Adjuvant Dabrafenib plus Trametinib in Stage III BRAF-Mutated Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Combination therapy with the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib plus the MEK inhibitor trametinib improved survival in patients with advanced melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations. We sought to determine whether adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib would improve outcomes in patients with resected, stage III melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 870 patients with completely resected, stage III melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations to receive oral dabrafenib at a dose of 150 mg twice daily plus trametinib at a dose of 2 mg once daily (combination therapy, 438 patients) or two matched placebo tablets (432 patients) for 12 months. The primary end point was relapse-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, distant metastasis-free survival, freedom from relapse, and safety. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 2.8 years, the estimated 3-year rate of relapse-free survival was 58% in the combination-therapy group and 39% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for relapse or death, 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.58; P<0.001). The 3-year overall survival rate was 86% in the combination-therapy group and 77% in the placebo group (hazard ratio for death, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.79; P=0.0006), but this level of improvement did not cross the prespecified interim analysis boundary of P=0.000019. Rates of distant metastasis-free survival and freedom from relapse were also higher in the combination-therapy group than in the placebo group. The safety profile of dabrafenib plus trametinib was consistent with that observed with the combination in patients with metastatic melanoma. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant use of combination therapy with dabrafenib plus trametinib resulted in a significantly lower risk of recurrence in patients with stage III melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations than the adjuvant use of placebo and was not associated with new toxic effects. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline and Novartis; COMBI-AD ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01682083 ; EudraCT number, 2012-001266-15 .).

Patient-reported outcomes in patients with resected, high-risk melanoma with BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutations treated with adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib (COMBI-AD): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the phase 3 COMBI-AD study, patients with resected, stage III melanoma with BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutations received adjuvant dabrafenib plus trametinib or placebo. The primary analysis showed that dabrafenib plus trametinib significantly improved relapse-free survival at 3 years. These results led to US Food and Drug Administration approval of dabrafenib plus trametinib as adjuvant treatment for patients with resected stage III melanoma with BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutations. Here, we report the patient-reported outcomes from COMBI-AD. METHODS: COMBI-AD was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study done at 169 sites in 25 countries. Study participants were aged 18 years or older and had complete resection of stage IIIA (lymph node metastases >1 mm), IIIB, or IIIC cutaneous melanoma as per American Joint Committee on Cancer 7th edition criteria, with BRAFV600E or BRAFV600K mutations, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive voice response system, stratified by mutation type and disease stage, to receive oral dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily) plus oral trametinib (2 mg once daily) or matching placebos for 12 months. Patients, physicians, and the investigators who analysed the data were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was relapse-free survival, reported elsewhere. Health-related quality of life, reported here, was a prespecified exploratory endpoint, and was assessed with the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensions 3-Levels (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire in the intention-to-treat population. We used a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis to assess differences in health-related quality of life between groups. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01682083. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer recruiting participants. FINDINGS: Between Jan 31, 2013, and Dec 11, 2014, 870 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib (n=438) or matching placebos (n=432). Data were collected until the data cutoff for analyses of the primary endpoint (June 30, 2017). The median follow-up was 34 months (IQR 28-39) in the dabrafenib plus trametinib group and 33 months (20·5-39) in the placebo group. During the 12-month treatment phase, there were no significant or clinically meaningful changes from baseline between groups in EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) or utility scores. During treatment, there were no clinically meaningful differences in VAS scores or utility scores in the dabrafenib plus trametinib group between patients who did and did not experience the most common adverse events. During long-term follow-up (range 15-48 months), VAS and utility scores were similar between groups and did not differ from baseline scores. At recurrence, there were significant decreases in VAS scores in both the dabrafenib plus trametinib group (mean change -6·02, SD 20·57; p=0·0032) and the placebo group (-6·84, 20·86; p<0·0001); the mean change in utility score also differed significantly at recurrence for both groups (dabrafenib plus trametinib -0·0626, 0·1911, p<0·0001; placebo -0·0748, 0·2182, p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: These findings show that dabrafenib plus trametinib did not affect patient-reported outcome scores during or after adjuvant treatment, and suggest that preventing or delaying relapse with adjuvant therapy could be beneficial in this setting. FUNDING: Novartis.

Evaluation of the effect of dabrafenib and metabolites on QTc interval in patients with BRAF V600-mutant tumours.

AIMS: The effect of repeat oral supratherapeutic dosing of the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib on QTc interval was assessed in patients with BRAF V600-mutant tumours. METHODS: Part 1 of this phase 1, multicentre, 2-part study (BRF113773/NCT01738451) assessed safety/tolerability of dabrafenib 225 or 300 mg twice daily (BID) to inform part 2 dosing. Patients in part 2 received dabrafenib-matched placebo on day -1, single-dose dabrafenib 300 mg on day 1, 300 mg BID on days 2 to 7, and 300 mg on day 8 (morning), followed by 24-h Holter electrocardiographic monitoring and pharmacokinetics sample collection each dose day. Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics analysis assessed combined dabrafenib and metabolite effects on QTc interval. RESULTS: Part 1 (n = 12) determined supratherapeutic dosing, 300 mg BID, for part 2. Thirty-one patients completed part 2. Mean maximum ΔΔQTcF occurred on day 8, 10 h postdose (2.86 msec; 90% CI, -1.36 to 7.07). Categorical analysis showed no placebo and dabrafenib outliers (increase >60 msec; QTcF >500 msec). Day 1 dabrafenib 300 mg Cmax and AUC(0-∞) were ≈ 2-fold higher than with single-dose 150 mg. Day 8 AUC(0-τ) with 300 mg BID was ≈ 2.7-fold higher than with 150 mg BID. Dabrafenib metabolites showed similar trends. Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics modelling/simulation showed that median QTc increase was <5 msec (upper 90% CI, <10 msec). No unexpected toxicities occurred with supratherapeutic dosing. CONCLUSION: Repeat oral supratherapeutic dabrafenib 300 mg BID dosing had no clinically relevant effect on QTc interval, with no new safety signals seen.

Dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with previously untreated BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: an open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: BRAFV600E mutation occurs in 1-2% of lung adenocarcinomas and acts as an oncogenic driver. Dabrafenib, alone or combined with trametinib, has shown substantial antitumour activity in patients with previously treated BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the activity and safety of dabrafenib plus trametinib treatment in previously untreated patients with BRAFV600E-mutant metastatic NSCLC. METHODS: In this phase 2, sequentially enrolled, multicohort, multicentre, non-randomised, open-label study, adults (≥18 years of age) with previously untreated metastatic BRAFV600E-mutant NSCLC were enrolled into cohort C from 19 centres in eight countries within North America, Europe, and Asia. Patients received oral dabrafenib 150 mg twice per day plus oral trametinib 2 mg once per day until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, consent withdrawal, or death. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed overall response, defined as the percentage of patients who achieved a confirmed complete response or partial response per Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1. The primary and safety analyses were by intention to treat in the protocol-defined population (previously untreated patients). The study is ongoing, but no longer recruiting patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01336634. FINDINGS: Between April 16, 2014, and Dec 28, 2015, 36 patients were enrolled and treated with first-line dabrafenib plus trametinib. Median follow-up was 15·9 months (IQR 7·8-22·0) at the data cutoff (April 28, 2017). The proportion of patients with investigator-assessed confirmed overall response was 23 (64%, 95% CI 46-79), with two (6%) patients achieving a complete response and 21 (58%) a partial response. All patients had one or more adverse event of any grade, and 25 (69%) had one or more grade 3 or 4 event. The most common (occurring in more than two patients) grade 3 or 4 adverse events were pyrexia (four [11%]), alanine aminotransferase increase (four [11%]), hypertension (four [11%]), and vomiting (three [8%]). Serious adverse events occurring in more than two patients included alanine aminotransferase increase (five [14%]), pyrexia (four [11%]), aspartate aminotransferase increase (three [8%]), and ejection fraction decrease (three [8%]). One fatal serious adverse event deemed unrelated to study treatment was reported (cardiorespiratory arrest). INTERPRETATION: Dabrafenib plus trametinib represents a new therapy with clinically meaningful antitumour activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with previously untreated BRAFV600E-mutant NSCLC. FUNDING: Novartis.

Dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma brain metastases (COMBI-MB): a multicentre, multicohort, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Dabrafenib plus trametinib improves clinical outcomes in BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma without brain metastases; however, the activity of dabrafenib plus trametinib has not been studied in active melanoma brain metastases. Here, we report results from the phase 2 COMBI-MB trial. Our aim was to build on the current body of evidence of targeted therapy in melanoma brain metastases through an evaluation of dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma brain metastases. METHODS: This ongoing, multicentre, multicohort, open-label, phase 2 study evaluated oral dabrafenib (150 mg twice per day) plus oral trametinib (2 mg once per day) in four patient cohorts with melanoma brain metastases enrolled from 32 hospitals and institutions in Europe, North America, and Australia: (A) BRAFV600E-positive, asymptomatic melanoma brain metastases, with no previous local brain therapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1; (B) BRAFV600E-positive, asymptomatic melanoma brain metastases, with previous local brain therapy, and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1; (C) BRAFV600D/K/R-positive, asymptomatic melanoma brain metastases, with or without previous local brain therapy, and an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1; and (D) BRAFV600D/E/K/R-positive, symptomatic melanoma brain metastases, with or without previous local brain therapy, and an ECOG performance status of 0, 1, or 2. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed intracranial response in cohort A in the all-treated-patients population. Secondary endpoints included intracranial response in cohorts B, C, and D. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02039947. FINDINGS: Between Feb 28, 2014, and Aug 5, 2016, 125 patients were enrolled in the study: 76 patients in cohort A; 16 patients in cohort B; 16 patients in cohort C; and 17 patients in cohort D. At the data cutoff (Nov 28, 2016) after a median follow-up of 8·5 months (IQR 5·5-14·0), 44 (58%; 95% CI 46-69) of 76 patients in cohort A achieved an intracranial response. Intracranial response by investigator assessment was also achieved in nine (56%; 95% CI 30-80) of 16 patients in cohort B, seven (44%; 20-70) of 16 patients in cohort C, and ten (59%; 33-82) of 17 patients in cohort D. The most common serious adverse events related to study treatment were pyrexia for dabrafenib (eight [6%] of 125 patients) and decreased ejection fraction (five [4%]) for trametinib. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events, regardless of study drug relationship, were pyrexia (four [3%] of 125) and headache (three [2%]). INTERPRETATION: Dabrafenib plus trametinib was active with a manageable safety profile in this melanoma population that was consistent with previous dabrafenib plus trametinib studies in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma without brain metastases, but the median duration of response was relatively short. These results provide evidence of clinical benefit with dabrafenib plus trametinib and support the need for additional research to further improve outcomes in patients with melanoma brain metastases. FUNDING: Novartis.

Dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with previously treated BRAF(V600E)-mutant metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: an open-label, multicentre phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: BRAF mutations act as an oncogenic driver via the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). BRAF inhibition has shown antitumour activity in patients with BRAF(V600E)-mutant NSCLC. Dual MAPK pathway inhibition with BRAF and MEK inhibitors in BRAF(V600E)-mutant NSCLC might improve efficacy over BRAF inhibitor monotherapy based on observations in BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma. We aimed to assess the antitumour activity and safety of dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAF(V600E)-mutant NSCLC. METHODS: In this phase 2, multicentre, non-randomised, open-label study, we enrolled adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with pretreated metastatic stage IV BRAF(V600E)-mutant NSCLC who had documented tumour progression after at least one previous platinum-based chemotherapy and had had no more than three previous systemic anticancer therapies. Patients with previous BRAF or MEK inhibitor treatment were ineligible. Patients with brain metastases were allowed to enrol only if the lesions were asymptomatic, untreated (or stable more than 3 weeks after local therapy if treated), and measured less than 1 cm. Enrolled patients received oral dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily) plus oral trametinib (2 mg once daily) in continuous 21-day cycles until disease progression, unacceptable adverse events, withdrawal of consent, or death. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed overall response, which was assessed by intention to treat in the protocol-defined population (patients who received second-line or later treatment); safety was also assessed in this population and was assessed at least once every 3 weeks, with adverse events, laboratory values, and vital signs graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. The study is ongoing but no longer recruiting patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01336634. FINDINGS: Between Dec 20, 2013, and Jan 14, 2015, 59 patients from 30 centres in nine countries across North America, Europe, and Asia met eligibility criteria. Two patients who had previously been untreated due to protocol deviation were excluded; thus, 57 eligible patients were enrolled. 36 patients (63·2% [95% CI 49·3-75·6]) achieved an investigator-assessed overall response. Serious adverse events were reported in 32 (56%) of 57 patients and included pyrexia in nine (16%), anaemia in three (5%), confusional state in two (4%), decreased appetite in two (4%), haemoptysis in two (4%), hypercalcaemia in two (4%), nausea in two (4%), and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma in two (4%). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia in five patients (9%), hyponatraemia in four (7%), and anaemia in three (5%). Four patients died during the study from fatal adverse events judged to be unrelated to treatment (one retroperitoneal haemorrhage, one subarachnoid haemorrhage, one respiratory distress, and one from disease progression that was more severe than typical progression, as assessed by the investigator). INTERPRETATION: Dabrafenib plus trametinib could represent a new targeted therapy with robust antitumour activity and a manageable safety profile in patients with BRAF(V600E)-mutant NSCLC. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Dabrafenib in patients with BRAF(V600E)-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a single-arm, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Activating BRAF(V600E) (Val600Glu) mutations are found in about 1-2% of lung adenocarcinomas, which might provide an opportunity for targeted treatment in these patients. Dabrafenib is an oral selective inhibitor of BRAF kinase. We did a trial to assess the clinical activity of dabrafenib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) positive for the BRAF(V600E) mutation. METHODS: In this phase 2, multicentre, non-randomised, open-label study, we enrolled previously treated and untreated patients with stage IV metastatic BRAF(V600E)-positive NSCLC. Patients received oral dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed overall response, which was assessed in patients who had received at least one dose of dabrafenib; safety was also assessed in this population. The study is ongoing but not enrolling patients in this cohort. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01336634. FINDINGS: Between Aug 3, 2011, and Feb 25, 2014, 84 patients were enrolled, six of whom had not previously received systemic treatment for NSCLC. 26 of the 78 previously treated patients achieved an investigator-assessed overall response (33% [95% CI 23-45]). Four of the six previously untreated patients had an objective response. One patient died from an intracranial haemorrhage that was judged by the investigator to be due to the study drug. Serious adverse events were reported in 35 (42%) of 84 patients. The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events were cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma in ten (12%), asthenia in four (5%), and basal-cell carcinoma in four (5%). INTERPRETATION: Dabrafenib showed clinical activity in BRAF(V600E)-positive NSCLC. Our findings suggest that dabrafenib could represent a treatment option for a population of patients with limited therapeutic options. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib and placebo for Val600 BRAF-mutant melanoma: a multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previously, a study of ours showed that the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib improves progression-free survival compared with dabrafenib and placebo in patients with BRAF Val600Lys/Glu mutation-positive metastatic melanoma. The study was continued to assess the secondary endpoint of overall survival, which we report in this Article. METHODS: We did this double-blind phase 3 study at 113 sites in 14 countries. We enrolled previously untreated patients with BRAF Val600Glu or Val600Lys mutation-positive unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma. Participants were computer-randomised (1:1) to receive a combination of dabrafenib (150 mg orally twice daily) and trametinib (2 mg orally once daily), or dabrafenib and placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival and overall survival was a secondary endpoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01584648. FINDINGS: Between May 4, 2012, and Nov 30, 2012, we screened 947 patients for eligibility, of whom 423 were randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib and trametinib (n=211) or dabrafenib only (n=212). The final data cutoff was Jan 12, 2015, at which time 222 patients had died. Median overall survival was 25·1 months (95% CI 19·2-not reached) in the dabrafenib and trametinib group versus 18·7 months (15·2-23·7) in the dabrafenib only group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71, 95% CI 0·55-0·92; p=0·0107). Overall survival was 74% at 1 year and 51% at 2 years in the dabrafenib and trametinib group versus 68% and 42%, respectively, in the dabrafenib only group. Based on 301 events, median progression-free survival was 11·0 months (95% CI 8·0-13·9) in the dabrafenib and trametinib group and 8·8 months (5·9-9·3) in the dabrafenib only group (HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·53-0·84; p=0·0004; unadjusted for multiple testing). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 181 (87%) of 209 patients in the dabrafenib and trametinib group and 189 (90%) of 211 patients in the dabrafenib only group; the most common was pyrexia (108 patients, 52%) in the dabrafenib and trametinib group, and hyperkeratosis (70 patients, 33%) in the dabrafenib only group. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 67 (32%) patients in the dabrafenib and trametinib group and 66 (31%) patients in the dabrafenib only group. INTERPRETATION: The improvement in overall survival establishes the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib as the standard targeted treatment for BRAF Val600 mutation-positive melanoma. Studies assessing dabrafenib and trametinib in combination with immunotherapies are ongoing. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Comparison of dabrafenib and trametinib combination therapy with vemurafenib monotherapy on health-related quality of life in patients with unresectable or metastatic cutaneous BRAF Val600-mutation-positive melanoma (COMBI-v): results of a phase 3, open-label, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: In the COMBI-v trial, patients with previously untreated BRAF Val600Glu or Val600Lys mutant unresectable or metastatic melanoma who were treated with the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib had significantly longer overall and progression-free survival than those treated with vemurafenib alone. Here, we present the effects of treatments on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), an exploratory endpoint in the COMBI-v study. METHODS: COMBI-v was an open-label, randomised phase 3 study in which 704 patients with metastatic melanoma with a BRAF Val600 mutation were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive voice response system to receive either a combination of dabrafenib (150 mg twice-daily) and trametinib (2 mg once-daily) or vemurafenib monotherapy (960 mg twice-daily) orally as first-line therapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival. In this pre-specified exploratory analysis, we prospectively assessed HRQoL in the intention-to-treat population with the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30), EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D), and Melanoma Subscale of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Melanoma (FACT-M), completed at baseline, during study treatment, at disease progression, and after progression. We used a mixed-model, repeated measures ANCOVA to assess differences in mean scores between groups with baseline score as covariate; all p-values are descriptive. The COMBI-v trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01597908, and is ongoing for the primary endpoint, but is not recruiting patients. FINDINGS: From June 4, 2012, to Oct 7, 2013, 1645 patients at 193 centres worldwide were screened for eligibility, and 704 patients were randomly assigned to dabrafenib plus trametinib (n=352) or vemurafenib (n=352). Questionnaire completion rates for both groups were high (>95% at baseline, >80% at follow-up assessments, and >70% at disease progression) with similar HRQoL and symptom scores reported at baseline in both treatment groups for all questionnaires. Differences in mean scores between treatment groups were significant and clinically meaningful in favour of the combination compared with vemurafenib monotherapy for most domains across all three questionnaires during study treatment and at disease progression, including EORTC QLQ-C30 global health (7·92, 7·62, 6·86, 7·47, 5·16, 7·56, and 7·57 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; p<0·001 for all assessments except p=0·005 at week 40), EORTC QLQ-C30 pain (-13·20, -8·05, -8·82, -12·69, -12·46, -11·41, and -10·57 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; all p<0·001), EQ-5D thermometer scores (7·96, 8·05, 6·83, 11·53, 7·41, 9·08, and 10·51 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; p<0·001 for all assessments except p=0·006 at week 32), and FACT-M Melanoma Subscale score (3·62, 2·93, 2·45, 3·39, 2·85, 3·00, and 3·68 at weeks 8, 16, 24, 32, 40, 48, and disease progression, respectively; all p<0·001). INTERPRETATION: From the patient's perspective, which integrates not only survival advantage but also disease-associated and adverse-event-associated symptoms, treatment with the combination of a BRAF inhibitor plus a MEK inhibitor (dabrafenib plus trametinib) adds a clear benefit over monotherapy with the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib and supports the combination therapy as standard of care in this population.

A phase 2 study of ruxolitinib, an oral JAK1 and JAK2 Inhibitor, in patients with advanced polycythemia vera who are refractory or intolerant to hydroxyurea.

BACKGROUND: Polycythemia vera (PV) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm associated with somatic gain-of-function mutations of Janus kinase-2 (JAK2). Therapeutic options are limited in patients with advanced disease. Ruxolitinib, an oral JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor, is active in preclinical models of PV. The long-term efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib in patients with advanced PV who are refractory or intolerant to hydroxyurea were studied in a phase 2 trial. METHODS: Response was assessed using modified European LeukemiaNet criteria, which included a reduction in hematocrit to <45% without phlebotomy, resolution of palpable splenomegaly, normalization of white blood cell and platelet counts, and reduction in PV-associated symptoms. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients received ruxolitinib for a median of 152 weeks (range, 31 weeks-177 weeks) or 35.0 months (range, 7.1 months-40.7 months). Hematocrit <45% without phlebotomy was achieved in 97% of patients by week 24.Only 1 patient required a phlebotomy after week 4. Among patients with palpable splenomegaly at baseline, 44% and 63%, respectively, achieved nonpalpable spleen measurements at weeks 24 and 144. Clinically meaningful improvements in pruritus, night sweats, and bone pain were observed within 4 weeks of the initiation of therapy and maintained with continued treatment. Ruxolitinib treatment also reduced elevated levels of inflammatory cytokines and granulocyte activation. Thrombocytopenia and anemia were the most common adverse events.Thrombocytopenia of grade 3 or anemia of grade 3 (according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events,version 3.0) occurred in 3 patients each (9%) (1 patient had both) and were managed with dose modification. CONCLUSIONS: Ruxolitinib was generally well tolerated and provided rapid and durable clinical benefits in patients with advanced PV who were refractory or intolerant to hydroxyurea.

Canakinumab in combination with docetaxel compared with docetaxel alone for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer following platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and immunotherapy (CANOPY-2): A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

OBJECTIVES: Canakinumab, an interleukin-1 beta inhibitor, previously showed reduced lung cancer incidence and mortality (CANTOS). Here, we compare the efficacy/safety of canakinumab versus placebo in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had progressed after platinum-based doublet chemotherapy (PDC) and immunotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CANOPY-2, a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, enrolled adult patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC, without EGFR or ALK alterations, who had received one prior PDC regimen and one prior programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitor and experienced subsequent disease progression. Patients were randomized to canakinumab plus docetaxel or placebo plus docetaxel. RESULTS: A total of 237 patients were randomly allocated: 120 (51 %) to canakinumab and 117 (49 %) to placebo, stratified by histology and prior lines of therapy. Three patients in the placebo arm did not receive study treatment. The trial did not meet its primary endpoint of overall survival: median 10.6 months (95 % confidence interval [CI], 8.2-12.4) for the canakinumab arm and 11.3 months (95 % CI, 8.5-13.8) for the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 1.06 [95 % CI, 0.76-1.48]; one-sided P-value = 0.633). AEs (any grade) were reported in 95 % of patients in the canakinumab group and in 98 % of patients in the placebo group. Grade 3-4 AEs were experienced by 62 % and 64 % of patients in the canakinumab and placebo groups, respectively, and grade 5 AEs were experienced by 8 % and 5 %. Prespecified, post-hoc subgroup analyses showed that patients with undetected circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and/or lower levels (< 10 mg/L) of C-reactive protein (CRP) achieved longer progression-free and overall survival than those with detected ctDNA or higher (≥ 10 mg/L) CRP levels. There was no association with treatment arm. CONCLUSION: Adding canakinumab to docetaxel did not provide additional benefit for patients with advanced NSCLC who had progressed after PDC and immunotherapy. CLINICAL REGISTRATION: NCT03626545.

A 2-step approach to myeloablative haploidentical stem cell transplantation: a phase 1/2 trial performed with optimized T-cell dosing.

Studies of haploidentical hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) have identified threshold doses of T cells below which severe GVHD is usually absent. However, little is known regarding optimal T-cell dosing as it relates to engraftment, immune reconstitution, and relapse. To begin to address this question, we developed a 2-step myeloablative approach to haploidentical HSCT in which 27 patients conditioned with total body irradiation (TBI) were given a fixed dose of donor T cells (HSCT step 1), followed by cyclophosphamide (CY) for T-cell tolerization. A CD34-selected HSC product (HSCT step 2) was infused after CY. A dose of 2 × 10(8)/kg of T cells resulted in consistent engraftment, immune reconstitution, and acceptable rates of GVHD. Cumulative incidences of grade III-IV GVHD, nonrelapse mortality (NRM), and relapse-related mortality were 7.4%, 22.2%, and 29.6%, respectively. With a follow-up of 28-56 months, the 3-year probability of overall survival for the whole cohort is 48% and 75% in patients without disease at HSCT. In the context of CY tolerization, a high, fixed dose of haploidentical T cells was associated with encouraging outcomes, especially in good-risk patients, and can serve as the basis for further exploration and optimization of this 2-step approach. This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00429143.

Cediranib in combination with fulvestrant in hormone-sensitive metastatic breast cancer: a randomized Phase II study.

Hormone receptor-positive breast cancer is treated with estrogen inhibitors. Fulvestrant (FASLODEX™), an estrogen receptor (ER) antagonist with no known agonist effects, competitively binds, blocks and degrades the ER. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) may mediate resistance to ER antagonists. Cediranib is a highly potent VEGF signaling inhibitor with activity against all three VEGF receptors. This randomized Phase II study evaluated cediranib plus fulvestrant. Postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive metastatic breast cancer were eligible. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), duration of response, clinical benefit rate (CBR), safety/tolerability and pharmacokinetics (PK). Patients received cediranib 45 mg/day (n=31) or placebo (n=31) both plus fulvestrant. Demographic/baseline characteristics were well balanced. Patients treated with cediranib had a numerical advantage in PFS (hazard ratio=0.867, P=0.669; median 223 vs. 112 days, respectively) and ORR (22 vs. 8 %, respectively) vs. placebo, although not statistically significant. CBR was 42 % in both arms. The most common adverse events (AEs) in the cediranib arm were diarrhea (68 %), fatigue (61 %) and hypertension (55 %). The incidence of grade ≥ 3 AEs (68 % vs. 32 %), serious AEs (48 % vs. 13 %), discontinuation AEs (39 % vs. 10 %), and cediranib dose reductions/interruptions (74 % vs. 32 %) were higher in the cediranib arm. There was no evidence of a clinically relevant effect of cediranib on fulvestrant PK. Cediranib plus fulvestrant may demonstrate clinical activity in this population, but cediranib 45 mg was not sufficiently well tolerated. Investigation of lower doses of cediranib plus hormonal/chemotherapy could be considered.

Long-term outcomes in patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma receiving dabrafenib monotherapy: Analysis from phase 2 and 3 clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Previous analyses of BREAK-2 and BREAK-3 showed that durable outcomes lasting ≥3 years are achievable with dabrafenib in some patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma (MM); however, additional follow-up is needed to fully characterise the long-term impact of dabrafenib in these patients. METHODS: BREAK-2 was a single-arm phase 2 study evaluating dabrafenib in treatment-naive or previously treated BRAF V600E/K-mutant MM. BREAK-3, a randomised (3:1) phase 3 study, assessed dabrafenib versus dacarbazine in previously untreated unresectable or metastatic BRAF V600E-mutant melanoma. Five-year analyses were performed. RESULTS: All BREAK-2 patients (N = 92 [V600E, n = 76; V600K, n = 16]) discontinued treatment by the data cutoff. Median follow-up was 13.0 months. In BRAF V600E patients, 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 11% and 20%, respectively. Subsequent immunotherapy was received by 22% of patients. In BREAK-3, median follow-up was 17.0 and 12.0 months in the dabrafenib (n = 187) and dacarbazine (n = 63) arms, respectively. Thirty-seven patients (59%) receiving dacarbazine crossed over to dabrafenib following disease progression as per protocol. Five-year PFS was 12% in the dabrafenib arm; all dacarbazine-arm patients progressed or were censored by 5 years. Dabrafenib improved PFS versus dacarbazine, regardless of baseline lactate dehydrogenase levels. Five-year OS rates were 24% and 22% in the dabrafenib and dacarbazine arms, respectively. Subsequent therapy in each arm included anti-CTLA-4 (dabrafenib [24%] and dacarbazine [24%]) and/or anti-PD-1 (8% and 2%) treatment. No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These data, representing extended follow-up for dabrafenib monotherapy, demonstrate that durable benefit lasting ≥5 years is achievable in a subset of patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (BREAK-2, NCT01153763; BREAK-3, NCT01227889).

Antiviral responses following L-leucyl-L-leucine methyl esther (LLME)-treated lymphocyte infusions: graft-versus-infection without graft-versus-host disease.

Although allogeneic hematopoietic progenitor cell transplant (HPCT) is curative therapy for many disorders, it is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, which can be related to graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and the immunosuppressive measures required for its prevention and/or treatment. Whether the immunosuppression is pharmacologic or secondary to graft manipulation, the graft recipient is left at increased risk of the threatening opportunistic infection. Refractory viral diseases in the immunocompromised host have been treated by infusion of virus-specific lymphotyces and by unmanipulated donor lymphocyte infusion (DLI) therapy. L-leucyl-L-leucine methyl ester (LLME) is a compound that induces programmed cell death of natural killer (NK) cells, monocytes, granulocytes, most CD8(+) T cells, and a small fraction of CD4(+) T cells. We have undertaken a study of the use of LLME-treated DLI following T cell-depleted allogeneic HPCT, specifically to aid with immune reconstitution. In this ongoing clinical trial, we have demonstrated the rapid emergence of virus-specific responses following LLME DLI with minimal associated GVHD. This paper examines the pace of immune recovery and the rapid development of antiviral responses in 6 patients who developed viral infections during the time period immediately preceding or coincident with the administration of the LLME DLI.

Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition with PD-1 blockade immunotherapy in BRAF-mutant melanoma.

Oncogene-targeted therapy with B-Raf proto-oncogene (BRAF) and mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibitors induces a high initial response rate in patients with BRAFV600-mutated melanoma, with a median duration of response of approximately 1 year1-3. Immunotherapy with antibodies to programmed death 1 (PD-1) produces lower response rates but with long response duration. Preclinical models suggest that combining BRAF and MEK inhibitors with PD-1 blockade therapy improves antitumor activity4-6, which may provide additional treatment options for patients unlikely to have long-lasting responses to either mode of therapy alone. We enrolled 15 patients with BRAFV600-mutated metastatic melanoma in a first-in-human clinical trial of dabrafenib, trametinib and pembrolizumab ( NCT02130466 ). Eleven patients (73%) experienced grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events, the most common being elevation of liver function tests and pyrexia, most of which resolved with drug interruption or discontinuation of either the anti-PD-1 antibody or the targeted therapy combination. Eleven patients (73%; 95% confidence interval = 45-92%) had an objective response, and six (40%; 95% confidence interval = 16-68%) continued with a response at a median follow-up of 27 months (range = 10.3-38.4+ months) for all patients. This study suggests that this triple-combined therapy may benefit a subset of patients with BRAFV600-mutated metastatic melanoma by increasing the frequency of long-lasting antitumor responses.

Publisher Correction: Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition with PD-1 blockade immunotherapy in BRAF-mutant melanoma.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

Five-year outcomes from a phase 3 METRIC study in patients with BRAF V600 E/K-mutant advanced or metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Primary findings from the METRIC (TMT212A2301) study demonstrated that trametinib improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with chemotherapy in patients with unresectable or metastatic cutaneous melanoma with a BRAF V600 E/K mutation. However, clinical data characterising the long-term use of these therapies in combination with BRAF inhibitors or as monotherapies are limited. METHODS: In this open-label, phase 3 study, 322 patients with BRAF V600 E/K-mutant metastatic melanoma were randomised in a 2:1 ratio to receive trametinib (2 mg orally, once daily; n = 214) or chemotherapy (dacarbazine [1000 mg/m2] or paclitaxel [175 mg/m2] intravenously, every 3 weeks; n = 108). Patients who progressed on chemotherapy were allowed to cross over and receive trametinib. Five-year results of efficacy and safety analyses are reported. RESULTS: The median PFS was 4.9 months in the trametinib arm versus 1.5 months in the chemotherapy arm (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.73). Landmark OS rates for trametinib versus chemotherapy arms at 1 year, 2 years and 5 years were 60.9% versus 49.6%, 32.0% versus 29.4% and 13.3% versus 17.0%, respectively. Most patients (n = 70 [65%]) from the chemotherapy arm crossed over to the trametinib arm early in their treatment. No unexpected adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: This 5-year follow-up of patients with BRAF V600 E/K-mutant metastatic melanoma on a targeted therapy demonstrates that long-term use of trametinib is possible with no new or unexpected adverse events. Some patients experienced long-term survival benefit with trametinib monotherapy (METRIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01245062.).

Dabrafenib, trametinib and pembrolizumab or placebo in BRAF-mutant melanoma.

Blocking programmed death 1 (PD-1) may enhance the durability of anti-tumor responses that are induced by the combined inhibition of BRAF and MEK1. Here we performed a randomized phase 2 trial ( NCT02130466 ), in which patients with treatment-naive BRAFV600E/K-mutant, advanced melanoma received the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib and the MEK inhibitor trametinib together with the PD-1-blocking antibody pembrolizumab (triplet; n = 60) or placebo (doublet; n = 60). The primary end point of progression-free survival was numerically improved in the triplet group-16.0 months-compared with 10.3 months in the doublet group (hazard ratio, 0.66; P = 0.043); however, the trial did not reach the planned benefit for a statistically significant improvement. Median duration of response was 18.7 months (95% confidence interval, 10.1-22.1) and 12.5 months (95% confidence interval, 6.0-14.1); 59.8 and 27.8% of responses were estimated to have lasted for more than 18 months for triplet and doublet treatment, respectively. Grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 58.3 and 26.7% of patients treated with triplet and doublet therapies, respectively, which were most commonly fever, increased transaminase levels and rash. One patient who received triplet therapy died of pneumonitis. In summary, triplet therapy with dabrafenib, trametinib and pembrolizumab conferred numerically longer progression-free survival and duration of response with a higher rate of grade 3/4 adverse events compared with the doublet therapy of dabrafenib, trametinib and placebo.

Dabrafenib and Trametinib Treatment in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic BRAF V600-Mutant Anaplastic Thyroid Cancer.

Purpose We report the efficacy and safety of dabrafenib (BRAF inhibitor) and trametinib (MEK inhibitor) combination therapy in BRAF V600E-mutated anaplastic thyroid cancer, a rare, aggressive, and highly lethal malignancy with poor patient outcomes and no systemic therapies with clinical benefit. Methods In this phase II, open-label trial, patients with predefined BRAF V600E-mutated malignancies received dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily and trametinib 2 mg once daily until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, or death. The primary end point was investigator-assessed overall response rate. Secondary end points included duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Results Sixteen patients with BRAF V600E-mutated anaplastic thyroid cancer were evaluable (median follow-up, 47 weeks; range, 4 to 120 weeks). All patients had received prior radiation treatment and/or surgery, and six had received prior systemic therapy. The confirmed overall response rate was 69% (11 of 16; 95% CI, 41% to 89%), with seven ongoing responses. Median duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival were not reached as a result of a lack of events, with 12-month estimates of 90%, 79%, and 80%, respectively. The safety population was composed of 100 patients who were enrolled with seven rare tumor histologies. Common adverse events were fatigue (38%), pyrexia (37%), and nausea (35%). No new safety signals were detected. Conclusion Dabrafenib plus trametinib is the first regimen demonstrated to have robust clinical activity in BRAF V600E-mutated anaplastic thyroid cancer and was well tolerated. These findings represent a meaningful therapeutic advance for this orphan disease.