MEK162 for patients with advanced melanoma harbouring NRAS or Val600 BRAF mutations: a non-randomised, open-label phase 2 study

ITGA1, the alpha 1 subunit of integrin receptor, is a novel marker of drug-resistant senescent melanoma cells in vitro

Chemotherapy-induced senescence may promote drug resistance and treatment failure. Precise detection and elimination of senescent cancer cells is considered as a novel promising anticancer strategy. However, data on senescence-associated skin cancer cell surface markers as potential therapeutic targets are limited. In the present study, we have established two models of drug-induced senescence in vitro using DNA damaging chemotherapeutics, namely etoposide (0.75-5 µM) and cisplatin (1.25-5 µM), and ten skin cancer cell lines, both melanoma (n = 8, A375, G-361, MM370, SH-4, SK-MEL-1, MeWo, MM127, RPMI-7951) and non-melanoma (n = 2, A431, MCC13), to investigate the levels of 97 cell surface markers. Initial gene expression analysis revealed the increasing tendency in the levels of seven transcripts (ITGA1, ITGA3, VAMP3, STX4, ARMCX3, ULBP2, and PLAUR) and five transcripts (ITGA1, ITGA3, STX4, ARMCX3, and PLAUR) in five etoposide and cisplatin-induced senescent melanoma cell lines, respectively, compared to corresponding proliferating cells. Elevated pools of integrin α1 (ITGA1) were confirmed at mRNA and protein levels in eight drug-induced senescent melanoma cell lines. Similar pattern of changes in integrin α1 levels was not observed in drug-induced senescent non-melanoma skin cancer cells. Analysis using clinical melanoma samples also showed that the levels of ITGA1 and ITGA3 were correlated with the presence of melanoma cells in a section. We document that integrin α1 can be considered as a novel marker of drug-induced senescent melanoma cells. Thus, we postulate that new integrin α1-based targeted therapies can be designed and tested against drug-induced senescent melanoma cells.

Cell Death Modalities in Therapy of Melanoma

Melanoma, one of the most lethal cancers, demands urgent and effective treatment strategies. However, a successful therapeutic approach requires a precise understanding of the mechanisms underlying melanoma initiation and progression. This review provides an overview of melanoma pathogenesis, identifies current pathogenic factors contributing to mortality, and explores targeted therapy and checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Furthermore, we examine melanoma classification and corresponding therapies, along with advancements in various cell death mechanisms for melanoma treatment. We also discuss the current treatment status along with some drawbacks encountered during research stages such as resistance and metastasis.

Neurologic adverse events associated with BRAF and MEK inhibitor therapy in patients with malignant melanoma: a disproportionality analysis using the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System

BRAF and MEK inhibitor (BRAFi + MEKi) therapy has improved the treatment of solid tumors with BRAF mutation. However, their neurologic adverse events (nAEs) have been largely unexplored. This study aimed to provide clinicians with more updated knowledge on nAEs associated with BRAFi + MEKi therapy in patients with malignant melanoma compared with nonmelanoma cancers. The United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System was queried from 2011 to 2022 to capture nAEs reported for the BRAFi + MEKi therapies, vemurafenib plus cobimetinib (V + C), dabrafenib plus trametinib (D + T), and encorafenib plus binimetinib (E + B). A disproportionality analysis was performed to calculate their reporting odds ratios (RORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a control group of antineoplastic medications. There were 2881 BRAFi + MEKi therapy-associated nAE cases, the majority of which listed malignant melanoma as the reason for use (87.5, 66.7, and 62.0% for V + C, D + T, and E + B, respectively). Several novel associations were identified; including epidural lipomatosis (ROR: 320.07, 95% CI: 123.76-827.77 for V + C), peripheral nerve lesion (ROR: 185.64, 95% CI: 73.95-466.03 for V + C), Guillain-Barre syndrome (RORs: 8.80, 2.94, and 11.79, 95% CIs: 3.65-21.22, 1.40-6.19, and 5.87-23.66 for V + C, D + T, and E + B), demyelinating polyneuropathy (RORs: 24.72 and 78.98, 95% CI: 8.16-74.86 and 24.84-251.13 for D + T and E + B), and multiple sclerosis (ROR: 5.90, 95% CI: 3.06-11.40 for D + T) in melanoma patients. nAEs in the setting of BRAFi + MEKi therapy should be a safety consideration when utilizing these medications.

RAS mutation-specific signaling dynamics in response to paralog- and state- selective RAS inhibitors

A high therapeutic index (TI), balancing potent oncogenic signaling inhibition in tumor cells with minimal effects on normal cells, is critical for effective cancer therapies. Recent advances have introduced diverse RAS-targeting inhibitors, including mutant-specific inhibitors (e.g., KRAS(G12C) and KRAS(G12D)), as well as paralog- and state-selective inhibitors. Non-mutant-specific RAS inhibition can be accomplished by 1) panRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors which inactivate RAS indirectly by inhibiting SHP2 or SOS1, thereby blocking the nucleotide exchange step of RAS activation, 2) direct KRAS(OFF)-selective inhibitors sparing NRAS and HRAS, and 3) panRAS(ON) inhibitors that directly target active RAS, by occluding binding of its effector RAF. However, the signaling inhibition index (SII) - the differential inhibition of oncogenic signaling between RAS-mutant (RAS(MUT)) and normal cells - remains poorly defined for these approaches. In this study, we evaluated the SII of state- and paralog-selective RAS inhibitors across diverse RAS-mutant (RAS(MUT)) and RAS-wild-type (RAS(WT)) models. PanRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors exhibited neutral or negative SII, with comparable or reduced MAPK suppression in KRAS(G12X) cells relative to RAS(WT) cells. KRAS(G13D) models showed low sensitivity (negative SII) to panRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors, particularly in the context of NF1 loss. Combination treatments with SHP2 and MEK inhibitors resulted in low SII, as pathway suppression was similar in RAS(MUT) and RAS(WT) cells. Furthermore, RAS(Q61X) models were resistant to combined SHP2 inhibitor+MEK inhibitor due to dual mechanisms: MEK inhibitor-induced NRAS(Q61X) reactivation and RAS(MUT)-induced SHP2 conformations impairing inhibitor binding. Overall, panRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors exhibited the lowest SII. PanKRAS(OFF) inhibitors demonstrated a higher SII, while panRAS(ON) inhibitors displayed broader activity but relatively narrow SII. We observed that tumors that were sensitive to RAS(MUT)-specific inhibitors, were also sensitive to the state-selective RAS inhibitors (OFF, or ON). In fact, all RAS inhibitors (mutant-specific and state- or paralog-selective) were active in the same portion of RAS(MUT) models, while the majority of RAS(MUT) cell lines were insensitive to all of them. These findings reveal significant SII variability among RAS-targeted inhibitors, depending on the specific RAS driver mutation and cell context and underscore the importance of incorporating SII considerations into the design and clinical application of RAS-targeted therapies to improve therapeutic outcomes.

Main points

PanRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors have limited SII and effectiveness: The Signaling Inhibition Index (SII) - i.e. the differential inhibition of oncogenic signaling between tumor and normal cells - was neutral or negative for panRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors, with comparable or reduced MAPK suppression in KRAS(G12X) mutant versus RAS(WT) cells. KRAS(G13D) models showed reduced sensitivity, particularly with NF1 loss. SHP2+MEK inhibitor combinations also had low SII, with RAS(Q61X) models demonstrating resistance due to NRAS(Q61X) reactivation and impaired SHP2 inhibitor binding.PanKRAS(OFF) selective inhibitors have higher SII than panRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors: panKRAS(OFF)-selective inhibitors have a higher SII compared to panRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors, offering better tumor-versus-normal cell selectivity.PanRAS(ON) inhibitors have broad but modest SII: While panRAS(ON) inhibitors displayed a broader activity profile, their ability to selectively inhibit mutant RAS signaling over normal cells remained relatively narrow (low SII).Most KRAS-mutant tumors will be insensitive to any single RAS-targeted inhibitor: State- and paralog-selective inhibitors have enhanced activity in the same RAS-MUT cancer models that are also sensitive to RAS-MUT-specific inhibitors, suggesting that most KRAS-MUT tumors will not respond uniformly to any one RAS-targeting inhibitor.SII varies across RAS inhibitors, necessitating tailored therapeutic strategies: The effectiveness of paralog- and state-selective inhibitors depends on specific RAS mutations and cell context, highlighting the need to integrate SII considerations into the development and clinical application of RAS-targeted therapies.

Selective abrogation of S6K2 identifies lipid homeostasis as a survival vulnerability in MAPK inhibitor-resistant NRAS-mutant melanoma

Although oncogenic NRAS activates mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling, inhibition of the MAPK pathway is not therapeutically efficacious in NRAS-mutant (NRASMUT) tumors. Here, we report that selectively silencing the ribosomal protein S6 kinase 2 (S6K2) while preserving the activity of S6K1 perturbs lipid metabolism, enhances fatty acid unsaturation, and triggers lethal lipid peroxidation in NRASMUT melanoma cells that are resistant to MAPK inhibition. S6K2 depletion induces endoplasmic reticulum stress and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α (PPARα) activation, triggering cell death selectively in MAPK inhibitor-resistant melanoma. We found that combining PPARα agonists and polyunsaturated fatty acids phenocopied the effects of S6K2 abrogation, blocking tumor growth in both patient-derived xenografts and immunocompetent murine melanoma models. Collectively, our study establishes S6K2 and its effector subnetwork as promising targets for NRASMUT melanomas that are resistant to global MAPK pathway inhibitors.

Cutaneous adverse events associated with BRAF and MEK inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim

Cutaneous adverse events (CAEs) after treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors in patients with melanoma remain incompletely characterized. To determine the association of BRAF and MEK inhibitor treatment with CAEs in patients with melanoma compared with BRAF inhibitor alone.

Method

PubMed, Cochrane, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched for BRAF and MEK inhibitors from database inception through 10 May 2024. Randomized clinical trials reporting on CAEs in patients with melanoma being treated with BRAF and MEK inhibitors compared with patients with melanoma being treated with BRAF inhibitor monotherapy were selected. Pooled Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were determined using random-effects analyses. The selected end points were alopecia, cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma, hyperkeratosis, keratoacanthoma, palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome, palmoplantar keratoderma, rash, photosensitivity reaction, and skin papilloma. All-grade and high-grade (≥3) CAEs were recorded.

Results

Comparing with BRAF and MEK inhibitors, treatment with BRAF inhibitors alone was associated with an increased risk of rash (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54-0.99; p = 0.039; I2 = 88%), alopecia (RR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.20-0.41; P < 0.001; I2 = 76%), hyperkeratosis (RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.22-0.41; P < 0.001; I2 = 56%), palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (RR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.10-0.47; P < 0.001; I2 = 81%), palmoplantar keratoderma (RR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.26-0.57; P < 0.001; I2 = 29%), Skin papilloma (RR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.12-0.52; P < 0.001; I2 = 77%), cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma (RR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.11-0.42; P < 0.001; I2 = 50%), and keratoacanthoma (RR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.12-0.40; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%).

Conclusion

Therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors was associated with a lower risk of CAEs, especially rash, alopecia, hyperkeratosis, palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome, palmoplantar keratoderma, skin papilloma, cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma, and keratoacanthoma, compared with BRAF inhibitor alone. The risks of photosensitivity reaction was similar between the assessed groups. The findings may help to balance between beneficial melanoma treatment and cutaneous morbidity and mortality.

Real-world evidence on efficacy and toxicity of targeted therapy in older melanoma patients treated in a tertiary-hospital setting

Melanoma is the deadliest form of skin cancer. The median age at diagnosis is 66. While most patients are treated with immunotherapy, the use of targeted therapy is a valid alternative for patients whose tumors harbor a BRAF or c-KIT driver mutation. These agents, while effective, come with a variety of side effects which limit their use, especially in older patients. We sought to assess the efficacy and toxicity of these agents in older melanoma patients. Melanoma patients over 65 treated with BRAF/MEK or c-KIT inhibitors were retrospectively identified, and their data were analyzed for treatment efficacy and toxicity. All data were compared using the Chi-square test for categorical comparisons and the Kruskal-Wallis method for median comparisons. One hundred and sixteen patients were identified. One hundred and six patients were treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors. The assessed response rate (RR) was 83% and was comparable across different subgroups, including advanced line patients and those with a more aggressive disease. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months, and the median overall survival (OS) was 15.7 months. Twenty-seven percent experienced grade 3-4 toxicity leading to a 24% treatment discontinuation rate. Another 10 patients were treated with the c-KIT inhibitor imatinib, for whom the assessed RR was 55%. The median PFS was 4.3 months, and the median OS was 22.6 months. Forty percent needed dose reductions, yet none had to stop treatment due to adverse effects. The use of targeted therapy in older patients is effective yet challenging due to toxicity. Deploying mitigation strategies can help maximizing their usefulness.

RAS signaling in carcinogenesis, cancer therapy and resistance mechanisms

Variants in the RAS family (HRAS, NRAS and KRAS) are among the most common mutations found in cancer. About 19% patients with cancer harbor RAS mutations, which are typically associated with poor clinical outcomes. Over the past four decades, KRAS has long been considered an undruggable target due to the absence of suitable small-molecule binding sites within its mutant isoforms. However, recent advancements in drug design have made RAS-targeting therapies viable, particularly with the approval of direct KRASG12C inhibitors, such as sotorasib and adagrasib, for treating non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with KRASG12C mutations. Other KRAS-mutant inhibitors targeting KRASG12D are currently being developed for use in the clinic, particularly for treating highly refractory malignancies like pancreatic cancer. Herein, we provide an overview of RAS signaling, further detailing the roles of the RAS signaling pathway in carcinogenesis. This includes a summary of RAS mutations in human cancers and an emphasis on therapeutic approaches, as well as de novo, acquired, and adaptive resistance in various malignancies.

Serum creatine kinase elevation following tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment in cancer patients: Symptoms, mechanism, and clinical management

Molecular targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have produced unprecedented treatment response in cancer therapy for patients harboring specific oncogenic mutations. While the TKIs are mostly well tolerated, they were reported to increase serum levels of creatine kinase (CK) and cause muscle metabolism-related toxicity. CK is an essential enzyme involved in cellular energy metabolism and muscle function. Elevated serum CK levels can arise from both physiological and pathological factors, as well as triggered by specific drug classes. The incidence of serum CK elevation induced by a few approved TKIs (brigatinib, binimetinib, cobimetinib-vemurafenib combination [Food and Drug Administration, United States]; aumolertinib, and sunvozertinib [only approved by National Medical Products Administration, China]) were over 35%. CK elevation-related symptoms include myopathy, myositis, inclusion body myositis (IBM), cardiotoxicity, rhabdomyolysis, rash, and acneiform dermatitis. High-level or severe symptomatic CK elevation may necessitate dose reduction and indirectly dampen TKI efficacy. This review presents an updated summary about the prevalence rate and recent research about mechanisms leading to TKI-induced serum CK elevation in cancer patients. The utility of monitoring serum CK levels for predicting TKI-induced adverse effects and their management will also be discussed.

A NRAS mRNA G-quadruplex structure-targeting small-molecule ligand reactivating DNA damage response in human cancer cells for combination therapy with clinical PI3K inhibitors

The Neuroblastoma RAS (NRAS) oncogene homologue plays crucial roles in diverse cellular processes such as cell proliferation, survival, and differentiation. Several strategies have been developed to inhibit NRAS or its downstream effectors; however, there is no effective drug available to treat NRAS-driven cancers and thus new approaches are needed to be established. The mRNA sequence expressing NRAS containing several guanine(G)-rich regions may form quadruplex structures (G4s) and regulate NRAS translation. Therefore, targeting NRAS mRNA G4s to repress NRAS expression at translational level with ligands may be a feasible strategy against NRAS-driven cancers but it is underexplored. We reported herein a NRAS mRNA G4-targeting ligand, B3C, specifically localized in cytoplasm in HeLa cells. It effectively downregulates NRAS proteins, reactivates the DNA damage response (DDR), causes cell cycle arrest in G2/M phase, and induces apoptosis and senescence. Moreover, combination therapy with NARS mRNA G4-targeting ligands and clinical PI3K inhibitors for cancer cells inhibition treatment is unexplored, and we demonstrated that B3C combining with PI3Ki (pictilisib (GDC-0941)) showed potent antiproliferation activity against HeLa cells (IC50 = 1.03 μM (combined with 10 μM PI3Ki) and 0.42 μM (combined with 20 μM PI3Ki)) and exhibited strong synergistic effects in inhibiting cell proliferation. This study provides new insights into drug discovery against RAS-driven cancers using this conceptually new combination therapy strategy.

Mucocutaneous toxicities from MEK inhibitors: a scoping review of the literature

BACKGROUND

MEK inhibitors cause a wide spectrum of mucocutaneous toxicities which can delay or interrupt life-saving therapy.

PURPOSE

To summarize the morphology, incidence, and clinical presentation of mucocutaneous toxicities from MEK inhibitors via a scoping review of the literature.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review of the published literature, including clinical trials, retrospective and prospective studies, reviews, and case reports and series. All included literature was analyzed by a panel of pediatric and adult oncodermatologists.

RESULTS

Of 1626 initial citations, 227 articles met final inclusion criteria. Our review identified follicular reactions, ocular toxicities, xerosis, eczematous dermatitis, edema, and paronychia as the most common mucocutaneous side effects from MEK inhibitor therapy. Grade 1 and 2 reactions were the most prevalent and were typically managed while continuing treatment; however, grade 3 toxicities requiring dose reductions or treatment interruptions were also reported.

CONCLUSION

Mucocutaneous toxicities to MEK inhibitor therapy are common and most often mild in severity. Early recognition and treatment can mitigate disruptions in oncologic therapy.

The safety and efficacy of binimetinib for lung cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer, accounting for a significant proportion of global cancer cases and deaths, poses a considerable health burden. Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients have a poor prognosis and limited treatment options due to late-stage diagnosis and drug resistance. Dysregulated of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway, which is implicated in NSCLC pathogenesis, underscores the potential of MEK inhibitors such as binimetinib. Despite promising results in other cancers, comprehensive studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of binimetinib in lung cancer are lacking. This systematic review aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of binimetinib for lung cancer treatment.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar until September 2023. Clinical trials evaluating the efficacy or safety of binimetinib for lung cancer treatment were included. Studies were excluded if they included individuals with conditions unrelated to lung cancer, investigated other treatments, or had different types of designs. The quality assessment was conducted utilizing the National Institutes of Health tool.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 228 participants overall were included. Four had good quality judgments, and three had fair quality judgments. The majority of patients experienced all-cause adverse events, with diarrhea, fatigue, and nausea being the most commonly reported adverse events of any grade. The objective response rate (ORR) was up to 75%, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was up to 9.3 months. The disease control rate after 24 weeks varied from 41% to 64%. Overall survival (OS) ranged between 3.0 and 18.8 months. Notably, treatment-related adverse events were observed in more than 50% of patients, including serious adverse events such as colitis, febrile neutropenia, and pulmonary infection. Some adverse events led to dose limitation and drug discontinuation in five studies. Additionally, five studies reported cases of death, mostly due to disease progression. The median duration of treatment ranged from 14.8 weeks to 8.4 months. The most common dosage of binimetinib was 30 mg or 45 mg twice daily, sometimes used in combination with other agents like encorafenib or hydroxychloroquine.

CONCLUSIONS

Only a few studies have shown binimetinib to be effective, in terms of improving OS, PFS, and ORR, while most of the studies found nonsignificant efficacy with increased toxicity for binimetinib compared with traditional chemotherapy in patients with lung cancer. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials are recommended.

Clinicopathological and Molecular Features of Penile Melanoma With a Proposed Staging System

Penile melanomas (PM) are an exceedingly rare subtype of mucosal melanoma (MM), and we reviewed the clinicopathologic features and molecular profile in 8 PMs. The patient ages ranged from 46 to 78 (mean: 62.8) years with involvement on the glans (n=5; 62.5%), penile urethra (n=2; 25%), and foreskin (n=1, 12.5%). Tumor depth ranged from 1.6 to 10.0 (mean: 5.25) mm. Most of the patients underwent partial penectomy (n=6; 75%) and sentinel lymph node (LN) biopsy N=7; 87.5%). Seven patients had metastatic disease at diagnosis, 6 involving LNs and 1 the adrenal gland, and 4 died of disease with a mean follow-up period of 40.5 (2 to 95) months. Five of 7 (71%) cases identified 15 molecular alterations within KIT , CDKN2A , NF1 , PTEN , and APC (n=2 each), and NRAS , MAP3K1 , CDH1 , MSH6 , and TERT (n=1 each). Two cases were not found to harbor genetic aberrations, and 1 case failed testing. In addition, we reviewed the English literature and included 93 cases with a reported depth of invasion and follow-up. A total of 101 PMs were analyzed for prognostic parameters, and the overall survival was significantly worse in patients with LN metastasis (P=0.0008), distant metastasis (P=0.0016), and greater depth of invasion (P=0.0222) based upon T-stage. While T4 conferred substantially worse survival, the delineation of the survival curves between T2 and T3 was less clear, and combining T2+T3 disease had a strong prognostic impact ( P =0.0024). Prognostic parameters used in the staging of cutaneous melanomas may also be used in PMs. An alternative staging system expanding the inclusion criteria for T2 might provide a more accurate prognostic stratification.

Phase II Study of Ulixertinib in Children and Young Adults With Tumors Harboring Activating Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Pathway Alterations: APEC1621J of the National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group Pediatric MATCH Trial

PURPOSE

The National Cancer Institute-Children's Oncology Group (NCI-COG) Pediatric MATCH trial assigns patients age 1-21 years with refractory malignancies to phase II treatment arms of molecularly targeted therapies on the basis of genetic alterations detected in their tumor. Patients with activating alterations in the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway were treated with ulixertinib, an extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK)1/2 inhibitor.

METHODS

As there were no previous pediatric data, ulixertinib was initially tested in a dose escalation cohort to establish the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) before proceeding to the phase II cohort. Ulixertinib was administered at 260 mg/m2/dose orally twice a day (dose level 1 [DL1], n = 15) or 350 mg/m2/dose orally twice a day (DL2, n = 5). The primary end point was objective response rate; secondary end points included safety/tolerability and progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

Twenty patients (median 12 years; range, 5-20) were treated, all evaluable for response. CNS tumors comprised 55% (11/20) of diagnoses, with high-grade glioma and low-grade glioma most common (n = 5 each). All CNS tumors except one harbored BRAF fusions or V600E mutations. Rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 5) was the most frequent non-CNS diagnosis. DL1 was declared the RP2D in the dose escalation cohort after dose-limiting toxicities in Cycle 1 occurred in 1/6 patients at DL1 and 2/5 patients at DL2, including fatigue, anorexia, rash, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dehydration, hypoalbuminemia, and hypernatremia. No objective responses were observed. Six-month PFS was 37% (95% CI, 17 to 58). Three patients with BRAF-altered CNS tumors achieved stable disease >6 months.

CONCLUSION

Ulixertinib, a novel targeted agent with no previous pediatric data, was successfully evaluated in a national precision medicine basket trial. The pediatric RP2D of ulixertinib is 260 mg/m2/dose orally twice a day. Limited single-agent efficacy was observed in a biomarker-selected cohort of refractory pediatric tumors.

Kinase Inhibitors and Kinase-Targeted Cancer Therapies: Recent Advances and Future Perspectives

Over 120 small-molecule kinase inhibitors (SMKIs) have been approved worldwide for treating various diseases, with nearly 70 FDA approvals specifically for cancer treatment, focusing on targets like the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) family. Kinase-targeted strategies encompass monoclonal antibodies and their derivatives, such as nanobodies and peptides, along with innovative approaches like the use of kinase degraders and protein kinase interaction inhibitors, which have recently demonstrated clinical progress and potential in overcoming resistance. Nevertheless, kinase-targeted strategies encounter significant hurdles, including drug resistance, which greatly impacts the clinical benefits for cancer patients, as well as concerning toxicity when combined with immunotherapy, which restricts the full utilization of current treatment modalities. Despite these challenges, the development of kinase inhibitors remains highly promising. The extensively studied tyrosine kinase family has 70% of its targets in various stages of development, while 30% of the kinase family remains inadequately explored. Computational technologies play a vital role in accelerating the development of novel kinase inhibitors and repurposing existing drugs. Recent FDA-approved SMKIs underscore the importance of blood-brain barrier permeability for long-term patient benefits. This review provides a comprehensive summary of recent FDA-approved SMKIs based on their mechanisms of action and targets. We summarize the latest developments in potential new targets and explore emerging kinase inhibition strategies from a clinical perspective. Lastly, we outline current obstacles and future prospects in kinase inhibition.

Incidence of Ophthalmological Complications in NF-1 Patients Treated with MEK Inhibitors

MEK inhibitors (MEKi) represent innovative and promising treatments for managing manifestations of neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). To mitigate potential ophthalmic side effects, such as MEKi-associated retinopathy (MEKAR), patients undergoing MEKi therapy routinely receive ophthalmology evaluations. Our study aims to assess the necessity of this regular screening within a predominantly pediatric NF1 population by examining the occurrence of ocular adverse events (OAE). A retrospective study evaluated 45 NF1 patients receiving MEKi. Inclusion criteria included baseline and follow-up examinations following the initiation of MEKi therapy. At each assessment, a comprehensive eye evaluation was performed, comprising a dilated fundus examination, ocular coherence tomography of the macula and nerve fiber layer, and Humphrey visual field testing. Twenty-six patients, with an average age of 13 years (range 2-23 years) and an average follow-up duration of 413 days were included in the analysis. Three different MEKi were used: selumetinib (77%), trametinib (23%), and mirdametinib (4%). None of the patients experienced retinopathy at any point during the study. Some patients had pre-existing optic neuropathies (27%), but no instances of nerve changes occurred after commencing MEKi therapy. Four patients (15%) exhibited symptoms of dry eye, all of which were effectively managed with topical lubrication.

Clinical practice guidelines for molecular tumor marker, 2nd edition review part 2

In recent years, rapid advancement in gene/protein analysis technology has resulted in target molecule identification that may be useful in cancer treatment. Therefore, "Clinical Practice Guidelines for Molecular Tumor Marker, Second Edition" was published in Japan in September 2021. These guidelines were established to align the clinical usefulness of external diagnostic products with the evaluation criteria of the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. The guidelines were scoped for each tumor, and a clinical questionnaire was developed based on a serious clinical problem. This guideline was based on a careful review of the evidence obtained through a literature search, and recommendations were identified following the recommended grades of the Medical Information Network Distribution Services (Minds). Therefore, this guideline can be a tool for cancer treatment in clinical practice. We have already reported the review portion of "Clinical Practice Guidelines for Molecular Tumor Marker, Second Edition" as Part 1. Here, we present the English version of each part of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Molecular Tumor Marker, Second Edition.

Primary lacrimal sac melanoma: a case report describing the novel use of fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) for diagnosis, together with literature review and immunotherapy treatment update

Primary lacrimal sac melanoma (PLSM) is exceedingly rare and associated with high morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately, PLSM often presents insidiously resulting in delayed detection and poor prognosis. A 69-year-old Black man was suspected of having a lacrimal sac tumour following presentation with a left sided watery eye, bloody tears, and a lacrimal mass. Due to the patient's implantable pacemaker, defibrillator, and high anticoagulation, an ultrasound-guided FNAC was performed instead of incisional biopsy, revealing a PLSM. Diagnosis was confirmed following complete tumour resection with free flap reconstruction and neck dissection. Unfortunately, disease progression ensued despite further neck dissection and three cycles of both pembrolizumab and iplimumab. This is the first description of FNAC to accurately diagnose PLSM and highlights its use as an accurate, rapid, and minimally invasive technique that may allow an earlier screening diagnosis of lacrimal sac tumours. We also discuss the outcome of immunotherapy in recent similar cases.

What Is the Timing and Role of Targeted Therapy in Metastatic Melanoma?

ABSTRACT

Melanoma is the most lethal cutaneous malignancy worldwide. The last 15 years have ushered in several regulatory approvals that have dramatically altered the landscape of treatment options for patients with melanoma. Many patients with melanoma harbor activating mutations in the BRAF proto-oncogene, a key component of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) intracellular signaling pathway. Therapies targeting BRAF have led to remarkable improvements in both response rates and survival in patients with metastatic disease. In parallel with these developments in MAPK-targeted therapy has been the clinical development of immune checkpoint inhibitors, which also have improved response rates and survival in patients with metastatic disease including randomized trials compared with MAPK-targeted therapy in patients with advanced, BRAF-mutant melanoma. Immune checkpoint inhibitors have become the preferred first-line standard-of-care treatment for patients with newly diagnosed metastatic disease in patients irrespective of BRAF mutational status. Given these developments, it is now less clear how to optimize the use of MAPK-targeted therapy regarding treatment setting and in sequence with immune checkpoint inhibitor.

Prognostic and predictive biomarkers in melanoma

Biomarkers help to inform the clinical management of patients with melanoma. For patients with clinically localised primary melanoma, biomarkers can help to predict post-surgical outcome (including via the use of risk prediction tools), better select patients for sentinel lymph node biopsy, and tailor catch-all follow-up protocols to the individual. Systemic drug treatments, including immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapies and BRAF-targeted therapies, have radically improved the prognosis of metastatic (stage III and IV) cutaneous melanoma patients, and also shown benefit in the earlier setting of stage IIB/C primary melanoma. Unfortunately, a response is far from guaranteed. Here, we review clinically relevant, established, and emerging, prognostic, and predictive pathological biomarkers that refine clinical decision-making in primary and metastatic melanoma patients. Gene expression profile assays and nomograms are emerging tools for prognostication and sentinel lymph node risk prediction in primary melanoma patients. Biomarkers incorporated into clinical practice guidelines include BRAF V600 mutations for the use of targeted therapies in metastatic cutaneous melanoma, and the HLA-A∗02:01 allele for the use of a bispecific fusion protein in metastatic uveal melanoma. Several predictive biomarkers have been proposed for ICI therapies but have not been incorporated into Australian clinical practice guidelines. Further research, validation, and assessment of clinical utility is required before more prognostic and predictive biomarkers are fluidly integrated into routine care.

Small-molecule inhibition of MAP2K4 is synergistic with RAS inhibitors in KRAS-mutant cancers

The Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homologue KRAS is among the most commonly mutated oncogenes in human cancers, thus representing an attractive target for precision oncology. The approval for clinical use of the first selective inhibitors of G12C mutant KRAS therefore holds great promise for cancer treatment. However, despite initial encouraging clinical results, the overall survival benefit that patients experience following treatment with these inhibitors has been disappointing to date, pointing toward the need to develop more powerful combination therapies. Here, we show that responsiveness to KRASG12C and pan-RAS inhibitors in KRAS-mutant lung and colon cancer cells is limited by feedback activation of the parallel MAP2K4-JNK-JUN pathway. Activation of this pathway leads to elevated expression of receptor tyrosine kinases that reactivate KRAS and its downstream effectors in the presence of drug. We find that the combination of sotorasib, a drug targeting KRASG12C, and the MAP2K4 inhibitor HRX-0233 prevents this feedback activation and is highly synergistic in a panel of KRASG12C-mutant lung and colon cancer cells. Moreover, combining HRX-0233 and sotorasib is well-tolerated and resulted in durable tumor shrinkage in mouse xenografts of human lung cancer cells, suggesting a therapeutic strategy for KRAS-driven cancers.

Targeting the RAS/RAF/MAPK pathway for cancer therapy: from mechanism to clinical studies

Metastatic dissemination of solid tumors, a leading cause of cancer-related mortality, underscores the urgent need for enhanced insights into the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying metastasis, chemoresistance, and the mechanistic backgrounds of individuals whose cancers are prone to migration. The most prevalent signaling cascade governed by multi-kinase inhibitors is the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway, encompassing the RAS-RAF-MAPK kinase (MEK)-extracellular signal-related kinase (ERK) pathway. RAF kinase is a primary mediator of the MAPK pathway, responsible for the sequential activation of downstream targets, such as MEK and the transcription factor ERK, which control numerous cellular and physiological processes, including organism development, cell cycle control, cell proliferation and differentiation, cell survival, and death. Defects in this signaling cascade are associated with diseases such as cancer. RAF inhibitors (RAFi) combined with MEK blockers represent an FDA-approved therapeutic strategy for numerous RAF-mutant cancers, including melanoma, non-small cell lung carcinoma, and thyroid cancer. However, the development of therapy resistance by cancer cells remains an important barrier. Autophagy, an intracellular lysosome-dependent catabolic recycling process, plays a critical role in the development of RAFi resistance in cancer. Thus, targeting RAF and autophagy could be novel treatment strategies for RAF-mutant cancers. In this review, we delve deeper into the mechanistic insights surrounding RAF kinase signaling in tumorigenesis and RAFi-resistance. Furthermore, we explore and discuss the ongoing development of next-generation RAF inhibitors with enhanced therapeutic profiles. Additionally, this review sheds light on the functional interplay between RAF-targeted therapies and autophagy in cancer.

Anorectal mucosal melanoma

Anorectal mucosal melanoma accounts for less than 1 % of all anorectal malignant tumors and a tendency for delayed diagnosis leads to advanced disease at presentation.1,2 Due to the rarity of the disease, there are limited prospective trials exploring the optimal treatment strategies. Generally, tumors are surgically excised, with a preference for conservative management with wide local excision. In the past decade, there have been advances with immunotherapy and other targeted therapies. Multiple clinical trials continue exploring neoadjuvant/adjuvant combination treatments in the setting of advanced or unresectable disease.

Logic-based modeling and drug repurposing for the prediction of novel therapeutic targets and combination regimens against E2F1-driven melanoma progression

Melanoma presents increasing prevalence and poor outcomes. Progression to aggressive stages is characterized by overexpression of the transcription factor E2F1 and activation of downstream prometastatic gene regulatory networks (GRNs). Appropriate therapeutic manipulation of the E2F1-governed GRNs holds the potential to prevent metastasis however, these networks entail complex feedback and feedforward regulatory motifs among various regulatory layers, which make it difficult to identify druggable components. To this end, computational approaches such as mathematical modeling and virtual screening are important tools to unveil the dynamics of these signaling networks and identify critical components that could be further explored as therapeutic targets. Herein, we integrated a well-established E2F1-mediated epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) map with transcriptomics data from E2F1-expressing melanoma cells to reconstruct a core regulatory network underlying aggressive melanoma. Using logic-based in silico perturbation experiments of a core regulatory network, we identified that simultaneous perturbation of Protein kinase B (AKT1) and oncoprotein murine double minute 2 (MDM2) drastically reduces EMT in melanoma. Using the structures of the two protein signatures, virtual screening strategies were performed with the FDA-approved drug library. Furthermore, by combining drug repurposing and computer-aided drug design techniques, followed by molecular dynamics simulation analysis, we identified two potent drugs (Tadalafil and Finasteride) that can efficiently inhibit AKT1 and MDM2 proteins. We propose that these two drugs could be considered for the development of therapeutic strategies for the management of aggressive melanoma.

Exploring the In Vitro and In Vivo Therapeutic Potential of BRAF and MEK Inhibitor Combination in NRAS-Mutated Melanoma

INTRODUCTION

Patients with NRAS-mutant metastatic melanoma often have an aggressive disease requiring a fast-acting, effective therapy. The MEK inhibitor binimetinib shows an overall response rate of 15% in patients with NRAS-mutant melanoma, providing a backbone for combination strategies. Our previous studies demonstrated that in NRAS-mutant melanoma, the antitumor activity of the MEK inhibitor binimetinib was significantly potentiated by the BRAFV600E/K inhibitor encorafenib through the induction of ER stress, leading to melanoma cell death by apoptotic mechanisms. Encorafenib combined with binimetinib was well tolerated in a phase III trial showing potent antitumor activity in BRAF-mutant melanoma, making a rapid evaluation in NRAS-mutant melanoma imminently feasible. These data provide a mechanistic rationale for the evaluation of binimetinib combined with encorafenib in preclinical and clinical studies on NRAS-mutant metastatic melanoma.

METHODS

The combination of BRAFi plus MEKi was tested in a monolayer culture of patient-derived cell lines and in corresponding patient-derived tissue slice cultures of NRAS-mutant melanoma. To investigate the treatment in vivo, NSG (NOD. Cg-PrkdcscidIl2rgtm1Wjl/SzJ) mice were subcutaneously injected with three different BRAF wild-type melanoma models harboring oncogenic NRAS mutations and treated orally with encorafenib (6 mg/kg body weight, daily) with or without binimetinib (8 mg/kg body weight, twice daily). In parallel, an individual healing attempt was carried out by treating one patient with an NRAS-mutated tumor.

RESULTS

Encorafenib was able to enhance the inhibitory effect on cell growth of binimetinib only in the cell line SKMel147 in vitro. It failed to enhance the apoptotic effect found in two other NRAS-mutated cell lines. Encorafenib led to a hyperactivation of ERK which could be reduced with the combinational treatment. In two of the three patient-derived tissue slice culture models of NRAS-mutant melanomas, a slight tendency of a combinatorial effect was seen which was not significant. Encorafenib showed a slight induction of the ER stress genes ATF4, CHOP, and NUPR1. The combinational treatment was able to enhance this effect, but not significantly. In the mouse model, the combination therapy of encorafenib with binimetinib resulted in reduced tumor growth compared to the control and encorafenib groups; however, the best effect in terms of tumor growth inhibition was measured in the binimetinib therapy group. The therapy showed no effect in an individual healing attempt for a patient suffering from metastatic, therapy-refractory NRAS-mutated melanoma.

CONCLUSION

In in vitro and ex vivo settings, the combination therapy was observed to elicit a response; however, it did not amplify the efficacy observed with binimetinib alone, whereas in a patient, the combinational treatment remained ineffective. The preclinical in vivo data showed no increased combinatorial effect. However, the in vivo effect of binimetinib as monotherapy was unexpectedly high in the tested regimen. Nevertheless, binimetinib proved to be advantageous in the treatment of melanoma in vivo and led to high rates of apoptosis in vitro; hence, it still seems to be a good base for combination with other substances in the treatment of patients with NRAS-mutant melanoma.

The molecular perspective on the melanoma and genome engineering of T-cells in targeting therapy

Melanoma, an aggressive malignant tumor originating from melanocytes in humans, is on the rise globally, with limited non-surgical treatment options available. Recent advances in understanding the molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying immune escape, tumorigenesis, drug resistance, and cancer metastasis have paved the way for innovative therapeutic strategies. Combination therapy targeting multiple pathways simultaneously has been shown to be promising in treating melanoma, eliciting favorable responses in most melanoma patients. CAR T-cells, engineered to overcome the limitations of human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-dependent tumor cell detection associated with T-cell receptors, offer an alternative approach. By genetically modifying apheresis-collected allogeneic or autologous T-cells to express chimeric antigen receptors, CAR T-cells can appreciate antigens on cell surfaces independently of major histocompatibility complex (MHC), providing a significant cancer cell detection advantage. However, identifying the most effective target antigen is the initial step, as it helps mitigate the risk of toxicity due to "on-target, off-tumor" and establishes a targeted therapeutic strategy. Furthermore, evaluating signaling pathways and critical molecules involved in melanoma pathogenesis remains insufficient. This study emphasizes the novel approaches of CAR T-cell immunoediting and presents new insights into the molecular signaling pathways associated with melanoma.

Contribution of MEK Inhibition to BRAF/MEK Inhibitor Combination Treatment of BRAF-Mutant Melanoma: Part 2 of the Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III COLUMBUS Trial

PURPOSE

In COLUMBUS part 1, patients with advanced BRAFV600-mutant melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg twice a day (COMBO450), vemurafenib 960 mg twice a day, or encorafenib 300 mg once daily (ENCO300). As previously reported, COMBO450 improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus vemurafenib (part 1 primary end point) and ENCO300 (part 1 key secondary end point; not statistically significant). Part 2, requested by the US Food and Drug Administration, evaluated the contribution of binimetinib by maintaining the same encorafenib dosage in the combination (encorafenib 300 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily [COMBO300]) and ENCO300 arms.

METHODS

In part 2, patients were randomly assigned 3:1 to COMBO300 or ENCO300. ENCO300 (parts 1 and 2) data were combined, per protocol, for PFS analysis (key secondary end point) by a blinded independent review committee (BIRC). Other analyses included overall response rate (ORR), overall survival, and safety.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-eight patients received COMBO300, and 86 received ENCO300. Per protocol, ENCO300 arms (parts 1 and 2 combined) were also evaluated (n = 280). The median follow-up for ENCO300 was 40.8 months (part 1) and 57.1 months (part 2). The median PFS (95% CI) was 12.9 months (10.9 to 14.9) for COMBO300 versus 9.2  months (7.4 to 11.1) for ENCO300 (parts 1  and  2) and 7.4  months (5.6 to 9.2) for ENCO300 (part 2). The hazard ratio (95% CI) for COMBO300 was 0.74 (0.60 to 0.92; two-sided P = .003) versus ENCO300 (parts 1  and  2). The ORR by BIRC (95% CI) was 68% (62 to 74) and 51% (45 to 57) for COMBO300 and ENCO300 (parts 1  and  2), respectively. COMBO300 had greater relative dose intensity and fewer grade 3/4 adverse events than ENCO300.

CONCLUSION

COMBO300 improved PFS, ORR, and tolerability compared with ENCO300, confirming the contribution of binimetinib to efficacy and safety.

Novel biomolecules in targeted cancer therapy: a new approach towards precision medicine

Cancer is a major threat to human life around the globe, and the discovery of novel biomolecules continue to be an urgent therapeutic need that is still unmet. Precision medicine relies on targeted therapeutic strategies. Researchers are better equipped to develop therapies that target proteins as they understand more about the genetic alterations and molecules that cause progression of cancer. There has been a recent diversification of the sorts of targets exploited in treatment. Therapeutic antibody and biotechnology advancements enabled curative treatments to reach previously inaccessible sites. New treatment strategies have been initiated for several undruggable targets. The application of tailored therapy has been proven to have efficient results in controlling cancer progression. Novel biomolecules like SMDCs, ADCs, mABs, and PROTACS has gained vast attention in the recent years. Several studies have shown that using these novel technology helps in reducing the drug dosage as well as to overcome drug resistance in different cancer types. Therefore, it is crucial to fully untangle the mechanism and collect evidence to understand the significance of these novel drug targets and strategies. This review article will be discussing the importance and role of these novel biomolecules in targeted cancer therapies.

MEK inhibition induces expression of differentiation marker Keratin 10 in human keratinocytes

BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma was regularly treated in the past with a BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) alone or in combination with inhibitors of the mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEKi), which is still a common treatment. This combination therapy strongly reduced the occurrence of keratoacanthomas and squamous cell carcinoma, which was frequently seen when BRAFi was used as monotherapy. Here we addressed the question whether MEK inhibition counteracts squamous cell carcinoma development in part by promoting keratinocyte differentiation. Exposure of human immortalized keratinocytes to different concentrations of MEKi revealed a significant increase in the expression of differentiation-associated keratins K10 and K1 as determined by qRT-PCR and immunofluorescence staining. Taken together, the present study suggests that in a combined treatment of melanoma with BRAFi/MEKi, MEKi reduces the incidence of squamous cell carcinomas by promoting keratinocyte differentiation under combined BRAFi/MEKi treatment in melanoma. This might open further treatment perspectives for skin cancer treatment.

Treatment experience with encorafenib plus binimetinib for BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma: management insights for clinical practice

For patients with locally advanced or metastatic melanoma who have BRAF V600 activating mutations, combination therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors is now the standard of care. The combination of encorafenib, a highly selective adenosine triphosphate-competitive BRAF inhibitor, plus binimetinib, a potent, selective, allosteric, non-adenosine triphosphate-competitive MEK1/2 inhibitor, was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for unresectable or metastatic melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations based on data from the phase III COLUMBUS study (NCT01909453). Clinical data evaluating BRAF and MEK inhibitor combinations in advanced melanoma indicate a specific profile of adverse events that includes serious retinopathy, skin disorders, and cardiovascular toxicities. Here we provide an overview of the rationale for combining BRAF and MEK inhibitors for the treatment of melanoma, long-term safety results from COLUMBUS, and guidance on managing the most common adverse events associated with this combination based on clinical experience. Proactive and appropriate management of adverse events can allow for longer treatment durations and may result in better treatment outcomes.

A real-world study of adjuvant anti-PD -1 immunotherapy on stage III melanoma with BRAF, NRAS, and KIT mutations

BACKGROUND

Melanoma frequently harbors BRAF, NRAS, or KIT mutations which influence both tumor development and treatment strategies. For example, it is still controversial whether adjuvant anti-PD-1 monotherapy or BRAF/MEK inhibitors may better improve the survival for resected BRAF-mutant melanoma. Furthermore, outcomes for melanoma with NRAS and KIT mutation receiving adjuvant immunotherapy remain unclear.

METHODS

One hundred seventy-four stage III melanoma patients who underwent radical surgery in Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (FUSCC) during January 2017 to December 2021 were included in this real-world study. Patients were followed up until death or May 30th, 2022. Pearson's chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test was performed for univariable analysis of the different category groups. Log-rank analysis was used to identify the prognostic factors for disease-free survival (DFS).

RESULTS

There were 41 (23.6%) patients with BRAF mutation, 31 (17.8%) with NRAS mutation, 17 (9.8%) with KIT mutation, and 85 (48.9%) wild-type patients without either genomic alteration of those three genes. Most ( n  = 118, 67.8%) of them were acral melanoma, while 45 (25.9%) were cutaneous subtype, and 11 were (6.3%) primary unknown. Among them, 115 (66.1%) patients received pembrolizumab or toripalimab monotherapy as adjuvant therapy; 22 (12.6%) patients received high-dose interferon (IFN), and 37 (21.3%) patients were just for observation. There was no statistical difference in clinicopathologic factors between anti-PD-1 group and IFN/OBS group. Of all the enrolled patients, anti-PD-1 group had a better DFS than IFN/OBS group ( p  = 0.039). In anti-PD-1 group, patients with BRAF or NRAS mutations had poorer DFS than wild-type group. No survival difference was found among patients harboring different gene mutations in IFN/OBS group. In wild-type patients, anti-PD-1 group had a better DFS than IFN/OBS group ( p  = 0.003), while no survival benefits were found for patients with BRAF, NRAS, or KIT mutations.

CONCLUSION

Although anti-PD-1 adjuvant therapy provides a better DFS in the general population and in wild-type patients, patients with BRAF, KIT or, especially, NRAS mutation may not benefit further from immunotherapy than conventional IFN treatment or observation.

Phase II, Open-Label Study of Encorafenib Plus Binimetinib in Patients With BRAFV600-Mutant Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

The combination of encorafenib (BRAF inhibitor) plus binimetinib (MEK inhibitor) has demonstrated clinical efficacy with an acceptable safety profile in patients with BRAFV600E/K-mutant metastatic melanoma. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of encorafenib plus binimetinib in patients with BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

In this ongoing, open-label, single-arm, phase II study, patients with BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic NSCLC received oral encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by independent radiology review (IRR). Secondary end points included duration of response (DOR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, time to response, and safety.

RESULTS

At data cutoff, 98 patients (59 treatment-naïve and 39 previously treated) with BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic NSCLC received encorafenib plus binimetinib. Median duration of treatment was 9.2 months with encorafenib and 8.4 months with binimetinib. ORR by IRR was 75% (95% CI, 62 to 85) in treatment-naïve and 46% (95% CI, 30 to 63) in previously treated patients; median DOR was not estimable (NE; 95% CI, 23.1 to NE) and 16.7 months (95% CI, 7.4 to NE), respectively. DCR after 24 weeks was 64% in treatment-naïve and 41% in previously treated patients. Median PFS was NE (95% CI, 15.7 to NE) in treatment-naïve and 9.3 months (95% CI, 6.2 to NE) in previously treated patients. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were nausea (50%), diarrhea (43%), and fatigue (32%). TRAEs led to dose reductions in 24 (24%) and permanent discontinuation of encorafenib plus binimetinib in 15 (15%) patients. One grade 5 TRAE of intracranial hemorrhage was reported. Interactive visualization of the data presented in this article is available at the PHAROS dashboard (https://clinical-trials.dimensions.ai/pharos/).

CONCLUSION

For patients with treatment-naïve and previously treated BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic NSCLC, encorafenib plus binimetinib showed a meaningful clinical benefit with a safety profile consistent with that observed in the approved indication in melanoma.

Pathology and Molecular Biology of Melanoma

Almost every death in young patients with an advanced skin tumor is caused by melanoma. Today, with the help of modern treatments, these patients survive longer or can even achieve a cure. Advanced stage melanoma is frequently related with poor prognosis and physicians still find this disease difficult to manage due to the absence of a lasting response to initial treatment regimens and the lack of randomized clinical trials in post immunotherapy/targeted molecular therapy settings. New therapeutic targets are emerging from preclinical data on the genetic profile of melanocytes and from the identification of molecular factors involved in the pathogenesis of malignant transformation. In the current paper, we present the diagnostic challenges, molecular biology and genetics of malignant melanoma, as well as the current therapeutic options for patients with this diagnosis.

Targeting small GTPases: emerging grasps on previously untamable targets, pioneered by KRAS

Small GTPases including Ras, Rho, Rab, Arf, and Ran are omnipresent molecular switches in regulating key cellular functions. Their dysregulation is a therapeutic target for tumors, neurodegeneration, cardiomyopathies, and infection. However, small GTPases have been historically recognized as "undruggable". Targeting KRAS, one of the most frequently mutated oncogenes, has only come into reality in the last decade due to the development of breakthrough strategies such as fragment-based screening, covalent ligands, macromolecule inhibitors, and PROTACs. Two KRAS^G12C covalent inhibitors have obtained accelerated approval for treating KRAS^G12C mutant lung cancer, and allele-specific hotspot mutations on G12D/S/R have been demonstrated as viable targets. New methods of targeting KRAS are quickly evolving, including transcription, immunogenic neoepitopes, and combinatory targeting with immunotherapy. Nevertheless, the vast majority of small GTPases and hotspot mutations remain elusive, and clinical resistance to G12C inhibitors poses new challenges. In this article, we summarize diversified biological functions, shared structural properties, and complex regulatory mechanisms of small GTPases and their relationships with human diseases. Furthermore, we review the status of drug discovery for targeting small GTPases and the most recent strategic progress focused on targeting KRAS. The discovery of new regulatory mechanisms and development of targeting approaches will together promote drug discovery for small GTPases.

The Genomic Landscape of Melanoma and Its Therapeutic Implications

Melanoma is one of the most aggressive malignancies of the skin. The genetic composition of melanoma is complex and varies among different subtypes. With the aid of recent technologies such as next generation sequencing and single-cell sequencing, our understanding of the genomic landscape of melanoma and its tumor microenvironment has become increasingly clear. These advances may provide explanation to the heterogenic treatment outcomes of melanoma patients under current therapeutic guidelines and provide further insights to the development of potential new therapeutic targets. Here, we provide a comprehensive review on the genetics related to melanoma tumorigenesis, metastasis, and prognosis. We also review the genetics affecting the melanoma tumor microenvironment and its relation to tumor progression and treatment.

Therapeutic targeting of anoikis resistance in cutaneous melanoma metastasis

The acquisition of resistance to anoikis, the cell death induced by loss of adhesion to the extracellular matrix, is an absolute requirement for the survival of disseminating and circulating tumour cells (CTCs), and for the seeding of metastatic lesions. In melanoma, a range of intracellular signalling cascades have been identified as potential drivers of anoikis resistance, however a full understanding of the process is yet to be attained. Mechanisms of anoikis resistance pose an attractive target for the therapeutic treatment of disseminating and circulating melanoma cells. This review explores the range of small molecule, peptide and antibody inhibitors targeting molecules involved in anoikis resistance in melanoma, and may be repurposed to prevent metastatic melanoma prior to its initiation, potentially improving the prognosis for patients.

FDA-Approved Fluorinated Heterocyclic Drugs from 2016 to 2022

The inclusion of fluorine atoms or heterocyclic moiety into drug structures represents a recurrent motif in medicinal chemistry. The combination of these two features is constantly appearing in new molecular entities with various biological activities. This is demonstrated by the increasing number of newly synthesized fluorinated heterocyclic compounds among the Food and Drug Administration FDA-approved drugs. In this review, the biological activity, as well as the synthetic aspects, of 33 recently FDA-approved fluorinated heterocyclic drugs from 2016 to 2022 are highlighted.

Optically activated MEK1/2 inhibitors (Opti-MEKi) as potential antimelanoma agents

Mitogen-activated protein kinase kinases 1/2 (MEK1/2) play critical roles in the canonical RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway. Highly selective and potent non-ATP-competitive allosteric MEK1/2 inhibitors have been developed, and three of them were clinically approved for the treatment of BRAFV600 -mutant melanoma. However, the accompanying side effects of the systemically administered MEK1/2 drugs largely constrain their tolerable doses and efficacy. In this study, a series of mirdametinib-based optically activatable MEK1/2 inhibitors (opti-MEKi) were designed and synthesized. A structural-based design led to the discovery of photocaged compounds with dramatically diminished efficacy in vitro, whose activities can be spatiotemporally induced by short durations of irradiation of ultraviolet (365 nm) light. We demonstrated the robust photoactivation of MEK1/2 inhibition and antimelanoma activity in cultured human cells, as well as in a xenograft zebrafish model. Taken together, the modular approach presented herein provides a method for the optical control of MEK1/2 inhibitor activity, and these data support the further development of optically activatable agents for light-mediated antimelanoma phototherapy.

Developing SHP2-based combination therapy for KRAS-amplified cancer

Gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas (GEAs) harbor recurrent amplification of KRAS, leading to marked overexpression of WT KRAS protein. We previously demonstrated that SHP2 phosphatase, which acts to promote KRAS and downstream MAPK pathway activation, is a target in these tumors when combined with MEK inhibition. We hypothesized that SHP2 inhibitors may serve as a foundation for developing novel combination inhibitor strategies for therapy of KRAS-amplified GEA, including with targets outside the MAPK pathway. Here, we explore potential targets to effectively augment the efficacy of SHP2 inhibition, starting with genome-wide CRISPR screens in KRAS-amplified GEA cell lines with and without SHP2 inhibition. We identify candidate targets within the MAPK pathway and among upstream RTKs that may enhance SHP2 efficacy in KRAS-amplified GEA. Additional in vitro and in vivo experiments demonstrated the potent cytotoxicity of pan-ERBB kinase inhibitions in vitro and in vivo. Furthermore, beyond targets within the MAPK pathway, we demonstrate that inhibition of CDK4/6 combines potently with SHP2 inhibition in KRAS-amplified GEA, with greater efficacy of this combination in KRAS-amplified, compared with KRAS-mutant, tumors. These results suggest therapeutic combinations for clinical study in KRAS-amplified GEAs.

Different clinico-pathological and prognostic features of vulvar, vaginal, and cervical melanomas

Female genital tract melanoma (FGTM) is a rare and aggressive melanocytic malignancy, and its clinico-pathological and prognostic features at different anatomic sites have not yet been fully described. We retrospectively analyzed and compared the clinico-pathological data and survival outcomes of patients with primary lower genital tract melanoma enrolled between January 2005 and December 2020. We identified 95 patients with FGTM, of whom 46 had vulvar melanomas (VuM), 43 had vaginal melanomas (VaM), and six had cervical melanomas (CM). The clinical characteristics of all 95 cases, including symptoms, single or multiple primary lesions, clinical stage, surgery, and histopathological characteristics of 62 primary untreated cases, including pigmentation, predominant cytology, histological pattern, mitotic figures, and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes of VuM, VaM, and CM, differed significantly. In comparison, only trend differences in molecular alternations were evident (p = 0.077). Disease-specific survival (DSS) was 30.7% at 5 years (46.5%, 25.6%, and 44.4% for VuM, VaM and CM, respectively). Seventy-one (85.5%) patients experienced FGTM recurrence. The median time to the first recurrence was 11 months, and VaM recurred earlier than VM and CM (16, 6, and 10 months for VuM, VaM, and CM, respectively, p = 0.038). A univariate analysis of 50 cases revealed the negative factors of disease-specific survival (DSS), including the location of the vagina and the presence of ulceration, and the negative factors of recurrence-free survival (RFS), including multiple lesions, the presence of ulceration, and the presence of lymphovascular invasion. Multiple lesions showed a borderline correlation with DSS. A multivariate Cox regression analyses of 50 cases revealed that the presence of ulceration was associated with shorter DSS and RFS (yes vs. no, Hazard Ratio = 2.400 and 2.716, respectively). Vaginal location showed a significant correlation with DSS (Hazard Ratio = 2.750, p = 0.024). In conclusion, vulval, vaginal, and cervical melanomas may differ in terms of their clinico-pathological features and associations with DSS and RFS. Ulceration and vaginal location were significantly associated with shorter DSS, and ulceration was associated with an increased risk of FGTM recurrence.

BRAF and MEK Inhibitors and Their Toxicities: A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis summarizes the incidence of treatment-related adverse events (AE) of BRAFi and MEKi.

METHODS

A systematic search of Medline/PubMed was conducted to identify suitable articles published in English up to 31 December 2021. The primary outcomes were profiles for all-grade and grade 3 or higher treatment-related AEs, and the analysis of single side effects belonging to both categories.

RESULTS

The overall incidence of treatment-related all-grade Aes was 99% for Encorafenib (95% CI: 0.97-1.00) and 97% for Trametinib (95% CI: 0.92-0.99; I² = 66%) and Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.94-0.99; I² = 0%). In combined therapies, the rate was 98% for both Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (95% CI: 0.96-0.99; I² = 77%) and Encorafenib + Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.96-1.00). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in 69% of cases for Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.50-0.84; I² = 71%), 68% for Encorafenib (95% CI: 0.61-0.74), and 72% for Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (95% CI: 0.65-0.79; I² = 84%). The most common grade 1-2 AEs were pyrexia (43%) and fatigue (28%) for Dabrafenib + Trametinib and diarrhea for both Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (52%) and Encorafenib + Binimetinib (34%). The most common AEs of grade 3 or higher were pyrexia, rash, and hypertension for Dabrafenib + Trametinib (6%), rash and hypertension for Encorafenib + Binimetinib (6%), and increased AST and ALT for Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (10%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides comprehensive data on treatment-related adverse events of BRAFi and MEKi combination therapies, showing related toxicity profiles to offer a helpful tool for clinicians in the choice of therapy.

Treatment outcomes of mucosal melanoma of head and neck: Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced disease

Background

Head and neck mucosal melanoma (HNMM) is a rare and aggressive subtype of melanoma. HNMM often develops as a recurrent or metastatic disease, and its prognosis is worse than that of cutaneous melanoma. Recent large-scale clinical studies have reported favorable outcomes with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for melanoma. However, these clinical trials included only a small number of HNMM cases. This study aimed to estimate treatment outcomes and prognostic predictors of ICIs for advanced HNMM.

Methods

Cases of advanced HNMM, defined as unresectable or metastatic HNMM at the initial diagnosis (five patients) or development of recurrent/metastatic HNMM after initial treatment (27 patients), were included in this study. Survival analysis and a search for prognostic factors were performed for these 32 patients. Furthermore, the detailed clinical course of patients who received ICI treatment was investigated.

Results

The median overall survival (OS) of 32 patients with advanced HNMM was 25.3 months. The estimated 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 68.4%, 42.8%, and 34.3%, respectively. Fourteen patients (43.7%) received ICIs, whereas 18 (56.3%) did not. Univariate analysis showed that ICI treatment was the only factor associated with a better 1-year OS. Patients who received ICI treatment had significantly longer OS (median OS: not reached, 1-year OS: 85.7%) than those who did not (median OS: 11.3 months, 1-year OS: 54.5%). The overall response and disease control rates of patients who received ICI treatment were 50% and 64.3%, respectively. Patients who achieved complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) to ICI treatment survived significantly longer (1-year OS: 100%) than those who did not (1-year OS: 71.4%). Among the five patients who discontinued ICI treatment due to severe immune-related adverse events (irAEs), four did not receive salvage treatments but showed durable treatment effects and survived for 9.8–54.2 months at the end of the follow-up period.

Conclusions

ICI treatment achieved a favorable OS for advanced HNMM. CR/PR to ICI treatment and discontinuation owing to severe irAEs were favorable predictors of OS.

COLUMBUS 5-Year Update: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial of Encorafenib Plus Binimetinib Versus Vemurafenib or Encorafenib in Patients With BRAF V600-Mutant Melanoma

PURPOSE

Combination treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors has demonstrated benefits on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) and is a standard of care for the treatment of advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma. Here, we report the 5-year update from the COLUMBUS trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01909453).

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600-mutant melanoma, untreated or progressed after first-line immunotherapy, were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily, vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily, or encorafenib 300 mg once daily. An updated analysis was conducted 65 months after the last patient was randomly assigned.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventy-seven patients were randomly assigned: 192 to encorafenib plus binimetinib, 191 to vemurafenib, and 194 to encorafenib. The 5-year PFS and OS rates with encorafenib plus binimetinib were 23% and 35% overall and 31% and 45% in those with normal lactate dehydrogenase levels, respectively. In comparison, the 5-year PFS and OS rates with vemurafenib were 10% and 21% overall and 12% and 28% in those with normal lactate dehydrogenase levels, respectively. The median duration of response with encorafenib plus binimetinib was 18.6 months, with disease control achieved in 92.2% of patients. In comparison, the median duration of response with vemurafenib was 12.3 months, with disease control achieved in 81.2% of patients. Long-term follow-up showed no new safety concerns, and results were consistent with the known tolerability profile of encorafenib plus binimetinib. Interactive visualization of the data presented in this article is available at COLUMBUS dashboard.

CONCLUSION

In this 5-year update of part 1 of the COLUMBUS trial, encorafenib plus binimetinib treatment demonstrated continued long-term benefits and a consistent safety profile in patients with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma.

Targeted Therapy for Melanomas Without BRAF V600 Mutation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the treatment paradigm for patients with metastatic melanoma; however, there remains an unmet clinical need for alternative treatment options for those patients who are either intolerant or refractory to immunotherapy. Here we review the role and clinical efficacy of targeted therapies for BRAF^V600 wild-type melanoma.

RECENT FINDINGS

Genomic analyses in BRAF^V600 wild-type melanoma have previously identified driver mutations along the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K)-AKT pathways that can be targeted with small molecule inhibitors. New drugs such as bispecific antibodies and antibody drug conjugates may have significant clinical activity even in rare subtypes of melanoma that are less responsive to ICIs. Historically, molecular-targeted therapies have modest clinical success in treating BRAF^V600 wild-type melanoma; nevertheless, they may have a significant clinical role in select, genetically distinct groups of patients. Next-generation immunotherapies or immunomodulators may represent the latest breakthrough in the treatment of melanoma. Additional studies are needed to identify novel drug targets and synergistic drug combinations to expand treatment options and optimize clinical outcomes.

Characterization of Serous Retinopathy Associated with Cobimetinib: Integrated Safety Analysis of Four Studies

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Serous retinopathy can be associated with MEK inhibitors, including cobimetinib. We present results of an integrated safety analysis to further characterize ocular functional and structural changes due to serous retinopathy.

METHODS

Four studies evaluating cobimetinib at the approved dose and schedule in combination with other oncology drugs were included. Study CO39721 incorporated standardized ophthalmologic assessments to fully characterize serous retinopathy events over time and was the primary study for analysis. Supporting information was provided by studies GO28141, WO29479, and GO30182.

RESULTS

In total, 655 patients received one or more doses of cobimetinib and comprised the safety-evaluable population. Overall, 117 patients (17.9%) had one or more serous retinopathy events, 24 (3.7%) had two or more events, and four (0.6%) had three or more events. Grade 3 events occurred in < 2.5% of patients. In CO39721, the median time to onset was 15 days (range 7-111); median time to resolution of first occurrence was 26 days (range 6-591 + days). Twelve of 25 patients (48.0%) recovered without a dose modification and 4/25 (16.0%) were recovered/recovering following a dose modification. The most frequent presentation of serous retinopathy was focal subretinal fluid on optical coherence tomography (62.8% of cases); in some instances (25.7% of cases), subretinal fluid was multifocal. There was no loss of visual function or visual acuity at serous retinopathy onset or resolution.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this integrated safety analysis indicate that cobimetinib-associated serous retinopathy can be managed with or without a dose modification of cobimetinib at the discretion of the treating physician. No visual loss or permanent retinal damage was identified on comprehensive ophthalmologic assessments.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT03178851, NCT01689519, NCT02322814, and NCT02788279.

The future of targeted kinase inhibitors in melanoma

Melanoma is a cancer of the pigment-producing cells of the body and its incidence is rising. Targeted inhibitors that act against kinases in the MAPK pathway are approved for BRAF-mutant metastatic cutaneous melanoma and increase patients' survival. Response to these therapies is limited by drug resistance and is less durable than with immune checkpoint inhibition. Conversely, rare melanoma subtypes have few therapeutic options for advanced disease and MAPK pathway targeting agents show minimal anti-tumor effects. Nevertheless, there is a future for targeted kinase inhibitors in melanoma: in new applications such as adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy and in novel combinations with immunotherapies or other targeted therapies. Pre-clinical studies continue to identify tumor dependencies and their corresponding actionable drug targets, paving the way for rational targeted kinase inhibitor combinations as a personalized medicine approach for melanoma.

Small-molecule inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and more: FDA-approved novel therapeutic drugs for solid tumors from 1991 to 2021

The United States Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) has always been a forerunner in drug evaluation and supervision. Over the past 31 years, 1050 drugs (excluding vaccines, cell-based therapies, and gene therapy products) have been approved as new molecular entities (NMEs) or biologics license applications (BLAs). A total of 228 of these 1050 drugs were identified as cancer therapeutics or cancer-related drugs, and 120 of them were classified as therapeutic drugs for solid tumors according to their initial indications. These drugs have evolved from small molecules with broad-spectrum antitumor properties in the early stage to monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and antibody‒drug conjugates (ADCs) with a more precise targeting effect during the most recent decade. These drugs have extended indications for other malignancies, constituting a cancer treatment system for monotherapy or combined therapy. However, the available targets are still mainly limited to receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs), restricting the development of antitumor drugs. In this review, these 120 drugs are summarized and classified according to the initial indications, characteristics, or functions. Additionally, RTK-targeted therapies and immune checkpoint-based immunotherapies are also discussed. Our analysis of existing challenges and potential opportunities in drug development may advance solid tumor treatment in the future.

Carotenoids from Marine Microalgae as Antimelanoma Agents

Melanoma cells are highly invasive and metastatic tumor cells and commonly express molecular alterations that contribute to multidrug resistance (e.g., BRAF^V600E mutation). Conventional treatment is not effective in a long term, requiring an exhaustive search for new alternatives. Recently, carotenoids from microalgae have been investigated as adjuvant in antimelanoma therapy due to their safety and acceptable clinical tolerability. Many of them are currently used as food supplements. In this review, we have compiled several studies that show microalgal carotenoids inhibit cell proliferation, cell migration and invasion, as well as induced cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in various melanoma cell lines. MAPK and NF-ĸB pathway, MMP and apoptotic factors are frequently affected after exposure to microalgal carotenoids. Fucoxanthin, astaxanthin and zeaxanthin are the main carotenoids investigated, in both in vitro and in vivo experimental models. Preclinical data indicate these compounds exhibit direct antimelanoma effect but are also capable of restoring melanoma cells sensitivity to conventional chemotherapy (e.g., vemurafenib and dacarbazine).

Advanced Acral Melanoma Therapies: Current Status and Future Directions

Melanoma is one of the deadliest malignancies. Its incidence has been significantly increasing in most countries in recent decades. Acral melanoma (AM), a peculiar subgroup of melanoma occurring on the palms, soles, and nails, is the main subtype of melanoma in people of color and is extremely rare in Caucasians. Although great progress has been made in melanoma treatment in recent years, patients with AM have shown limited benefit from current therapies and thus consequently have worse overall survival rates. Achieving durable therapeutic responses in this high-risk melanoma subtype represents one of the greatest challenges in the field. The frequency of BRAF mutations in AM is much lower than that in cutaneous melanoma, which prevents most AM patients from receiving treatment with BRAF inhibitors. However, AM has more frequent mutations such as KIT and CDK4/6, so targeted therapy may still improve the survival of some AM patients in the future. AM may be less susceptible to immune checkpoint inhibitors because of the poor immunogenicity. Therefore, how to enhance the immune response to the tumor cells may be the key to the application of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced AM. Anti-angiogenic drugs, albumin paclitaxel, or interferons are thought to enhance the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitors. Combination therapies based on the backbone of PD-1 are more likely to provide greater clinical benefits. Understanding the molecular landscapes and immune microenvironment of AM will help optimize our combinatory strategies.

Role of extracellular matrix architecture and signaling in melanoma therapeutic resistance

The extracellular matrix (ECM) is critical for maintaining tissue homeostasis therefore its production, assembly and mechanical stiffness are highly regulated in normal tissues. However, in solid tumors, increased stiffness resulting from abnormal ECM structural changes is associated with disease progression, an increased risk of metastasis and poor survival. As a dynamic and key component of the tumor microenvironment, the ECM is becoming increasingly recognized as an important feature of tumors, as it has been shown to promote several hallmarks of cancer via biochemical and biomechanical signaling. In this regard, melanoma cells are highly sensitive to ECM composition, stiffness and fiber alignment because they interact directly with the ECM in the tumor microenvironment via cell surface receptors, secreted factors or enzymes. Importantly, seeing as the ECM is predominantly deposited and remodeled by myofibroblastic stromal fibroblasts, it is a key avenue facilitating their paracrine interactions with melanoma cells. This review gives an overview of melanoma and further describes the critical roles that ECM properties such as ECM remodeling, ECM-related proteins and stiffness play in cutaneous melanoma progression, tumor cell plasticity and therapeutic resistance. Finally, given the emerging importance of ECM dynamics in melanoma, future perspectives on therapeutic strategies to normalize the ECM in tumors are discussed.