Mitogen-activated protein kinase blockade in melanoma: intermittent versus continuous therapy, from preclinical to clinical data

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although targeted therapy provides a high response rate and rapid disease control in advanced melanoma, most patients experience disease progression due to acquired resistance mechanisms leading to reactivation of mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. The purpose of this article is to review the recently published data on the impact of an intermittent versus continuous dosing schedule of BRAF and MEK inhibition in advanced melanoma to determine the best approach in clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some preclinical studies have highlighted the concept that drug-resistant cells may also display drug dependency, such that intermittent dosing of targeted therapy may prevent the emergence of lethal drug resistance. Moreover, clinical observations have suggested that repeated treatment after a break or an intervening therapy may provide clinical benefit. However, recent preclinical and clinical studies have also failed to demonstrate an advantage of intermittent dosing and showed a similar efficacy of the intermittent versus continuous regimens of BRAF and MEK inhibitors in mice models and phase 2 clinical trial.

SUMMARY

Owing to these discordant results, continuous dosing of BRAF and MEK inhibitors remains the optimal therapeutic approach until additional clinical data demonstrate the superiority of another combination or dosing regimen.

BRAF and MEK inhibitors rechallenge as effective treatment for patients with metastatic melanoma

Despite considerable progress made in the treatment of patients with advanced melanoma, the majority of the patients treated with BRAF and mitogen-activated protein inhibitors (BRAFi and MEKi) experience a disease progression due to acquired resistance. Currently, ongoing studies explore the possibility to overcome or reverse this process. Our multicenter retrospective analysis included 51 patients with metastatic BRAF-mutated melanoma who had previously progressed on BRAFi/MEKi than had progressed on immunotherapy (anti-progression disease-1 or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4) and next were rechallenged with BRAFi/MEKi. Median age at BRAFi/MEKi rechallenge was 56 (range: 31-82 y/o). Median overall survival from the start of the first BRAFi/MEKi therapy and from rechallenge BRAFi/MEKi treatment was 29.7 and 9.3 months, respectively, whereas median progression-free survival was 10.5 and 5.9 months, respectively. Six-month, annual, and 2-year overall survival rates on both treatments were: 98% and 55%, 92% and 29%, and 69% and 2%, respectively. A response rate to treatment was higher in the group receiving BRAFi/MEKi for the first time as compared with the group receiving BRAFi/MEKi rechallenge and was overall response rate 72% and 27%; disease control rate 92% and 63%. Time interval between the end of the first BRAFi/MEKi treatment and the beginning of BRAFi/MEKi rechallenge did not influence median overall survival or progression-free survival. A lower toxicity rate was noted with BRAFi/MEKi rechallenge. BRAFi/MEKi rechallenge treatment remains clinically important and is associated with the lower toxicity. BRAFi/MEKi rechallenge efficacy is higher in patients who are in good performance status, with normal lactate dehydrogenase, and without brain metastases.

Mitochondrial Hyperactivation and Enhanced ROS Production are Involved in Toxicity Induced by Oncogenic Kinases Over-Signaling

Targeted therapy is an effective, rational, and safe approach to solid and hematological tumors treatment. Unfortunately, a significant fraction of patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) relapses mainly because of gene amplification, mutations, or other bypass mechanisms. Recently a growing number of papers showed how, in some cases, resistance due to oncogene overexpression may be associated with drug addiction: cells able to proliferate in the presence of high TKI doses become also TKI dependent, undergoing cellular stress, and apoptosis/death upon drug withdrawal. Notably, if a sub-cellular population survives TKI discontinuation it is also partially re-sensitized to the same drug. Thus, it is possible that a subset of patients relapsing upon TKI treatment may benefit from a discontinuous therapeutic schedule. We focused on two different hematologic malignancies, chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL), both successfully treatable with TKIs. The two models utilized (LAMA and SUP-M2) differed in having oncogene overexpression as the sole cause of drug resistance (CML), or additionally carrying kinase domain mutations (ALCL). In both cases drug withdrawal caused a sudden overload of oncogenic signal, enhanced mitochondria activity, induced the release of a high amount of reactive oxygen species (ROS), and caused genotoxic stress and massive cell death. In LAMA cells (CML) we could rescue the cells from death by partially blocking downstream oncogenic signaling or lowering ROS detrimental effect by adding reduced glutathione.

A systematic review of non-standard dosing of oral anticancer therapies

Background

The use of oral systemic anticancer therapies (SACT) has increased and led to improved cancer survival outcomes, particularly with the introduction of small molecule targeted agents and immunomodulators. Oral targeted SACT are, however, associated with toxicities, which might result in reduced quality of life and non-adherence. To reduce treatment-related toxicity, the practice of non-standard dosing is increasing; however guidance to govern this practice is limited. A systematic review was conducted to identify evidence of, and outcomes from, non-standard dosing of oral SACT in oncology and malignant haematology.

Methods

A comprehensive search of 78 oral SACT was conducted in the following databases: MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, Cochrane Library©, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL©). Studies were selected based on predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, and were critically appraised. Extracted data were tabulated to summarise key findings. Due to diversity of study designs and heterogeneity of reported outcomes, studies were categorised and evidence was synthesised in three main themes: dose interruption; dose reduction; and other dosing strategies.

Results

Thirty-four studies were eligible for inclusion: four clinical trials, fifteen cohort studies and fifteen case reports. Evidence for non-standard dosing was reported for eleven oral SACT. Dose interruptions were the most commonly reported strategy (14 studies); nine studies reported dose reductions; and eleven reported other dosing strategies. Eight retrospective cohort studies reported dose interruption of sunitinib in renal cell carcinoma and showed either similar or improved responses and survival outcomes, and fewer or equivalent high grade toxicities, compared to the standard schedule. Four cohort studies retrospectively evaluated dose reductions of imatinib, gefitinib or erlotinib, for chronic myeloid leukaemia and non-small cell lung cancer, respectively. Other dosing strategies included alternate-day dosing. The quality of the evidence was limited by the small sample size in many studies, retrospective study designs, and lack of reported toxicity and/or QoL outcomes.

Conclusions

This review identified limited evidence to support current non-standard dosing strategies, but some of findings, e.g. dose interruption of sunitinib, warrant further investigation in large-scale prospective clinical trials.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-5066-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Reinduction of PD1-inhibitor therapy: first experience in eight patients with metastatic melanoma

Significant progress has been made in the treatment of metastatic melanoma during the last years. Approval of immune-checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies has been achieved recently. The sequencing of these therapies is an important issue. Here, we report our experience with the treatment and retreatment with PD1-inhibitors (PD1i) in eight patients. The patients (two female and seven male with a median age of 70 years, all melanoma stage IV, M1c) underwent a first treatment period with PD1i for a median of 5.5 months. Three (37.5%) patients had a stable disease as best response, two (25%) showed progression, two (25%) showed partial response, and one (12.5%) achieved complete remission. PD1i was discontinued due to disease progression in seven patients and due to side effects (pancreatitis) in one patient. Patients were subsequently treated with ipilimumab (n=2), or chemotherapy (n=4), or no other medical treatment (n=2). All eight patients were subsequently retreated with PD1i for a median of 2.5 months. One (12.5%) developed a partial response, whereas in three patients (37.5%) the disease was stabilized. PD1i have shown a high and durable response rate in the first-line treatment of metastatic melanoma. Our study suggests PD1i retreatment as a reasonable option for selected patients. Further investigations are needed to verify the value of PD1i re-exposure and to identify subgroups of patients who can benefit.

Clinical outcome of concomitant vs interrupted BRAF inhibitor therapy during radiotherapy in melanoma patients

Background:

Concomitant radiation with BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) therapy may increase radiation-induced side effects but also potentially improve tumour control in melanoma patients.

Methods:

A total of 155 patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma from 17 European skin cancer centres were retrospectively analysed. Out of these, 87 patients received concomitant radiotherapy and BRAFi (59 vemurafenib, 28 dabrafenib), while in 68 patients BRAFi therapy was interrupted during radiation (51 vemurafenib, 17 dabrafenib). Overall survival was calculated from the first radiation (OS_RT) and from start of BRAFi therapy (OS_BRAFi).

Results:

The median duration of BRAFi treatment interruption prior to radiotherapy was 4 days and lasted for 17 days. Median OS_RT and OS_BRAFi in the entire cohort were 9.8 and 12.6 months in the interrupted group and 7.3 and 11.5 months in the concomitant group (P=0.075/P=0.217), respectively. Interrupted vemurafenib treatment with a median OS_RT and OS_BRAFi of 10.1 and 13.1 months, respectively, was superior to concomitant vemurafenib treatment with a median OS_RT and OS_BRAFi of 6.6 and 10.9 months (P=0.004/P=0.067). Interrupted dabrafenib treatment with a median OS_RT and OS_BRAFi of 7.7 and 9.8 months, respectively, did not differ from concomitant dabrafenib treatment with a median OS_RT and OS_BRAFi of 9.9 and 11.6 months (P=0.132/P=0.404). Median local control of the irradiated area did not differ in the interrupted and concomitant BRAFi treatment groups (P=0.619). Skin toxicity of grade ≥2 (CTCAE) was significantly increased in patients with concomitant vemurafenib compared to the group with treatment interruption (P=0.002).

Conclusions:

Interruption of vemurafenib treatment during radiation was associated with better survival and less toxicity compared to concomitant treatment. Due to lower number of patients, the relevance of treatment interruption in dabrafenib treated patients should be further investigated. The results of this analysis indicate that treatment with the BRAFi vemurafenib should be interrupted during radiotherapy. Prospective studies are desperately needed.

The safety and efficacy of dabrafenib and trametinib for the treatment of melanoma

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of BRAF and MEK inhibitors into clinical practice improved the prognosis of metastatic melanoma patients. The combination of BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib with MEK inhibitor trametinib has shown its superiority to single agent therapy and is characterized by a tolerable spectrum of adverse events which shows a decrease in incidence over time on treatment. Areas covered: The current scientific literature on safety and adverse events (AEs) related to BRAF and MEK-inhibition has been investigated with special focus on the large phase 3 studies (COMBI-v, COMBI-d and CoBRIM) as well as recent updates presented at oncology and melanoma meetings. Additionally, published case series/case reports were screened for information on AEs. Expert opinion: Even though almost every patient (98%) under combination therapy with dabrafenib and trametinib experiences at least one adverse event, these are generally mild to moderate, reversible and can be managed with dose reductions or interruptions. However, due to an increased life expectancy, there is a substantial need to prevent and treat also mild adverse events, as they play a central role for the quality of life of patients. Ongoing clinical trials will have to demonstrate the efficacy as well as safety of triple combination with anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 antibodies.

Treatment Outcomes for Metastatic Melanoma of Unknown Primary in the New Era: A Single-Institution Study and Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Metastatic melanoma of unknown primary (MUP) is uncommon, biologically ill defined, and clinically understudied. MUP outcomes are seldom reported in clinical trials. In this study, we analyze responses of MUP patients treated with systemic therapy in an attempt to inform treatment guidelines for this unique population.

METHODS

New York University (NYU)'s prospective melanoma database was searched for MUP patients treated with systemic therapy. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for MUP patients treated with immunotherapy or targeted therapy reported in the literature, and their response and survival data were compared to the MUP patient data from NYU. Both groups' response data were compared to those reported for melanoma of known primary (MKP).

RESULTS

The MUP patients treated at NYU had better outcomes on immunotherapy but worse on targeted therapy than the MUP patients in the literature. The NYU MUP patients and those in the literature had worse outcomes than the majority-MKP populations in 10 clinical trial reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that MUP patients might have poorer outcomes on systemic therapy as compared to MKP patients. Our cohort was small and limited data were available, highlighting the need for increased reporting of MUP outcomes and multi-institutional efforts to understand the mechanism behind the observed differences.

MAPK Pathway Inhibitors Sensitize BRAF-Mutant Melanoma to an Antibody-Drug Conjugate Targeting GPNMB

PURPOSE

To determine if BRAF and/or MEK inhibitor-induced GPNMB expression renders melanomas sensitive to CDX-011, an antibody-drug conjugate targeting GPNMB.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

The Cancer Genome Atlas melanoma dataset was interrogated for a panel of MITF-regulated melanosomal differentiation antigens, including GPNMB. BRAF-mutant melanoma cell lines treated with BRAF or MEK inhibitors were assessed for GPNMB expression by RT-qPCR, immunoblot, and FACS analyses. Transient siRNA-mediated knockdown approaches were used to determine if MITF is requirement for treatment-induced GPNMB upregulation. GPNMB expression was analyzed in serial biopsies and serum samples from patients with melanoma taken before, during, and after disease progression on MAPK inhibitor treatment. Subcutaneous injections were performed to test the efficacy of MAPK inhibitors alone, CDX-011 alone, or their combination in suppressing melanoma growth.

RESULTS

A MITF-dependent melanosomal differentiation signature is associated with poor prognosis in patients with this disease. MITF is increased following BRAF and MEK inhibitor treatment and induces the expression of melanosomal differentiation genes, including GPNMB. GPNMB is expressed at the cell surface in MAPK inhibitor-treated melanoma cells and is also elevated in on-treatment versus pretreatment biopsies from melanoma patients receiving MAPK pathway inhibitors. Combining BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors with CDX-011, an antibody-drug conjugate targeting GPNMB, is effective in causing melanoma regression in preclinical animal models and delays the recurrent melanoma growth observed with MEK or BRAF/MEK inhibitor treatment alone.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of MAPK pathway inhibitors with an antibody-drug conjugate targeting GPNMB is an effective therapeutic option for patients with melanoma. Clin Cancer Res; 22(24); 6088-98. ©2016 AACR.

Optimising the combination dosing strategy of abemaciclib and vemurafenib in BRAF-mutated melanoma xenograft tumours

BACKGROUND

Resistance to BRAF inhibition is a major cause of treatment failure for BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma patients. Abemaciclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, overcomes this resistance in xenograft tumours and offers a promising drug combination. The present work aims to characterise the quantitative pharmacology of the abemaciclib/vemurafenib combination using a semimechanistic pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modelling approach and to identify an optimum dosing regimen for potential clinical evaluation.

METHODS

A PK/biomarker model was developed to connect abemaciclib/vemurafenib concentrations to changes in MAPK and cell cycle pathway biomarkers in A375 BRAF-mutated melanoma xenografts. Resultant tumour growth inhibition was described by relating (i) MAPK pathway inhibition to apoptosis, (ii) mitotic cell density to tumour growth and, under resistant conditions, (iii) retinoblastoma protein inhibition to cell survival.

RESULTS

The model successfully described vemurafenib/abemaciclib-mediated changes in MAPK pathway and cell cycle biomarkers. Initial tumour shrinkage by vemurafenib, acquisition of resistance and subsequent abemaciclib-mediated efficacy were successfully captured and externally validated. Model simulations illustrate the benefit of intermittent vemurafenib therapy over continuous treatment, and indicate that continuous abemaciclib in combination with intermittent vemurafenib offers the potential for considerable tumour regression.

CONCLUSIONS

The quantitative pharmacology of the abemaciclib/vemurafenib combination was successfully characterised and an optimised, clinically-relevant dosing strategy was identified.

Guanine nucleotide exchange factor H1 can be a new biomarker of melanoma

Guanine nucleotide exchange factor H1 (GEF-H1), which couples microtubule dynamics to RhoA activation, is a microtubule-regulated exchange factor. Studies have shown that GEF-H1 can be involved in various cancer pathways; however, the clinical significance of GEF-H1 expression and functions in melanoma has not been established. In this study, we investigated the relationship between clinical outcomes and GEF-H1 functions in melanoma. A total of 60 cases of different grades of melanoma samples were used to detect the expression of GEF-H1. Results showed that both messenger RNA and protein levels of GEF-H1 were significantly higher in high-grade melanomas. Furthermore, patients with high GEF-H1 expression had a shorter overall survival (22 months) than patients with low level of GEF-H1 expression (33.38 months). We also found that GEF-H1 can promote the proliferation and metastasis of melanoma cells. In summary, these results suggested that GEF-H1 may be a valuable biomarker for assessing the degree and prognosis of melanoma following surgery.

Induction vemurafenib followed by consolidative radiation therapy for surgically incurable melanoma

Approximately half of melanomas are driven by a point mutation in the BRAF kinase gene, targetable with vemurafenib. However, the chief limitation of continuous BRAF inhibition is that the majority of patients develop resistance within 8 months, including those with surgically unresectable stage III melanoma. Researchers retrospectively reviewed medical records of all patients at our institution with surgically incurable BRAF V600E mutated stage III or limited stage IV melanoma treated with induction vemurafenib, stopped electively during ongoing response, followed by consolidative radiation therapy with or without intervening surgery to debulk nodal metastases. In our six-patient cohort, the median duration of vemurafenib was 5.8 months and the median radiation dose was 57 Gy using conventional fractionation. This algorithm produced 100% locoregional control at 29+ months following radiation and a median progression-free survival of 32.5+ months. Three of six patients remained progression free, and three relapsed in a single organ and achieved ongoing complete response to subsequent therapy. Outcomes greatly exceeding those reported with either BRAF inhibition or radiation alone suggest unanticipated synergies with this therapeutic sequence for both in-field and distant melanoma control, which may be mediated by radiosensitization and immune activation, respectively. In patients with surgically incurable melanoma encompassed within a radiation field, induction vemurafenib and consolidative radiation therapy, rather than continuing vemurafenib until progression, also limit the duration of vemurafenib toxicity and preserve sensitivity to future BRAF inhibition.

Excess of NPM-ALK oncogenic signaling promotes cellular apoptosis and drug dependency

Most of the anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (ALCL) cases carry the t(2;5; p23;q35) that produces the fusion protein NPM-ALK (nucleophosmin-anaplastic lymphoma kinase). NPM-ALK-deregulated kinase activity drives several pathways that support malignant transformation of lymphoma cells. We found that in ALK-rearranged ALCL cell lines, NPM-ALK was distributed in equal amounts between the cytoplasm and the nucleus. Only the cytoplasmic portion was catalytically active in both cell lines and primary ALCL, whereas the nuclear portion was inactive because of heterodimerization with NPM1. Thus, about 50% of the NPM-ALK is not active and sequestered as NPM-ALK/NPM1 heterodimers in the nucleus. Overexpression or relocalization of NPM-ALK to the cytoplasm by NPM genetic knockout or knockdown caused ERK1/2 (extracellular signal-regulated protein kinases 1 and 2) increased phosphorylation and cell death through the engagement of an ATM/Chk2- and γH2AX (phosphorylated H2A histone family member X)-mediated DNA-damage response. Remarkably, human NPM-ALK-amplified cell lines resistant to ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) underwent apoptosis upon drug withdrawal as a consequence of ERK1/2 hyperactivation. Altogether, these findings indicate that an excess of NPM-ALK activation and signaling induces apoptosis via oncogenic stress responses. A 'drug holiday' where the ALK TKI treatment is suspended could represent a therapeutic option in cells that become resistant by NPM-ALK amplification.

Complete remission of metastatic melanoma upon BRAF inhibitor treatment - what happens after discontinuation?

Treatment with BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) leads to complete remissions (CR) in 3-6% of patients with BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma. In cases of CR, it is unclear whether BRAFi therapy should be continued. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical course of patients with metastatic melanoma who discontinued BRAFi therapy after achieving a CR. In 12 patients, CR of metastatic melanoma was diagnosed after a median BRAFi treatment duration of 13 (range 0.3-32) months. Reasons for discontinuation were side effects in seven patients and patient demand in five patients. Six patients are still in CR after a median of 17 (range 2-26) months after discontinuation of BRAF inhibition. Six patients developed a melanoma recurrence after a median of 3 (range 2-17) months of discontinuation of BRAFi therapy. Subsequently, these patients were again treated with a BRAFi, which resulted in three CR, one stable disease, and one progressive disease; one patient could not be assessed. Melanoma patients achieving CR during BRAFi therapy represent a heterogeneous group. Discontinuation of BRAFi therapy after a CR has to be balanced carefully with the potential risk of nonresponding to BRAFi retreatment in the case of relapse.

Management of BRAF and MEK inhibitor toxicities in patients with metastatic melanoma

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

Intermittent dosing with vemurafenib in BRAF V600E-mutant melanoma: review of a case series

The selective BRAF inhibitors, vemurafenib and dabrafenib, yield high response rates and improved overall survival in patients with BRAF V600E-mutant metastatic melanoma. Acquired drug resistance and drug toxicity are key challenges when using these drugs. We investigated whether vemurafenib toxicity could successfully be managed with intermittent dosing, and if its therapeutic efficacy could be maintained on intermittent dosing. Six patients with BRAF V600E-mutated metastatic melanoma were treated with an intermittent dosing regimen of vemurafenib. In three patients, toxicities were successfully managed with an intermittent dosing regimen. In the other three patients, intolerable toxicities continued on intermittent dosing. Our experience shows that intermittent dosing can successfully manage vemurafenib toxicities where continuous dosing at a reduced dose does not. Intermittent treatment improves drug tolerability and can achieve or maintain melanoma shrinkage. We recommend that in clinical practice, intermittent dosing should be considered as an alternative to dose reduction/termination in the management of vemurafenib toxicity.