) requiring dose reduction in 6/18 patients (33%), and discontinuation of treatment in 2/18 patients (11%).ConclusionsTrametinib was an active and feasible treatment for progressive pLGG leading to disease control in all patients. However, treatment related toxicity interfered with treatment in individual patients, and disease control after MEKi withdrawal was not sustained in a fraction of patients. Our data support in-class efficacy of MEKi in pLGGs and necessity for upfront randomized testing of trametinib against current standard chemotherapy regimens.

Following the discovery that nearly half of all cutaneous melanomas harbour a mutation in the BRAF gene, molecular targeted kinase inhibitors have been developed for the treatment of metastatic melanoma and have dramatically improved outcomes for those patients with BRAF mutant disease, achieving high levels of objective response and prolonging survival. Since 2011, the specific BRAF targeted agents, vemurafenib and dabrafenib, and the MEK inhibitor, trametinib, have been licensed for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic BRAF mutant melanoma. As with other biological targeted agents, these drugs are associated with predictable patterns of adverse events. Proactive toxicity management is important to ensure maximum treatment benefit and avoid unnecessary treatment discontinuation. We review the most common and serious adverse events associated with BRAF targeted agents and suggest management algorithms to guide practitioners in using these drugs effectively in the clinic.

Background Hotspot mutations of the oncogenes BRAF and NRAS are the most common genetic alterations in cutaneous melanoma. Specific inhibitors of BRAF and MEK have shown significant survival benefits in large phase III trials. However, the prognostic significance of BRAF and NRAS mutations outside of clinical trials remains unclear. Methods The mutational status of BRAF (exon 15) and NRAS (exon 2 and 3) was determined in melanoma samples of 217 patients with pyrosequencing and Sanger sequencing. The genotypes were correlated with clinical outcomes and pathologic features of the primary tumors. Time to disease progression was calculated with the cumulative incidence function. Survival analyses were performed with Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Relative survival was calculated with the Ederer-II method. Treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors and immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) was allowed. Results Mutations in BRAF and NRAS were identified in 40.1 and 24.4% of cases, respectively. Concurrent mutations in both genes were detected in further 2.3%. The remaining 33.2% were wild type for the investigated exons (WT). BRAF mutations were significantly associated with younger age at first diagnosis ( p  < 0.001) and truncal localization of the culprit primary ( p  = 0.002). The nodular subtype was most common in the NRAS cohort. In addition, NRAS-mutant melanoma patients showed a higher frequency of nodal relapse ( p  = 0.013) and development of metastatic disease ( p  = 0.021). The time to loco-regional nodal relapse was shortest in NRAS-mutant melanoma ( p  = 0.002). Presence of NRAS mutation was an independent risk factor for disease progression in multivariate analysis (HR 2.01; 95% CI 1.02 – 3.98). BRAF-mutant melanoma patients showed a tendency for better overall and relative survival. Genotype was not a consistent risk factor in multivariate analysis. Instead, positive sentinel lymph node status (HR 2.65; 95% CI 1.15 – 6.10) and treatment with ICB in stage IV disease (HR 0.17; 95% CI 0.06–0.48) were significant multivariate risk factors. Conclusions NRAS-mutant tumors tended to behave more aggressively particularly in early stages of the disease in this high-risk melanoma population. Treatment with immune checkpoint blockade improved survival in stage IV disease in a real-world setting.

Combination use of BRAF V600E inhibitor dabrafenib and MEK inhibitor trametinib has become a standard treatment for human cancers harboring BRAF V600E. Its anticancer efficacies vary, however, with dramatic efficacy in some patients and drug resistance/ tumor recurrence in others, which is poorly understood. Using thyroid cancer, melanoma, and colon cancer cell models, we showed that dabrafenib and trametinib induced robust apoptosis of cancer cells harboring both BRAF V600E and TERT promoter mutations but had little proapoptotic effect in cells harboring only BRAF V600E. Correspondingly, the inhibitors nearly completely abolished the growth of in vivo tumors harboring both mutations but had little effect on tumors harboring only BRAF V600E. Upon drug withdrawal, tumors harboring both mutations remained hardly measurable but tumors harboring only BRAF V600E regrew rapidly. BRAF V600E/MAP kinase pathway is known to robustly activate mutant promoter of TERT, a strong apoptosis suppressor. Thus, for survival, cancer cells harboring both mutations may have evolved to rely on BRAF V600E-promoted and high-TERT expression-mediated suppression of apoptosis. As such, inhibition of BRAF/MEK can trigger strong apoptosis-induced cell death and hence tumor abolishment. This does not happen in cells harboring only BRAF V600E as they have not developed reliance on TERT-mediated suppression of apoptosis due to the lack of mutant promoter-driven high-TERT expression. TERT promoter mutation governs BRAF-mutant cancer cells’ apoptotic and hence therapeutic responses to BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Thus, the genetic duet of BRAF V600E and TERT promoter mutation represents an Achilles Heel for effective therapeutic targeting and response prediction in cancer.

The development of BRAF and MEK inhibitors (BRAFis and MEKis) and immune checkpoint inhibitors have changed the management of advanced stage melanoma and improved the outcomes of patients with this malignancy. However, both therapeutic approaches have limitations, including a limited duration of benefit in subsets of BRAF-mutant melanoma patients treated with targeted therapy and a lower overall response rate without a clear predictive biomarker in patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors. Preclinical and translational data have shown that BRAFis and MEKis alter the tumor microenvironment to make it more amenable to immunotherapy and have provided the scientific rationale for combing BRAFis and MEKis with immunotherapy. In this review, the initial studies demonstrating the impact of BRAFis and MEKis on the expression of melanoma differentiation antigens, T-cell infiltration, and the balance of immune stimulatory and immune suppressive cells and cytokines are addressed. Preclinical work on the combination of targeted therapy with BRAFis and MEKis with immunotherapy are reviewed, highlighting improved tumor responses in mouse models of BRAF-mutated melanoma treated with combinatorial strategies. Lastly, data from early clinical trials of combined targeted therapy and immunotherapy are discussed, focusing on response rates and toxicities.

Melanoma is one of the most common cutaneous cancers worldwide. Activating mutations in oncogenes are found in a third of all human cancers and mutations are found in 15%-20% of melanomas. The -mutant subset of melanoma is more aggressive and associated with poorer outcomes, compared to non- -mutant melanoma. Although immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies for -mutant melanoma are transforming the treatment of metastatic melanoma, the ideal treatment for -mutant melanoma remains unknown. Despite promising preclinical data, current therapies for -mutant melanoma remain limited, showing a modest increase in progression-free survival but without any benefit in overall survival. Combining MEK inhibitors with agents inhibiting cell cycling and the PI3K-AKT pathway appears to provide additional benefit; in particular, a strategy of MEK inhibition and CDK4/6 inhibition is likely to be a viable treatment option in the future. Patients whose tumors had mutations had better response to immunotherapy and better outcomes than patients whose tumors had other genetic subtypes, suggesting that immune therapies - especially immune checkpoint inhibitors - may be particularly effective as treatment options for -mutant melanoma. Improved understanding of -mutant melanoma will be essential to develop new treatment strategies for this subset of patients with melanoma.

Patients with BRAF‐mutated colorectal cancer (BRAFV600E CRC) are currently treated with a combination of BRAF inhibitor and anti‐EGFR antibody with or without MEK inhibitor. A fundamental problem in treating patients with BRAFV600E CRC is intrinsic and/or acquired resistance to this combination therapy. By screening 78 compounds, we identified tretinoin, a retinoid, as a compound that synergistically enhances the antiproliferative effect of a combination of BRAF inhibition and MEK inhibition with or without EGFR inhibition on BRAFV600E CRC cells. This synergistic effect was also exerted by other retinoids. Tretinoin, added to BRAF inhibitor and MEK inhibitor, upregulated PARP, BAK, and p‐H2AX. When either RARα or RXRα was silenced, the increase in cleaved PARP expression by the addition of TRE to ENC/BIN or ENC/BIN/CET was canceled. Our results suggest that the mechanism of the synergistic antiproliferative effect involves modulation of the Bcl‐2 family and the DNA damage response that affects apoptotic pathways, and this synergistic effect is induced by RARα‐ or RXRα‐mediated apoptosis. Tretinoin also enhanced the antitumor effect of a combination of the BRAF inhibitor and anti‐EGFR antibody with or without MEK inhibitor in a BRAFV600E CRC xenograft mouse model. Our data provide a rationale for developing retinoids as a new combination agent to overcome resistance to the combination therapy for patients with BRAFV600E CRC. Tretinoin enhanced the antitumor effect of a combination of BRAF inhibitor and anti‐EGFR antibody with or without MEK inhibitor in a BRAFV600E CRC model in vitro and in vivo. Our data provide a rationale for developing retinoids as a new combination agent to overcome resistance to the combination therapy for patients with BRAFV600E CRC.

BRAF-mutated colorectal cancer correlates with poor prognosis and limited response to standard treatments. Combining immune checkpoint inhibitors with BRAF/MEK inhibitors shows promise against BRAF-mutant melanoma in both preclinical and clinical trials. Therefore, we hypothesized that the treatment would be effective against BRAF-mutant colorectal cancer. In this study, we assessed the efficacy of combining immune checkpoint inhibitors with BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors in BRAF-mutant colorectal cancers. We treated BRAF V600E colorectal cancer cells HT-29 and SNU-1235 with encorafenib (BRAF inhibitor) and binimetinib (MEK inhibitor) and assessed the degrees of MAPK inhibition, JAK/STAT inhibition, cell viability, apoptosis, and the expression of antigen presenting machinery. We also inoculated HT-29 cells into mice and treated them with an immune checkpoint inhibitor (durvalumab), encorafenib, and binimetinib for 4 weeks. We found that treatment with BRAF inhibitor, MEK inhibitor, or their combination led to significant tumor growth reduction, along with the MAPK and JAK/STAT pathway inhibition, antigen presenting machinery induction, and cytotoxic T cell activation. Our study demonstrates the potential effectiveness of combining immune checkpoint inhibitors with BRAF or MEK inhibitors for BRAF-mutated colorectal cancers.