Assessment of various efficacy outcomes using ERIVANCE-like criteria in patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma receiving sonidegib: results from a preplanned sensitivity analysis.

BACKGROUND: The BOLT study for sonidegib, a Hedgehog pathway inhibitor (HHI) approved for patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (laBCC) not amenable to curative surgery or radiotherapy, used modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST) for laBCC tumor evaluation. The ERIVANCE study for vismodegib, another HHI, used a composite RECIST endpoint of ≥30% reduction in externally visible tumor or radiographic dimension, or complete ulceration resolution. This preplanned sensitivity BOLT analysis evaluated efficacy outcomes using ERIVANCE-like criteria in patients with laBCC who received sonidegib 200 mg once daily. METHODS: This phase 2, double-blind study randomized patients 1:2 to sonidegib 200:800 mg daily, respectively. Key endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), complete response (CR), partial response (PR), stable disease (SD), and progressive disease (PD). laBCC tumors were assessed by both mRECIST and ERIVANCE-like criteria. Per mRECIST, an overall response of CR was based on negative histology; photographic assessment of CR, PR (scar/fibrosis only), SD (scar/fibrosis only), or not available (NA); and a magnetic resonance imaging response of CR or NA. An overall response of CR was primarily based on negative histology using ERIVANCE-like criteria. RESULTS: Per mRECIST criteria, ORR (95% confidence interval [CI]) by central and investigator review for patients with laBCC (n = 66) was 56.1% (43.3-68.3%) and 71.2% (58.7-81.7%), respectively. CR per central review was achieved in 3 (4.5%) patients and PR, SD, and PD occurred in 34 (51.5%), 23 (34.8%), and 1 (1.5%) patient, respectively. Median (95% CI) DOR was 26.1 months (not estimable [NE]). Using ERIVANCE-like criteria, efficacy outcomes per central and investigator review were higher, with an ORR (95% CI) of 60.6% (47.8-72.4%) and 74.2% (62.0-84.2%), respectively. CR per central review was reached in 14 (21.2%) patients and PR, SD, and PD occurred in 26 (39.4%), 20 (30.3%), and 1 (1.5%) patient, respectively. DOR was unchanged with a median (95% CI) of 26.1 months (NE). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, applying ERIVANCE-like criteria to patients with laBCC receiving sonidegib 200 mg daily yielded higher response rates vs mRECIST criteria. TRIAL REGISTRATION: BOLT registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01327053 ) on March 30, 2011.

Patterns of care and follow-up care of patients with uveal melanoma in German-speaking countries: a multinational survey of the German Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group (DeCOG).

PURPOSE: Uveal melanoma (UM) is an orphan cancer of high unmet medical need. Current patterns of care and surveillance remain unclear as they are situated in an interdisciplinary setting. METHODS: A questionnaire addressing the patterns of care and surveillance in the management of patients with uveal melanoma was distributed to 70 skin cancer centers in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Frequency distributions of responses for each item of the questionnaire were calculated. RESULTS: 44 of 70 (62.9%) skin cancer centers completed the questionnaire. Thirty-nine hospitals were located in Germany (88.6%), three in Switzerland (6.8%) and two in Austria (4.5%). The majority (68.2%) represented university hospitals. Most patients with metastatic disease were treated in certified skin cancer centers (70.7%, 29/41). Besides, the majority of patients with UM were referred to the respective skin cancer center by ophthalmologists (87.2%, 34/39). Treatment and organization of follow-up of patients varied across the different centers. 35.1% (14/37) of the centers stated to not perform any screening measures. CONCLUSION: Treatment patterns of patients with uveal melanoma in Germany, Austria and Switzerland remain extremely heterogeneous. A guideline for the treatment and surveillance is urgently needed.

Adverse events associated with encorafenib plus binimetinib in the COLUMBUS study: incidence, course and management.

BACKGROUND: Dual inhibition of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway with BRAF/MEK inhibitor (BRAFi/MEKi) therapy is a standard treatment for BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma and has historically been associated with grade III pyrexia or photosensitivity depending on the combination used. The objective of this study was to fully describe adverse events from the COLUMBUS study evaluating the most recent BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination encorafenib+binimetinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic BRAFV600-mutant melanoma were randomised to receive encorafenib 450 mg once daily plus binimetinib 45 mg twice daily, encorafenib 300 mg once daily or vemurafenib 960 mg twice daily. Adverse events that represent known effects of available BRAFi and/or MEKi were evaluated. RESULTS: The safety population included a total of 570 patients (encorafenib+binimetinib = 192; encorafenib = 192; vemurafenib = 186). Median duration of exposure was longer with encorafenib+binimetinib (51 weeks) than with encorafenib (31 weeks) or vemurafenib (27 weeks). Common BRAFi/MEKi toxicities with encorafenib+binimetinib were generally manageable, reversible and infrequently associated with discontinuation. Pyrexia was less frequent with encorafenib+binimetinib (18%) and encorafenib (16%) than with vemurafenib (30%) and occurred later in the course of therapy with encorafenib+binimetinib (median time to first onset: 85 days versus 2.5 days and 19 days, respectively). The incidence of photosensitivity was lower with encorafenib+binimetinib (5%) and encorafenib (4%) than with vemurafenib (30%). The incidence of serous retinopathy was higher with encorafenib+binimetinib (20%) than with encorafenib (2%) or vemurafenib (2%), but no patients discontinued encorafenib+binimetinib because of this event. CONCLUSION: Encorafenib+binimetinib is generally well tolerated and has a low discontinuation rate in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma, with a distinct safety profile as compared with other anti-BRAF/MEK targeted therapies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT01909453) and with EudraCT (number 2013-001176-38).

Willingness to pay for a cure of low-risk melanoma patients in Germany.

Malignant melanoma is potentially life-threatening but in most cases curable if detected early. Willingness to pay (WTP) is a preference-based construct that reflects burden of disease by assessment of the monetary value for a hypothetical cure from disease. Since WTP (directly as total amount of money) has not been assessed so far in patients with low risk melanoma, it was interesting to gain insights in this patient population and then, in a second step, compare it directly with the WTP of their treating dermato-oncologists. WTP was assessed in 125 patients with low-risk melanoma and additionally in 105 treating physicians, asking for the one-time and continuous payments they would be willing to make for a sustainable cure, both as absolute sums and as percentages of monthly income. The median WTP based on one-time payment was €10,000 for patients and €100,000 for physicians; relative numbers were 100% versus 300% of monthly income. For continuous monthly payments, WTP was €500 for patients and €1000 for physicians, relative numbers 25% and 50% of income, respectively. Even after controlling for income differences, there was a significantly higher WTP in physicians for all four questions. Compared to patients with chronic skin diseases such as vitiligo, rosacea, atopic eczema and psoriasis, patients with low-risk melanoma showed a significantly higher WTP. Our data suggest that there is a relevant burden of disease even in patients with low-risk tumors. Higher WTP of physicians underlines the prevalence of differences in disease perception.

Stimulation of the histamine 4 receptor upregulates thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) in human and murine keratinocytes.

The cytokine thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) is involved in the development and the progression of allergic diseases. It is mainly released by epithelial cells at barriers such as skin and gut in response to danger signals. Overexpression of TSLP in keratinocytes (KC) can provoke the development of a type 2 inflammatory response. Additionally, TSLP directly acts on sensory neurons and thereby triggers itch. Since histamine is also increased in lesions of inflammatory skin diseases, the aim of this study was to investigate possible effects of histamine as well as different histamine receptor subtype agonists and antagonists on TSLP production in KC. We therefore stimulated human KC with histamine in the presence or absence of the known TSLP-inductor poly I:C and measured TSLP production at protein as well as mRNA level. Histamine alone did not induce TSLP production in human KC, but pre-incubation with histamine prior to challenge with poly I:C resulted in a significant increase of TSLP production compared to stimulation with poly I:C alone. Experiments with different histamine receptor agonists (H1R: 2-pyridylethylamine; H2R: amthamine; H2R/H4R: 4-methylhistamine (4MH)) revealed a dominant role for the H4R receptor, as 4-MH in combination with poly I:C displayed a significant increase of TSLP secretion, while the other agonists did not show any effect. The increase in TSLP production by 4MH was blocked with the H4R antagonist JNJ7777120. This effect was reproducible also in the murine KC cell line MSC. Taken together, our study indicates a new role for the H4 receptor in the regulation of TSLP in keratinocytes. Therefore, blocking of the H4R receptor in allergic diseases might be promising to alleviate inflammation and pruritus via TSLP.

Histamine induces proliferation in keratinocytes from patients with atopic dermatitis through the histamine 4 receptor.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal hyperproliferation resulting in acanthosis is an important clinical observation in patients with atopic dermatitis, and its underlying mechanisms are not completely understood. OBJECTIVE: Because increased levels of histamine are present in lesional skin, we investigated the effect of histamine, especially with regard to histamine 4 receptor (H4R) activation, on the proliferation of human and murine keratinocytes. METHODS: The expression of H4R on human and murine keratinocytes was detected by using real-time PCR. Keratinocyte proliferation was evaluated by using different in vitro cell proliferation assays, scratch assays, and measurement of the epidermal thickness of murine skin. RESULTS: We detected H4R mRNA on foreskin keratinocytes and on outer root sheath keratinocytes; H4R mRNA was more abundant in keratinocytes from patients with atopic dermatitis compared with those from nonatopic donors. Stimulation of foreskin keratinocytes, atopic dermatitis outer root sheath keratinocytes, and H4R-transfected HaCaT cells with histamine and H4R agonist resulted in an increase in proliferation, which was blocked with the H4R-specific antagonist JNJ7777120. Abdominal epidermis of H4R-deficient mice was significantly thinner, and the in vitro proliferation of keratinocytes derived from H4R-deficient mice was lower compared with that seen in control mice. Interestingly, we only detected H4R expression on murine keratinocytes after stimulation with LPS and peptidoglycan. CONCLUSION: H4R is highly expressed on keratinocytes from patients with atopic dermatitis, and its stimulation induces keratinocyte proliferation. This might represent a mechanism that contributes to the epidermal hyperplasia observed in patients with atopic dermatitis.

The price of tumor control: an analysis of rare side effects of anti-CTLA-4 therapy in metastatic melanoma from the ipilimumab network.

BACKGROUND: Ipilimumab, a cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) blocking antibody, has been approved for the treatment of metastatic melanoma and induces adverse events (AE) in up to 64% of patients. Treatment algorithms for the management of common ipilimumab-induced AEs have lead to a reduction of morbidity, e.g. due to bowel perforations. However, the spectrum of less common AEs is expanding as ipilimumab is increasingly applied. Stringent recognition and management of AEs will reduce drug-induced morbidity and costs, and thus, positively impact the cost-benefit ratio of the drug. To facilitate timely identification and adequate management data on rare AEs were analyzed at 19 skin cancer centers. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Patient files (n = 752) were screened for rare ipilimumab-associated AEs. A total of 120 AEs, some of which were life-threatening or even fatal, were reported and summarized by organ system describing the most instructive cases in detail. Previously unreported AEs like drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), granulomatous inflammation of the central nervous system, and aseptic meningitis, were documented. Obstacles included patients delay in reporting symptoms and the differentiation of steroid-induced from ipilimumab-induced AEs under steroid treatment. Importantly, response rate was high in this patient population with tumor regression in 30.9% and a tumor control rate of 61.8% in stage IV melanoma patients despite the fact that some patients received only two of four recommended ipilimumab infusions. This suggests that ipilimumab-induced antitumor responses can have an early onset and that severe autoimmune reactions may reflect overtreatment. CONCLUSION: The wide spectrum of ipilimumab-induced AEs demands doctor and patient awareness to reduce morbidity and treatment costs and true ipilimumab success is dictated by both objective tumor responses and controlling severe side effects.