ARAF mutations confer resistance to the RAF inhibitor belvarafenib in melanoma.

Although RAF monomer inhibitors (type I.5, BRAF(V600)) are clinically approved for the treatment of BRAFV600-mutant melanoma, they are ineffective in non-BRAFV600 mutant cells1-3. Belvarafenib is a potent and selective RAF dimer (type II) inhibitor that exhibits clinical activity in patients with BRAFV600E- and NRAS-mutant melanomas. Here we report the first-in-human phase I study investigating the maximum tolerated dose, and assessing the safety and preliminary efficacy of belvarafenib in BRAFV600E- and RAS-mutated advanced solid tumours (NCT02405065, NCT03118817). By generating belvarafenib-resistant NRAS-mutant melanoma cells and analysing circulating tumour DNA from patients treated with belvarafenib, we identified new recurrent mutations in ARAF within the kinase domain. ARAF mutants conferred resistance to belvarafenib in both a dimer- and a kinase activity-dependent manner. Belvarafenib induced ARAF mutant dimers, and dimers containing mutant ARAF were active in the presence of inhibitor. ARAF mutations may serve as a general resistance mechanism for RAF dimer inhibitors as the mutants exhibit reduced sensitivity to a panel of type II RAF inhibitors. The combination of RAF plus MEK inhibition may be used to delay ARAF-driven resistance and suggests a rational combination for clinical use. Together, our findings reveal specific and compensatory functions for the ARAF isoform and implicate ARAF mutations as a driver of resistance to RAF dimer inhibitors.

Primary results and characterization of patients with exceptional outcomes in a phase 1b study combining PARP and MEK inhibition, with or without anti-PD-L1, for BRCA wild-type, platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase 1b study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03695380) evaluated regimens combining PARP and MEK inhibition, with or without PD-L1 inhibition, for BRCA wild-type, platinum-sensitive, recurrent ovarian cancer (PSROC). METHODS: Patients with PSROC who had received one or two prior treatment lines were treated with 28-day cycles of cobimetinib 60 mg daily (days 1-21) plus niraparib 200 mg daily (days 1-28) with or without atezolizumab 840 mg (days 1 and 15). Stage 1 assessed safety before expansion to stage 2, which randomized patients who had BRCA wild-type PSROC to receive either doublet or triplet therapy, stratified by genome-wide loss of heterozygosity status (<16% vs. ≥16%; FoundationOne CDx assay) and platinum-free interval (≥6 to <12 vs. ≥12 months). Coprimary end points were safety and the investigator-determined objective response rate (ORR) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST). Potential associations between genetic parameters and efficacy were explored, and biomarker profiles of super-responders (complete response or those with progression-free survival [PFS] >15 months) and progressors (disease progression as the best response) were characterized. RESULTS: The ORR in patients who had BRCA wild-type PSROC was 35% (95% confidence interval, 20%-53%) with the doublet regimen (n = 37) and 27% (95% confidence interval, 14%-44%) with the triplet regimen (n = 37), and the median PFS was 6.0 and 7.4 months, respectively. Post-hoc analyses indicated more favorable ORR and PFS in the homologous recombination-deficiency-signature (HRDsig)-positive subgroup than in the HRDsig-negative subgroup. Tolerability was consistent with the known profiles of individual agents. NF1 and MKNK1 mutations were associated with sustained benefit from the doublet and triplet regimens, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy-free doublet and triplet therapy demonstrated encouraging activity, including among patients who had BRCA wild-type, HRDsig-positive or HRDsig-negative PSROC harboring NF1 or MKNK1 mutations.

Development and validation of a machine learning-based predictive model for assessing the 90-day prognostic outcome of patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) is associated with significant mortality and morbidity. Predicting the prognosis of patients with sICH remains an important issue, which significantly affects treatment decisions. Utilizing readily available clinical parameters to anticipate the unfavorable prognosis of sICH patients holds notable clinical significance. This study employs five machine learning algorithms to establish a practical platform for the prediction of short-term prognostic outcomes in individuals afflicted with sICH. METHODS: Within the framework of this retrospective analysis, the model underwent training utilizing data gleaned from 413 cases from the training center, with subsequent validation employing data from external validation center. Comprehensive clinical information, laboratory analysis results, and imaging features pertaining to sICH patients were harnessed as training features for machine learning. We developed and validated the model efficacy using all the selected features of the patients using five models: Support Vector Machine (SVM), Logistic Regression (LR), Random Forest (RF), XGboost and LightGBM, respectively. The process of Recursive Feature Elimination (RFE) was executed for optimal feature screening. An internal five-fold cross-validation was employed to pinpoint the most suitable hyperparameters for the model, while an external five-fold cross-validation was implemented to discern the machine learning model demonstrating the superior average performance. Finally, the machine learning model with the best average performance is selected as our final model while using it for external validation. Evaluation of the machine learning model's performance was comprehensively conducted through the utilization of the ROC curve, accuracy, and other relevant indicators. The SHAP diagram was utilized to elucidate the variable importance within the model, culminating in the amalgamation of the above metrics to discern the most succinct features and establish a practical prognostic prediction platform. RESULTS: A total of 413 patients with sICH patients were collected in the training center, of which 180 were patients with poor prognosis. A total of 74 patients with sICH were collected in the external validation center, of which 26 were patients with poor prognosis. Within the training set, the test set AUC values for SVM, LR, RF, XGBoost, and LightGBM models were recorded as 0.87, 0.896, 0.916, 0.885, and 0.912, respectively. The best average performance of the machine learning models in the training set was the RF model (average AUC: 0.906 ± 0.029, P < 0.01). The model still maintains a good performance in the external validation center, with an AUC of 0.817 (95% CI 0.705-0.928). Pertaining to feature importance for short-term prognostic attributes of sICH patients, the NIHSS score reigned supreme, succeeded by AST, Age, white blood cell, and hematoma volume, among others. In culmination, guided by the RF model's variable importance weight and the model's ROC curve insights, the NIHSS score, AST, Age, white blood cell, and hematoma volume were integrated to forge a short-term prognostic prediction platform tailored for sICH patients. CONCLUSION: We constructed a prediction model based on the results of the RF model incorporating five clinically accessible predictors with reliable predictive efficacy for the short-term prognosis of sICH patients. Meanwhile, the performance of the external validation set was also more stable, which can be used for accurate prediction of short-term prognosis of sICH patients.

Overall survival with first-line atezolizumab in combination with vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma (IMspire150): second interim analysis of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Primary analysis of the phase 3 IMspire150 study showed improved investigator-assessed progression-free survival with first-line atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) versus placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group) in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma. With a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4-23·8) at the primary analysis, overall survival data were immature. Here, we report the results from the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis. METHODS: The multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 IMspire150 study was done at 108 academic and community hospitals in 20 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated unresectable stage IIIc or stage IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously on day 1 and 15) or placebo plus vemurafenib (960 mg or 720 mg twice daily orally) and cobimetinib (60 mg once daily orally; 21 days on and 7 days off) in 28-day cycles. Atezolizumab and placebo were added to treatment regimens from cycle two onwards. Randomisation was done centrally (Durham, NC, USA) based on a permuted block randomisation scheme (block size of 4) using an interactive web-based response system and was stratified by geographical region and baseline lactate dehydrogenase concentration. Overall survival was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug according to actual treatment received. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, which was previously reported. Here, we report the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis, which was planned after about 270 overall survival events had occurred. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer enrolling patients, and it is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 514 patients (median age 54 years [IQR 43-63]; 299 [58%] men and 215 [42%] women) were enrolled in the trial and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (256 [50%] patients) or the control group (258 [50%] patients). At the data cutoff (Sept 8, 2021), 273 patients had died (126 in the atezolizumab group and 147 in the control group). Median follow-up was 29·1 months (IQR 10·1-45·4) for the atezolizumab group versus 22·8 months (10·6-44·1) for the control group. Median overall survival was 39·0 months (95% CI 29·9-not estimable) in the atezolizumab group versus 25·8 months (22·0-34·6) in the control group (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·66-1·06]; p=0·14). The most common adverse events of any grade in the atezolizumab group were blood creatine phosphokinase increased (123 [53%] of 231 patients), diarrhoea (116 [50%]), and pyrexia (115 [50%]). The most common adverse events of any grade in the control group were diarrhoea (157 [56%] of 280 patients), blood creatine phosphokinase increased (135 [48%]), and rash (119 [43%]). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were increased lipase (54 [23%] of 231 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 62 [22%] of 280 patients in the control group), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (51 [22%] vs 50 [18%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase (32 [14%] vs 26 [9%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 112 (48%) patients in the atezolizumab group and 117 (42%) patients in the control group. Grade 5 adverse events were reported in eight (3%) patients in the atezolizumab group versus six (2%) patients in the control group. Two grade 5 adverse events (hepatitis fulminant and hepatic failure) in the atezolizumab group were considered to be associated with the triplet combination, and one event in the control group (pulmonary haemorrhage) was considered to be associated with cobimetinib. INTERPRETATION: Additional follow-up of the IMspire150 trial showed that overall survival was not significantly improved with atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib compared with placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. Results of the final analysis are awaited to establish whether a significant improvement in overall survival can be achieved with long-term treatment with this triplet combination versus vemurafenib plus cobimetinib. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib as first-line treatment for unresectable advanced BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma (IMspire150): primary analysis of the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: IMspire150 aimed to evaluate first-line combination treatment with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors and immune checkpoint therapy in BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced or metastatic melanoma. METHODS: IMspire150 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study done at 112 institutes in 20 countries. Patients with unresectable stage IIIc-IV, BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma were randomly assigned 1:1 to 28-day cycles of atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) or atezolizumab placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group). In cycle 1, all patients received vemurafenib and cobimetinib only; atezolizumab placebo was added from cycle 2 onward. Randomisation was stratified by lactate dehydrogenase concentration and geographical region. Blinding for atezolizumab was achieved by means of an identical intravenous placebo, and blinding for vemurafenib was achieved by means of a placebo tablet. The primary outcome was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. This trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672) is ongoing but no longer recruiting patients. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 777 patients were screened and 514 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (n=256) or control group (n=258). At a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4-23·8), progression-free survival as assessed by the study investigator was significantly prolonged with atezolizumab versus control (15·1 vs 10·6 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0·78; 95% CI 0·63-0·97; p=0·025). Common treatment-related adverse events (>30%) in the atezolizumab and control groups were blood creatinine phosphokinase increased (51·3% vs 44·8%), diarrhoea (42·2% vs 46·6%), rash (40·9%, both groups), arthralgia (39·1% vs 28·1%), pyrexia (38·7% vs 26·0%), alanine aminotransferase increased (33·9% vs 22·8%), and lipase increased (32·2% vs 27·4%); 13% of patients in the atezolizumab group and 16% in the control group stopped all treatment because of adverse events. INTERPRETATION: The addition of atezolizumab to targeted therapy with vemurafenib and cobimetinib was safe and tolerable and significantly increased progression-free survival in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Better modulation for risk decision-making after optimized magnetic stimulation.

Traditional repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation can only produce a significant but weak effect on the cortex while theta burst stimulation (TBS), a patterned accelerated form of stimulation, can produce a stronger poststimulation effect, which may improve decision-making abilities. We designed a comparative assessment of the effect of intermittent TBS (iTBS), 20 Hz, in two risk decision-making tasks on healthy controls. Participants were randomized and assigned to the iTBS (n = 29), 20 Hz (n = 29), or sham (n = 29) groups. The effects of the different methods of left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex stimulation on risk decision-making functions were compared based on subjects' performance in the Game of Dice Task (GDT) and Risky Gains Task (RGT). The main indicators were positive and negative feedback utilization rates of GDT and RGT. Both iTBS and 20 Hz stimulation resulted in significant improvements upon negative feedback in the GDT, with increases in safe options and reductions in risky options; iTBS stimulation increased subjects' use of positive feedback in the GDT and RGT (all p < 0.05). Furthermore, the iTBS group had a stronger feedback risk reduction effect than the 20 Hz or sham group following RGT negative feedback (p < 0.05). Individuals would integrate positive and negative information more efficiently, leading to them making rational choices after excitatory transcranial magnetic stimulation. Moreover, iTBS has a stronger risk reduction effect following negative feedback than the 20Hz stimulation did. In summary, iTBS might have clinical value in decision promotion.

A phase Ib open-label dose escalation study of the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of cobimetinib (GDC-0973) and ipatasertib (GDC-0068) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: This Phase Ib study explored combination dosing of the allosteric MEK1/2 inhibitor cobimetinib and the ATP-competitive pan-AKT inhibitor ipatasertib. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled to two dose escalation arms, each using a 3 + 3 design in 28-day cycles. In Arm A, patients received concurrent cobimetinib and ipatasertib on days 1-21. In Arm B, cobimetinib was administered intermittently with ipatasertib for 21 days. Primary objectives evaluated dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), maximum tolerated doses (MTD), and the recommended Phase II dose (RP2D). Secondary objectives included analysis of pharmacokinetic parameters, MAPK and PI3K pathway alterations, changes in tissue biomarkers, and preliminary anti-tumor efficacy. Expansion cohorts included patients with PTEN-deficient triple-negative breast cancer and endometrial cancer. RESULTS: Among 66 patients who received ≥1 dose of study drug, all experienced an adverse event (AE). Although no DLTs were reported, 6 patients experienced Cycle 1 DLT-equivalent AEs. The most common treatment-related AEs were diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, dermatitis acneiform, and fatigue. Thirty-five (53%) patients experienced drug-related AEs of ≥ grade 3 severity. Cobimetinb/ipatasertib MTDs were 60/200 mg on Arm A and 150/300 mg on Arm B; the latter was chosen as the RP2D. No pharmacokinetic interactions were identified. Biomarker analyses indicated pathway blockade and increases in IFNγ and PD-L1 gene expression following the combination. Three patients with endometrial or ovarian cancer achieved partial response, all with PTEN-low disease and two with tumor also harboring KRAS mutation. CONCLUSION: There was limited tolerability and efficacy for this MEK and AKT inhibitor combination. Nonetheless, pharmacodynamic analyses indicated target engagement and suggest rationale for further exploration of cobimetinib or ipatasertib in combination with other anticancer agents. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01562275.

The vessel density of the superficial retinal capillary plexus as a new biomarker in cerebral small vessel disease: an optical coherence tomography angiography study.

BACKGROUND: Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) is a novel and noninvasive technique for the quantitative assessment of retinal microvascular perfusion. Since the retinal and cerebral small vessels share similar embryological origins, anatomical features, and physiological properties, altered retinal microvasculature might provide a new perspective on the mechanisms of cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD). OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate retinal vessel density (VD) in patients with CSVD using OCTA and identify associations with cerebral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) markers and cognitive function. METHODS: We prospectively recruited 47 CSVD patients and 30 healthy controls (HCs) to participate in the study. All participants underwent OCTA to evaluate retinal microvascular perfusion. The VDs of the macular region in the superficial retinal capillary plexus (SRCP), deep retinal capillary plexus (DRCP), and foveal avascular zone (FAZ) were determined, along with the VD of the optic nerve head (ONH) in the radial peripapillary capillary (RPC) network. Additionally, cerebral MRI and cognitive function tests were performed. RESULTS: In the macula area, the VD of the CSVD patients was significantly lower than HCs in the temporal quadrant of SRCP. In the ONH area, CSVD patients had lower VD than HCs in the peripapillary RPC network. According to multiple linear regression analysis, decreased VD of the macular SRCP was associated with white matter hyperintensity scores after adjustment for age, hypertension, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia. Furthermore, the VD of the macular SRCP was significantly correlated with CSVD patients' cognitive function, especially global cognition, memory function, attention function, information processing, and executive function. CONCLUSION: OCTA revealed a significant decrease in retinal microvascular perfusion in CSVD patients, and retinal hypoperfusion was related to MRI markers and cognitive function, suggesting that these parameters could have potential utility as early disease biomarkers.

Robust network inference using response logic.

MOTIVATION: A major challenge in molecular and cellular biology is to map out the regulatory networks of cells. As regulatory interactions can typically not be directly observed experimentally, various computational methods have been proposed to disentangling direct and indirect effects. Most of these rely on assumptions that are rarely met or cannot be adapted to a given context. RESULTS: We present a network inference method that is based on a simple response logic with minimal presumptions. It requires that we can experimentally observe whether or not some of the system's components respond to perturbations of some other components, and then identifies the directed networks that most accurately account for the observed propagation of the signal. To cope with the intractable number of possible networks, we developed a logic programming approach that can infer networks of hundreds of nodes, while being robust to noisy, heterogeneous or missing data. This allows to directly integrate prior network knowledge and additional constraints such as sparsity. We systematically benchmark our method on KEGG pathways, and show that it outperforms existing approaches in DREAM3 and DREAM4 challenges. Applied to a novel perturbation dataset on PI3K and MAPK pathways in isogenic models of a colon cancer cell line, it generates plausible network hypotheses that explain distinct sensitivities toward various targeted inhibitors due to different PI3K mutants. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: A Python/Answer Set Programming implementation can be accessed at github.com/GrossTor/response-logic. Data and analysis scripts are available at github.com/GrossTor/response-logic-projects. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

bcGST-an interactive bias-correction method to identify over-represented gene-sets in boutique arrays.

MOTIVATION: Gene annotation and pathway databases such as Gene Ontology and Kyoto Encyclopaedia of Genes and Genomes are important tools in Gene-Set Test (GST) that describe gene biological functions and associated pathways. GST aims to establish an association relationship between a gene-set of interest and an annotation. Importantly, GST tests for over-representation of genes in an annotation term. One implicit assumption of GST is that the gene expression platform captures the complete or a very large proportion of the genome. However, this assumption is neither satisfied for the increasingly popular boutique array nor the custom designed gene expression profiling platform. Specifically, conventional GST is no longer appropriate due to the gene-set selection bias induced during the construction of these platforms. RESULTS: We propose bcGST, a bias-corrected GST by introducing bias-correction terms in the contingency table needed for calculating the Fisher's Exact Test. The adjustment method works by estimating the proportion of genes captured on the array with respect to the genome in order to assist filtration of annotation terms that would otherwise be falsely included or excluded. We illustrate the practicality of bcGST and its stability through multiple differential gene expression analyses in melanoma and the Cancer Genome Atlas cancer studies. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The bcGST method is made available as a Shiny web application at http://shiny.maths.usyd.edu.au/bcGST/. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Phase Ib study of the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib (GDC-0973) in combination with the PI3K inhibitor pictilisib (GDC-0941) in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Purpose We investigated the combination of the MEK inhibitor, cobimetinib, and the pan-PI3K inhibitor, pictilisib, in an open-label, phase Ib study. Experimental Design Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled in 3 dose escalation schedules: (1) both agents once-daily for 21-days-on 7-days-off ("21/7"); (2) intermittent cobimetinib and 21/7 pictilisib ("intermittent"); or (3) both agents once-daily for 7-days-on 7-days-off ("7/7"). Starting doses for the 21/7, intermittent, and 7/7 schedules were 20/80, 100/130, and 40/130 mg of cobimetinib/pictilisib, respectively. Nine indication-specific expansion cohorts interrogated the recommended phase II dose and schedule. Results Of 178 enrollees (dose escalation: n = 98), 177 patients were dosed. The maximum tolerated doses for cobimetinib/pictilisib (mg) were 40/100, 125/180, and not reached, for the 21/7, intermittent, and 7/7 schedules, respectively. Six dose-limiting toxicities included grade 3 (G3) elevated lipase, G4 elevated creatine phosphokinase, and G3 events including fatigue concurrent with a serious adverse event (SAE) of diarrhea, decreased appetite, and SAEs of hypersensitivity and dehydration. Common drug-related adverse events included nausea, fatigue, vomiting, decreased appetite, dysgeusia, rash, and stomatitis. Pharmacokinetic parameters of the drugs used in combination were unaltered compared to monotherapy exposures. Confirmed partial responses were observed in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma (n = 1) and KRAS-mutant endometrioid adenocarcinoma (n = 1). Eighteen patients remained on study ≥6 months. Biomarker data established successful blockade of MAP kinase (MAPK) and PI3K pathways. The metabolic response rate documented by FDG-PET was similar to that observed with cobimetinib monotherapy. Conclusions Cobimetinib and pictilisib combination therapy in patients with solid tumors had limited tolerability and efficacy.

Atezolizumab with or without cobimetinib versus regorafenib in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (IMblaze370): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer is typically unresponsive to immunotherapy. This phase 3 study was designed to assess atezolizumab plus cobimetinib in metastatic colorectal cancer. Here, we report the comparison of atezolizumab plus cobimetinib or atezolizumab monotherapy versus regorafenib in the third-line setting. METHODS: IMblaze 370 is a multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled trial, done at 73 academic medical centres and community oncology practices in 11 countries. Patients aged at least 18 years with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer, baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and disease progression on or intolerance to at least two previous systemic chemotherapy regimens were enrolled. We used permuted-block randomisation (block size four) to assign patients (2:1:1) via an interactive voice and web response system to atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously every 2 weeks) plus cobimetinib (60 mg orally once daily for days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle), atezolizumab monotherapy (1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks), or regorafenib (160 mg orally once daily for days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle). Stratification factors were extended RAS status (wild-type vs mutant) and time since diagnosis of first metastasis (<18 months vs ≥18 months). Recruitment of patients with high microsatellite instability was capped at 5%. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in the population of patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. IMblaze370 is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02788279. FINDINGS: Between July 27, 2016, and Jan 19, 2017, 363 patients were enrolled (183 patients in the atezolizumab plus cobimetinib group, 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 90 in the regorafenib group). At data cutoff (March 9, 2018), median follow-up was 7·3 months (IQR 3·7-13·6). Median overall survival was 8·87 months (95% CI 7·00-10·61) with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib, 7·10 months (6·05-10·05) with atezolizumab, and 8·51 months (6·41-10·71) with regorafenib; the hazard ratio was 1·00 (95% CI 0·73-1·38; p=0·99) for the combination versus regorafenib and 1·19 (0·83-1·71; p=0·34) for atezolizumab versus regorafenib. Grade 3-4 adverse events were reported in 109 (61%) of 179 patients in the atezolizumab plus cobimetinib group, 28 (31%) of 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 46 (58%) of 80 in the regorafenib group. The most common all-cause grade 3-4 adverse events in the combination group were diarrhoea (20 [11%] of 179), anaemia (ten [6%]), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (12 [7%]), and fatigue (eight [4%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 71 (40%) of 179 patients in the combination group, 15 (17%) of 90 in the atezolizumab group, and 18 (23%) of 80 in the regorafenib group. Two treatment-related deaths occurred in the combination group (sepsis) and one in the regorafenib group (intestinal perforation). INTERPRETATION: IMblaze370 did not meet its primary endpoint of improved overall survival with atezolizumab plus cobimetinib or atezolizumab versus regorafenib. The safety of atezolizumab plus cobimetinib was consistent with those of the individual drugs. These results underscore the challenge of expanding the benefit of immunotherapy to patients whose tumours have lower baseline levels of immune inflammation, such as those with microsatellite-stable metastatic colorectal cancer. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech Inc.

Impact of depth of response on survival in patients treated with cobimetinib ± vemurafenib: pooled analysis of BRIM-2, BRIM-3, BRIM-7 and coBRIM.

BACKGROUND: This pooled analysis investigated the prognostic value of depth of response in two cohorts of patients with BRAFV600-mutated metastatic melanoma treated with vemurafenib or cobimetinib plus vemurafenib. METHODS: The data were pooled from BRIM-2, BRIM-3, BRIM-7 and coBRIM. Association of depth of response with survival was estimated by Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for clinically relevant covariates. Depth of response was analysed in previously identified prognostic subgroups based on disease characteristics and gene signatures. RESULTS: Greater tumour reduction and longer time to maximal response were significantly associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) when evaluated as continuous variables. Patients with the deepest responses had long-lasting survival outcomes (median PFS: 14 months; OS: 32 months with vemurafenib; not estimable with cobimetinib plus vemurafenib). Cobimetinib plus vemurafenib improved depth of response versus vemurafenib monotherapy regardless of other prognostic factors, including gene signatures. CONCLUSIONS: Greater depth of response was associated with improved survival, supporting its utility as a measure of treatment efficacy in melanoma and further evaluation of its incorporation into existing prognostic models. Cobimetinib plus vemurafenib improved outcomes across quartiles of response regardless of prognostic factors or gene signatures and provided durable survival benefits in patients with deep responses.

Adjuvant vemurafenib in resected, BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma (BRIM8): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Systemic adjuvant treatment might mitigate the high risk of disease recurrence in patients with resected stage IIC-III melanoma. The BRIM8 study evaluated adjuvant vemurafenib monotherapy in patients with resected, BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma. METHODS: BRIM8 was a phase 3, international, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study that enrolled 498 adults (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed stage IIC-IIIA-IIIB (cohort 1) or stage IIIC (cohort 2) BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma that was fully resected. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive voice or web response system to receive twice-daily adjuvant oral vemurafenib 960 mg tablets or matching placebo for 52 weeks (13 × 28-day cycles). Randomisation was done by permuted blocks (block size 6) and was stratified by pathological stage and region in cohort 1 and by region in cohort 2. The investigators, patients, and sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, evaluated separately in each cohort. Hierarchical analysis of cohort 2 before cohort 1 was prespecified. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01667419. FINDINGS: The study enrolled 184 patients in cohort 2 (93 were assigned to vemurafenib and 91 to placebo) and 314 patients in cohort 1 (157 were assigned to vemurafenib and 157 to placebo). At the time of data cutoff (April 17, 2017), median study follow-up was 33·5 months (IQR 25·9-41·6) in cohort 2 and 30·8 months (25·5-40·7) in cohort 1. In cohort 2 (patients with stage IIIC disease), median disease-free survival was 23·1 months (95% CI 18·6-26·5) in the vemurafenib group versus 15·4 months (11·1-35·9) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·80, 95% CI 0·54-1·18; log-rank p=0·26). In cohort 1 (patients with stage IIC-IIIA-IIIB disease) median disease-free survival was not reached (95% CI not estimable) in the vemurafenib group versus 36·9 months (21·4-not estimable) in the placebo group (HR 0·54 [95% CI 0·37-0·78]; log-rank p=0·0010); however, the result was not significant because of the prespecified hierarchical prerequisite for the primary disease-free survival analysis of cohort 2 to show a significant disease-free survival benefit. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 141 (57%) of 247 patients in the vemurafenib group and 37 (15%) of 247 patients in the placebo group. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the vemurafenib group were keratoacanthoma (24 [10%] of 247 patients), arthralgia (17 [7%]), squamous cell carcinoma (17 [7%]), rash (14 [6%]), and elevated alanine aminotransferase (14 [6%]), although all keratoacanthoma events and most squamous cell carcinoma events were by default graded as grade 3. In the placebo group, grade 3-4 adverse events did not exceed 2% for any of the reported terms. Serious adverse events were reported in 40 (16%) of 247 patients in the vemurafenib group and 25 (10%) of 247 patients in the placebo group. The most common serious adverse event was basal cell carcinoma, which was reported in eight (3%) patients in each group. One patient in the vemurafenib group of cohort 2 died 2 months after admission to hospital for grade 3 hypertension; however, this death was not considered to be related to the study drug. INTERPRETATION: The primary endpoint of disease-free survival was not met in cohort 2, and therefore the analysis of cohort 1 showing a numerical benefit in disease-free survival with vemurafenib versus placebo in patients with resected stage IIC-IIIA-IIIB BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma must be considered exploratory only. 1 year of adjuvant vemurafenib was well tolerated, but might not be an optimal treatment regimen in this patient population. FUNDING: F Hoffman-La Roche Ltd.

Association of body-mass index and outcomes in patients with metastatic melanoma treated with targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or chemotherapy: a retrospective, multicohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Obesity has been linked to increased mortality in several cancer types; however, the relation between obesity and survival outcomes in metastatic melanoma is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between body-mass index (BMI) and progression-free survival or overall survival in patients with metastatic melanoma who received targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or chemotherapy. METHODS: This retrospective study analysed independent cohorts of patients with metastatic melanoma assigned to treatment with targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or chemotherapy in randomised clinical trials and one retrospective study of patients treated with immunotherapy. Patients were classified according to BMI, following the WHO definitions, as underweight, normal, overweight, or obese. Patients without BMI and underweight patients were excluded. The primary outcomes were the associations between BMI and progression-free survival or overall survival, stratified by treatment type and sex. We did multivariable analyses in the independent cohorts, and combined adjusted hazard ratios in a mixed-effects meta-analysis to provide a precise estimate of the association between BMI and survival outcomes; heterogeneity was assessed with meta-regression analyses. Analyses were done on the predefined intention-to-treat population in the randomised controlled trials and on all patients included in the retrospective study. FINDINGS: The six cohorts consisted of a total of 2046 patients with metastatic melanoma treated with targeted therapy, immunotherapy, or chemotherapy between Aug 8, 2006, and Jan 15, 2016. 1918 patients were included in the analysis. Two cohorts containing patients from randomised controlled trials treated with targeted therapy (dabrafenib plus trametinib [n=599] and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib [n=240]), two cohorts containing patients treated with immunotherapy (one randomised controlled trial of ipilimumab plus dacarbazine [n=207] and a retrospective cohort treated with pembrolizumab, nivolumab, or atezolizumab [n=331]), and two cohorts containing patients treated with chemotherapy (two randomised controlled trials of dacarbazine [n=320 and n=221]) were classified according to BMI as normal (694 [36%] patients), overweight (711 [37%]), or obese (513 [27%]). In the pooled analysis, obesity, compared with normal BMI, was associated with improved survival in patients with metastatic melanoma (average adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·77 [95% CI 0·66-0·90] for progression-free survival and 0·74 [0·58-0·95] for overall survival). The survival benefit associated with obesity was restricted to patients treated with targeted therapy (HR 0·72 [0·57-0·91] for progression-free survival and 0·60 [0·45-0·79] for overall survival) and immunotherapy (HR 0·75 [0·56-1·00] and 0·64 [0·47-0·86]). No associations were observed with chemotherapy (HR 0·87 [0·65-1·17, pinteraction=0·61] for progression-free survival and 1·03 [0·80-1·34, pinteraction=0·01] for overall survival). The association of BMI with overall survival for patients treated with targeted and immune therapies differed by sex, with inverse associations in men (HR 0·53 [0·40-0·70]), but no associations observed in women (HR 0·85 [0·61-1·18, pinteraction=0·03]). INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that in patients with metastatic melanoma, obesity is associated with improved progression-free survival and overall survival compared with those outcomes in patients with normal BMI, and that this association is mainly seen in male patients treated with targeted or immune therapy. These results have implications for the design of future clinical trials for patients with metastatic melanoma and the magnitude of the benefit found supports further investigation of the underlying mechanism of these associations. FUNDING: ASCO/CCF Young Investigator Award, ASCO/CCF Career Development Award, MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) Melanoma Moonshot Program, MDACC Melanoma SPORE, and the Dr Miriam and Sheldon G Adelson Medical Research Foundation.

Widespread potential for growth-factor-driven resistance to anticancer kinase inhibitors.

Mutationally activated kinases define a clinically validated class of targets for cancer drug therapy. However, the efficacy of kinase inhibitors in patients whose tumours harbour such alleles is invariably limited by innate or acquired drug resistance. The identification of resistance mechanisms has revealed a recurrent theme­the engagement of survival signals redundant to those transduced by the targeted kinase. Cancer cells typically express multiple receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) that mediate signals that converge on common critical downstream cell-survival effectors­most notably, phosphatidylinositol-3-OH kinase (PI(3)K) and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK). Consequently, an increase in RTK-ligand levels, through autocrine tumour-cell production, paracrine contribution from tumour stroma or systemic production, could confer resistance to inhibitors of an oncogenic kinase with a similar signalling output. Here, using a panel of kinase-'addicted' human cancer cell lines, we found that most cells can be rescued from drug sensitivity by simply exposing them to one or more RTK ligands. Among the findings with clinical implications was the observation that hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) confers resistance to the BRAF inhibitor PLX4032 (vemurafenib) in BRAF-mutant melanoma cells. These observations highlight the extensive redundancy of RTK-transduced signalling in cancer cells and the potentially broad role of widely expressed RTK ligands in innate and acquired resistance to drugs targeting oncogenic kinases.

Cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib in advanced BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma (coBRIM): updated efficacy results from a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The combination of cobimetinib with vemurafenib improves progression-free survival compared with placebo and vemurafenib in previously untreated patients with BRAF(V600)-mutant advanced melanoma, as previously reported in the coBRIM study. In this Article, we report updated efficacy results, including overall survival and safety after longer follow-up, and selected biomarker correlative studies. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre study, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed BRAF(V600) mutation-positive unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive response system to receive cobimetinib (60 mg once daily for 21 days followed by a 7-day rest period in each 28-day cycle) or placebo, in combination with oral vemurafenib (960 mg twice daily). Progression-free and overall survival were primary and secondary endpoints, respectively; all analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01689519, and is ongoing but no longer recruiting participants. FINDINGS: Between Jan 8, 2013, and Jan 31, 2014, 495 eligible adult patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the cobimetinib plus vemurafenib group (n=247) or placebo plus vemurafenib group (n=248). At a median follow-up of 14·2 months (IQR 8·5-17·3), the updated investigator-assessed median progression-free survival was 12·3 months (95% CI 9·5-13·4) for cobimetinib and vemurafenib versus 7·2 months (5·6-7·5) for placebo and vemurafenib (HR 0·58 [95% CI 0·46-0·72], p<0·0001). The final analysis for overall survival occurred when 255 (52%) patients had died (Aug 28, 2015). Median overall survival was 22·3 months (95% CI 20·3-not estimable) for cobimetinib and vemurafenib versus 17·4 months (95% CI 15·0-19·8) for placebo and vemurafenib (HR 0·70, 95% CI 0·55-0·90; p=0·005). The safety profile for cobimetinib and vemurafenib was tolerable and manageable, and no new safety signals were observed with longer follow-up. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events occurring at a higher frequency in patients in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group compared with the vemurafenib group were γ-glutamyl transferase increase (36 [15%] in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group vs 25 [10%] in the placebo and vemurafenib group), blood creatine phosphokinase increase (30 [12%] vs one [<1%]), and alanine transaminase increase (28 [11%] vs 15 [6%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 92 patients (37%) in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 69 patients (28%) in the vemurafenib group. Pyrexia (six patients [2%]) and dehydration (five patients [2%]) were the most common serious adverse events reported in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group. A total of 259 patients have died: 117 (47%) in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 142 (58%) in the vemurafenib group. The primary cause of death was disease progression in most patients: 109 (93%) of 117 in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 133 (94%) of 142 in the vemurafenib group. INTERPRETATION: These data confirm the clinical benefit of cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib and support the use of the combination as a standard first-line approach to improve survival in patients with advanced BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche-Genentech.

PTEN loss in circulating tumour cells correlates with PTEN loss in fresh tumour tissue from castration-resistant prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: PTEN gene loss occurs frequently in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and may drive progression through activation of the PI3K/AKT pathway. Here, we developed a novel CTC-based assay to determine PTEN status and examined the correlation between PTEN status in CTCs and matched tumour tissue samples. METHODS: PTEN gene status in CTCs was evaluated on an enrichment-free platform (Epic Sciences) by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH). PTEN status in archival and fresh tumour tissue was evaluated by FISH and immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Peripheral blood was collected from 76 patients. Matched archival and fresh cancer tissue was available for 48 patients. PTEN gene status detected in CTCs was concordant with PTEN status in matched fresh tissues and archival tissue in 32 of 38 patients (84%) and 24 of 39 patients (62%), respectively. CTC counts were prognostic (continuous, P=0.001). PTEN loss in CTCs associated with worse survival in univariate analysis (HR 2.05; 95% CI 1.17-3.62; P=0.01) and with high lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) in metastatic CRPC patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our results illustrate the potential use of CTCs as a non-invasive, real-time liquid biopsy to determine PTEN gene status. The prognostic and predictive value of PTEN in CTCs warrants investigation in CRPC clinical trials of PI3K/AKT-targeted therapies.

PAK1 mediates pancreatic cancer cell migration and resistance to MET inhibition.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a major unmet medical need and a deeper understanding of molecular drivers is needed to advance therapeutic options for patients. We report here that p21-activated kinase 1 (PAK1) is a central node in PDAC cells downstream of multiple growth factor signalling pathways, including hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) and MET receptor tyrosine kinase. PAK1 inhibition blocks signalling to cytoskeletal effectors and tumour cell motility driven by HGF/MET. MET antagonists, such as onartuzumab and crizotinib, are currently in clinical development. Given that even highly effective therapies have resistance mechanisms, we show that combination with PAK1 inhibition overcomes potential resistance mechanisms mediated either by activation of parallel growth factor pathways or by direct amplification of PAK1. Inhibition of PAK1 attenuated in vivo tumour growth and metastasis in a model of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. In human tissues, PAK1 is highly expressed in a proportion of PDACs (33% IHC score 2 or 3; n = 304) and its expression is significantly associated with MET positivity (p < 0.0001) and linked to a widespread metastatic pattern in patients (p = 0.067). Taken together, our results provide evidence for a functional role of MET/PAK1 signalling in pancreatic adenocarcinoma and support further characterization of therapeutic inhibitors in this indication.

Network quantification of EGFR signaling unveils potential for targeted combination therapy.

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signaling network is activated in most solid tumors, and small-molecule drugs targeting this network are increasingly available. However, often only specific combinations of inhibitors are effective. Therefore, the prediction of potent combinatorial treatments is a major challenge in targeted cancer therapy. In this study, we demonstrate how a model-based evaluation of signaling data can assist in finding the most suitable treatment combination. We generated a perturbation data set by monitoring the response of RAS/PI3K signaling to combined stimulations and inhibitions in a panel of colorectal cancer cell lines, which we analyzed using mathematical models. We detected that a negative feedback involving EGFR mediates strong cross talk from ERK to AKT. Consequently, when inhibiting MAPK, AKT activity is increased in an EGFR-dependent manner. Using the model, we predict that in contrast to single inhibition, combined inactivation of MEK and EGFR could inactivate both endpoints of RAS, ERK and AKT. We further could demonstrate that this combination blocked cell growth in BRAF- as well as KRAS-mutated tumor cells, which we confirmed using a xenograft model.