For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
2
views
35
references
 Top references
cited by
15
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      88
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Long-Term Outcomes in BRAF-Mutated Melanoma Treated with Combined Targeted Therapy or Immune Checkpoint Blockade: Are We Approaching a True Cure?

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Approximately 50% of all melanomas harbor an activating BRAF mutation. In patients suffering from an advanced melanoma with such a somatic alteration, combined targeted therapy with a BRAF and MEK inhibitor can be applied to significantly increase the survival probability. Nevertheless, resistance mechanisms, as well as negative predictive biomarkers (elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, high number of metastatic organ disease sites, brain metastasis), remain a major problem in treating melanoma patients. Recently, a landmark overall survival (OS) rate of 34% after 5 years of combined targeted therapy in treatment-naïve patients was reported. On the other hand, patients harboring a BRAF mutation and receiving first-line immune checkpoint blockade with ipilimumab plus nivolumab showed a 5-year OS rate of 60%. As indicated by these data, long-term survival can be reached in melanoma patients but it remains unclear if this is equivalent to reaching a true cure for metastatic melanoma. In this review, we summarize the recent results for combined targeted therapy and immunotherapy in advanced melanoma harboring an activating BRAF mutation and discuss the impact of baseline characteristics on long-term outcome.

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Melanomas acquire resistance to B-RAF(V600E) inhibition by RTK or N-RAS upregulation.

          Ramin Nazarian, Hubing Shi, Qi Wang … (2010)
          Activating B-RAF(V600E) (also known as BRAF) kinase mutations occur in ∼7% of human malignancies and ∼60% of melanomas. Early clinical experience with a novel class I RAF-selective inhibitor, PLX4032, demonstrated an unprecedented 80% anti-tumour response rate among patients with B-RAF(V600E)-positive melanomas, but acquired drug resistance frequently develops after initial responses. Hypotheses for mechanisms of acquired resistance to B-RAF inhibition include secondary mutations in B-RAF(V600E), MAPK reactivation, and activation of alternative survival pathways. Here we show that acquired resistance to PLX4032 develops by mutually exclusive PDGFRβ (also known as PDGFRB) upregulation or N-RAS (also known as NRAS) mutations but not through secondary mutations in B-RAF(V600E). We used PLX4032-resistant sub-lines artificially derived from B-RAF(V600E)-positive melanoma cell lines and validated key findings in PLX4032-resistant tumours and tumour-matched, short-term cultures from clinical trial patients. Induction of PDGFRβ RNA, protein and tyrosine phosphorylation emerged as a dominant feature of acquired PLX4032 resistance in a subset of melanoma sub-lines, patient-derived biopsies and short-term cultures. PDGFRβ-upregulated tumour cells have low activated RAS levels and, when treated with PLX4032, do not reactivate the MAPK pathway significantly. In another subset, high levels of activated N-RAS resulting from mutations lead to significant MAPK pathway reactivation upon PLX4032 treatment. Knockdown of PDGFRβ or N-RAS reduced growth of the respective PLX4032-resistant subsets. Overexpression of PDGFRβ or N-RAS(Q61K) conferred PLX4032 resistance to PLX4032-sensitive parental cell lines. Importantly, MAPK reactivation predicts MEK inhibitor sensitivity. Thus, melanomas escape B-RAF(V600E) targeting not through secondary B-RAF(V600E) mutations but via receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK)-mediated activation of alternative survival pathway(s) or activated RAS-mediated reactivation of the MAPK pathway, suggesting additional therapeutic strategies.
          Article 0 comments Cited 681 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Combined vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAF-mutated melanoma.

            James Larkin, Paolo Ascierto, Brigitte Dréno … (2014)
            The combined inhibition of BRAF and MEK is hypothesized to improve clinical outcomes in patients with melanoma by preventing or delaying the onset of resistance observed with BRAF inhibitors alone. This randomized phase 3 study evaluated the combination of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib and the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib. We randomly assigned 495 patients with previously untreated unresectable locally advanced or metastatic BRAF V600 mutation-positive melanoma to receive vemurafenib and cobimetinib (combination group) or vemurafenib and placebo (control group). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. The median progression-free survival was 9.9 months in the combination group and 6.2 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death or disease progression, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.68; P<0.001). The rate of complete or partial response in the combination group was 68%, as compared with 45% in the control group (P<0.001), including rates of complete response of 10% in the combination group and 4% in the control group. Progression-free survival as assessed by independent review was similar to investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Interim analyses of overall survival showed 9-month survival rates of 81% (95% CI, 75 to 87) in the combination group and 73% (95% CI, 65 to 80) in the control group. Vemurafenib and cobimetinib was associated with a nonsignificantly higher incidence of adverse events of grade 3 or higher, as compared with vemurafenib and placebo (65% vs. 59%), and there was no significant difference in the rate of study-drug discontinuation. The number of secondary cutaneous cancers decreased with the combination therapy. The addition of cobimetinib to vemurafenib was associated with a significant improvement in progression-free survival among patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma, at the cost of some increase in toxicity. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech; coBRIM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01689519.).
            Article 0 comments Cited 670 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Melanoma staging: Evidence-based changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual

              John F. Thompson, Grant A. McArthur, Lauren E. Haydu … (2017)
              Answer questions and earn CME/CNE To update the melanoma staging system of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) a large database was assembled comprising >46,000 patients from 10 centers worldwide with stages I, II, and III melanoma diagnosed since 1998. Based on analyses of this new database, the existing seventh edition AJCC stage IV database, and contemporary clinical trial data, the AJCC Melanoma Expert Panel introduced several important changes to the Tumor, Nodes, Metastasis (TNM) classification and stage grouping criteria. Key changes in the eighth edition AJCC Cancer Staging Manual include: 1) tumor thickness measurements to be recorded to the nearest 0.1 mm, not 0.01 mm; 2) definitions of T1a and T1b are revised (T1a, <0.8 mm without ulceration; T1b, 0.8-1.0 mm with or without ulceration or <0.8 mm with ulceration), with mitotic rate no longer a T category criterion; 3) pathological (but not clinical) stage IA is revised to include T1b N0 M0 (formerly pathologic stage IB); 4) the N category descriptors "microscopic" and "macroscopic" for regional node metastasis are redefined as "clinically occult" and "clinically apparent"; 5) prognostic stage III groupings are based on N category criteria and T category criteria (ie, primary tumor thickness and ulceration) and increased from 3 to 4 subgroups (stages IIIA-IIID); 6) definitions of N subcategories are revised, with the presence of microsatellites, satellites, or in-transit metastases now categorized as N1c, N2c, or N3c based on the number of tumor-involved regional lymph nodes, if any; 7) descriptors are added to each M1 subcategory designation for lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level (LDH elevation no longer upstages to M1c); and 8) a new M1d designation is added for central nervous system metastases. This evidence-based revision of the AJCC melanoma staging system will guide patient treatment, provide better prognostic estimates, and refine stratification of patients entering clinical trials. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:472-492. © 2017 American Cancer Society.
              Article 0 comments Cited 633 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Bastian Schilling:
                ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8859-4103
                schilling_b@ukw.de
                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Am J Clin Dermatol
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Am J Clin Dermatol
                Title: American Journal of Clinical Dermatology
                Publisher: Springer International Publishing (Cham )
                ISSN (Print): 1175-0561
                ISSN (Electronic): 1179-1888
                Publication date (Electronic): 2 March 2020
                Publication date PMC-release: 2 March 2020
                Publication date (Print): 2020
                Volume: 21
                Issue: 4
                Pages: 493-504
                Affiliations
                GRID grid.411760.5, ISNI 0000 0001 1378 7891, Department of Dermatology, , University Hospital Würzburg, ; Josef-Schneider-Str. 2, 97080 Würzburg, Germany
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8859-4103
                Article
                Publisher ID: 509
                DOI: 10.1007/s40257-020-00509-z
                PMC ID: 7371660
                PubMed ID: 32124332
                SO-VID: e122c8e0-e04b-43ec-b15c-c641f0d4b6b1
                Copyright © © The Author(s) 2020
                License:

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                Categories
                Subject: Review Article
                Custom metadata
                issue-copyright-statement © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

                Data availability:

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content88

                See all similar

                Cited by15

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors2,800

                See all reference authors