Adjuvant therapy in patients with sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma: post hoc analysis from Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) E2805.

OBJECTIVES: To study the effects of adjuvant therapy in patients with sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma (sRCC) enrolled in the randomised phase III clinical trial E2805. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The original trial (E2805) was a randomised, double-blinded phase III clinical trial comparing outcomes in 1943 patients with RCC accrued between 2006 and 2010 and treated with up to 1 year of adjuvant placebo, sunitinib, or sorafenib. The present study analyses the cohort of patients with sRCC that participated in E2805. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients (8.8%) had sarcomatoid features. Of these, 52 patients received sunitinib, 58 received sorafenib, and 61 received placebo. Most patients were pT3-4 (71.1%, 63.7%, and 70.5%, respectively); 17.3%, 19.0%, and 27.9% had pathologically positive lymph nodes; and 59.6%, 62.1%, and 62.3% of the patients were University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Integrated Staging System (UISS) very-high risk. In 49% of patients with subsequent development of metastatic disease, recurrence occurred in the lung, followed by 30% in the lymph nodes, and 13% in the liver. There was a high local recurrence rate in the renal bed (16%, 29%, and 18%, respectively). The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 33.6%, 36.0%, and 27.8%, for sunitinib, sorafenib and placebo, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-1.20 for sunitinib vs placebo, and HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.53-1.28 for sorafenib vs placebo). CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant therapy with sunitinib or sorafenib did not show an improvement in DFS or OS in patients with sRCC.

Development of MK-8353, an orally administered ERK1/2 inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Constitutive activation of ERK1/2 occurs in various cancers, and its reactivation is a well-described resistance mechanism to MAPK inhibitors. ERK inhibitors may overcome the limitations of MAPK inhibitor blockade. The dual mechanism inhibitor SCH772984 has shown promising preclinical activity across various BRAFV600/RAS-mutant cancer cell lines and human cancer xenografts. METHODS: We have developed an orally bioavailable ERK inhibitor, MK-8353; conducted preclinical studies to demonstrate activity, pharmacodynamic endpoints, dosing, and schedule; completed a study in healthy volunteers (P07652); and subsequently performed a phase I clinical trial in patients with advanced solid tumors (MK-8353-001). In the P07652 study, MK-8353 was administered as a single dose in 10- to 400-mg dose cohorts, whereas in the MK-8353-001 study, MK-8353 was administered in 100- to 800-mg dose cohorts orally twice daily. Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity were analyzed. RESULTS: MK-8353 exhibited comparable potency with SCH772984 across various preclinical cancer models. Forty-eight patients were enrolled in the P07652 study, and twenty-six patients were enrolled in the MK-8353-001 study. Adverse events included diarrhea (44%), fatigue (40%), nausea (32%), and rash (28%). Dose-limiting toxicity was observed in the 400-mg and 800-mg dose cohorts. Sufficient exposure to MK-8353 was noted that correlated with biological activity in preclinical data. Three of fifteen patients evaluable for treatment response in the MK-8353-001 study had partial response, all with BRAFV600-mutant melanomas. CONCLUSION: MK-8353 was well tolerated up to 400 mg twice daily and exhibited antitumor activity in patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma. However, antitumor activity was not particularly correlated with pharmacodynamic parameters. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01358331. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co. Inc., and NIH (P01 CA168585 and R35 CA197633).

Overcoming sorafenib evasion in hepatocellular carcinoma using CXCR4-targeted nanoparticles to co-deliver MEK-inhibitors.

Sorafenib is a RAF inhibitor approved for several cancers, including hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Inhibition of RAF kinases can induce a dose-dependent "paradoxical" upregulation of the downstream mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway in cancer cells. It is unknown whether "paradoxical" ERK activation occurs after sorafenib therapy in HCC, and if so, if it impacts the therapeutic efficacy. Here, we demonstrate that RAF inhibition by sorafenib rapidly leads to RAF dimerization and ERK activation in HCCs, which contributes to treatment evasion. The transactivation of RAF dimers and ERK signaling promotes HCC cell survival, prevents apoptosis via downregulation of BIM and achieves immunosuppression by MAPK/NF-kB-dependent activation of PD-L1 gene expression. To overcome treatment evasion and reduce systemic effects, we developed CXCR4-targeted nanoparticles to co-deliver sorafenib with the MEK inhibitor AZD6244 in HCC. Using this approach, we preferentially and efficiently inactivated RAF/ERK, upregulated BIM and down-regulated PD-L1 expression in HCC, and facilitated intra-tumoral infiltration of cytotoxic CD8+ T cells. These effects resulted in a profound delay in tumor growth. Thus, this nano-delivery strategy to selectively target tumors and prevent the paradoxical ERK activation could increase the feasibility of dual RAF/MEK inhibition to overcome sorafenib treatment escape in HCC.

Adjuvant Treatment for High-Risk Clear Cell Renal Cancer: Updated Results of a High-Risk Subset of the ASSURE Randomized Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Given recently published results of a 750-patient adjuvant sunitinib trial showing improved disease-free survival (DFS), the appropriate strategy for treating high-risk patients is unclear. We sought to determine whether there is improved disease-free survival benefit to taking the active drug in patients with high-risk (pT3, pT4, node-positive) clear cell renal cancer (ccRCC) in the ASSURE trial (adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib vs placebo in resected unfavorable renal cell carcinoma [RCC]), the largest adjuvant trial published to date. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate DFS and overall survival (OS) in ccRCC high-risk patients randomized to sunitinib or sorafenib vs placebo among patients with stages comparable to other high-risk adjuvant trials. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The DFS and OS at 10 years postactivation were calculated for 1069 patients in US and Canadian cooperative groups with high-risk patients who had ccRCC histology and pT3, pT4, or node-positive disease accrued between 2006 and 2010 to the double-blind randomized placebo-controlled phase 3 trial. Outcome analyses by dose quartiles of these patients receiving sunitinib or sorafenib were also performed. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received 1 year of adjuvant sunitinib (50 mg), sorafenib (800 mg) daily, or equivalent placebo. The study was amended for patient intolerance to sunitinib (37.5 mg), sorafenib (400 mg) daily, or equivalent placebo with mandatory dose escalation if no serious adverse effects were experienced. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Disease-free survival, defined as time from randomization to recurrence, second primary cancer, or death. RESULTS: Of 1069 patients, 358 (243 [67.9%] men, 115 [32.1%] women) received sunitinib, 355 (248 [69.9%] men, 107 [30.1%] women) received sorafenib, and 356 (254 [71.3%] men, 102 [28.7%] women) received placebo as adjuvant therapy. The mean (SD) age for each group was 58.3 (10.6) years, 56.8 (10.3) years, and 57.5 (10.4) years, respectively. Five-year DFS rates were 47.7%, 49.9%, and 50.0%, respectively for sunitinib, sorafenib, and placebo (HR, 0.94 for sunitinib vs placebo; and HR, 0.90; 97.5% CI, 0.71-1.14 for sorafenib vs placebo), with 5-year OS of 75.2%, 80.2%, and 76.5% (HR, 1.06; 97.5% CI, 0.78-1.45; P = .66, sunitinib vs placebo; and HR, 0.80; 97.5% CI, 0.58-1.11; P = .12 for sorafenib vs placebo). There was no difference by dose quartile. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Neither prognostic category of the tumor nor dose intensity of therapy altered the lack of difference in DFS or OS in this population of patients with high-risk ccRCC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00326898.

Adjuvant sunitinib or sorafenib for high-risk, non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma (ECOG-ACRIN E2805): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Renal-cell carcinoma is highly vascular, and proliferates primarily through dysregulation of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway. We tested sunitinib and sorafenib, two oral anti-angiogenic agents that are effective in advanced renal-cell carcinoma, in patients with resected local disease at high risk for recurrence. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients at 226 study centres in the USA and Canada. Eligible patients had pathological stage high-grade T1b or greater with completely resected non-metastatic renal-cell carcinoma and adequate cardiac, renal, and hepatic function. Patients were stratified by recurrence risk, histology, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, and surgical approach, and computerised double-blind randomisation was done centrally with permuted blocks. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive 54 weeks of sunitinib 50 mg per day orally throughout the first 4 weeks of each 6 week cycle, sorafenib 400 mg twice per day orally throughout each cycle, or placebo. Placebo could be sunitinib placebo given continuously for 4 weeks of every 6 week cycle or sorafenib placebo given twice per day throughout the study. The primary objective was to compare disease-free survival between each experimental group and placebo in the intention-to-treat population. All treated patients with at least one follow-up assessment were included in the safety analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00326898. FINDINGS: Between April 24, 2006, and Sept 1, 2010, 1943 patients from the National Clinical Trials Network were randomly assigned to sunitinib (n=647), sorafenib (n=649), or placebo (n=647). Following high rates of toxicity-related discontinuation after 1323 patients had enrolled (treatment discontinued by 193 [44%] of 438 patients on sunitinib, 199 [45%] of 441 patients on sorafenib), the starting dose of each drug was reduced and then individually titrated up to the original full doses. On Oct 16, 2014, because of low conditional power for the primary endpoint, the ECOG-ACRIN Data Safety Monitoring Committee recommended that blinded follow-up cease and the results be released. The primary analysis showed no significant differences in disease-free survival. Median disease-free survival was 5·8 years (IQR 1·6-8·2) for sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR] 1·02, 97·5% CI 0·85-1·23, p=0·8038), 6·1 years (IQR 1·7-not estimable [NE]) for sorafenib (HR 0·97, 97·5% CI 0·80-1·17, p=0·7184), and 6·6 years (IQR 1·5-NE) for placebo. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were hypertension (105 [17%] patients on sunitinib and 102 [16%] patients on sorafenib), hand-foot syndrome (94 [15%] patients on sunitinib and 208 [33%] patients on sorafenib), rash (15 [2%] patients on sunitinib and 95 [15%] patients on sorafenib), and fatigue 110 [18%] patients on sunitinib [corrected]. There were five deaths related to treatment or occurring within 30 days of the end of treatment; one patient receiving sorafenib died from infectious colitis while on treatment and four patients receiving sunitinib died, with one death due to each of neurological sequelae, sequelae of gastric perforation, pulmonary embolus, and disease progression. Revised dosing still resulted in high toxicity. INTERPRETATION: Adjuvant treatment with the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors sorafenib or sunitinib showed no survival benefit relative to placebo in a definitive phase 3 study. Furthermore, substantial treatment discontinuation occurred because of excessive toxicity, despite dose reductions. These results provide a strong rationale against the use of these drugs for high-risk kidney cancer in the adjuvant setting and suggest that the biology of cancer recurrence might be independent of angiogenesis. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute and ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group, Pfizer, and Bayer.

Antitumor Activity of BRAF Inhibitor and IFNα Combination in BRAF-Mutant Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: BRAF(V600E)-mediated MAPK pathway activation is associated in melanoma cells with IFNAR1 downregulation. IFNAR1 regulates melanoma cell sensitivity to IFNα, a cytokine used for the adjuvant treatment of melanoma. These findings and the limited therapeutic efficacy of BRAF-I prompted us to examine whether the efficacy of IFNα therapy of BRAF(V600E) melanoma can be increased by its combination with BRAF-I. METHODS: BRAF/NRAS genotype, ERK activation, IFNAR1, and HLA class I expression were tested in 60 primary melanoma tumors from treatment-naive patients. The effect of BRAF-I on IFNAR1 expression was assessed in three melanoma cell lines and in four biopsies of BRAF(V600E) metastases. The antiproliferative, pro-apoptotic and immunomodulatory activity of BRAF-I and IFNα combination was tested in vitro and in vivo utilizing three melanoma cell lines, HLA class I-MA peptide complex-specific T-cells and immunodeficient mice (5 per group for survival and 10 per group for tumor growth inhibition). All statistical tests were two-sided. Differences were considered statistically significant when the P value was less than .05. RESULTS: The IFNAR1 level was statistically significantly (P < .001) lower in BRAF(V600E) primary melanoma tumors than in BRAF wild-type tumors. IFNAR1 downregulation was reversed by BRAF-I treatment in the three melanoma cell lines (P ≤ .02) and in three out of four metastases. The IFNAR1 level in the melanoma tumors analyzed was increased as early as 10 to 14 days following the beginning of the treatment. These changes were associated with: 1) an increased susceptibility in vitro of melanoma cells to the antiproliferative (P ≤ .04), pro-apoptotic (P ≤ .009) and immunomodulatory activity, including upregulation of HLA class I antigen APM component (P ≤ .04) and MA expression as well as recognition by cognate T-cells (P < .001), of BRAF-I and IFNα combination and 2) an increased survival (P < .001) and inhibition of tumor growth of melanoma cells (P < .001) in vivo by BRAF-I and IFNα combination. CONCLUSIONS: The described results provide a strong rationale for the clinical trials implemented in BRAF(V600E) melanoma patients with BRAF-I and IFNα combination.

Copy Number Changes Are Associated with Response to Treatment with Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, and Sorafenib in Melanoma.

PURPOSE: Copy number alterations have been shown to be involved in melanoma pathogenesis. The randomized phase III clinical trial E2603: carboplatin, paclitaxel, ± sorafenib (CP vs. CPS) offers a large collection of tumor samples to evaluate association of somatic mutations, genomic alterations, and clinical outcomes, prior to current FDA-approved therapies. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Copy number and mutational analysis on 119 pretreatment samples was performed. RESULTS: CPS therapy was associated with improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with CP in patients with tumors with RAF1 (cRAF) gene copy gains (HR, 0.372; P = 0.025) or CCND1 gene copy gains (HR, 0.45; P = 0.035). CPS therapy was associated with improved overall survival (OS) compared with CP in patients with tumors with KRAS gene copy gains (HR, 0.25; P = 0.035). BRAF gene copy gain and MET amplification were more common in samples with V600K versus V600E mutations (P < 0.001), which was validated in The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) dataset. CONCLUSIONS: We observed improved treatment response with CPS in patients with melanoma whose tumors have RAF1 (cRAF), KRAS, or CCND1 amplification, all of which can be attributed to sorafenib targeting CRAF. These genomic alterations should be incorporated in future studies for evaluation as biomarkers.

BEST: A Randomized Phase II Study of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor, RAF Kinase, and Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Combination Targeted Therapy With Bevacizumab, Sorafenib, and Temsirolimus in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma--A Trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (E2804).

PURPOSE: On the basis of evidence that resistance to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor inhibition is caused by hypoxia-driven residual VEGF and other proangiogenic factors, combinations of agents from these classes were hypothesized to improve treatment outcomes relative to single-agent VEGF pathway blockade. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 361 patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma were randomly assigned equally to arm A (bevacizumab monotherapy 10 mg/kg intravenously [IV] every 2 weeks), B (bevacizumab 10 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks and temsirolimus 25 mg IV every week), C (bevacizumab 5 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks and sorafenib 200 mg orally twice daily on days 1 to 5, 8 to 12, 15 to 19, and 22 to 26), or D (sorafenib 200 mg twice daily and temsirolimus 25 mg IV weekly). Progression-free survival was the primary end point. RESULTS: Among 331 eligible treated patients, median PFS was 7.5 months for bevacizumab alone (90% CI, 5.8 to 10.8 months), 7.6 months for bevacizumab plus temsirolimus (90% CI, 6.7 to 9.2 months), 9.2 months for bevacizumab plus sorafenib (90% CI, 7.5 to 11.4 months), and 7.4 months for sorafenib plus temsirolimus (90% CI, 5.6 to 7.9 months). Hazard ratios from stratified Cox proportional hazards models were 1.01, 0.89, and 1.07 (with respective P values of .95, .49, and .68) for the three combinations, respectively, compared with bevacizumab alone. Adverse events did not differ significantly among treatment arms. CONCLUSION: The activity of sorafenib, temsirolimus, and bevacizumab administered in doublet combinations did not significantly improve median progression-free survival in comparison with bevacizumab monotherapy.

Effects of Adjuvant Sorafenib and Sunitinib on Cardiac Function in Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients without Overt Metastases: Results from ASSURE, ECOG 2805.

PURPOSE: Sunitinib and sorafenib are used widely in the treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). These agents are associated with a significant incidence of cardiovascular (CV) dysfunction and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) declines, observed largely in the metastatic setting. However, in the adjuvant population, the CV effects of these agents remain unknown. We prospectively defined the incidence of cardiotoxicity among resected, high-risk RCC patients treated with these agents. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Sunitinib, sorafenib, or placebo was administered for up to 12 months in patients with high-risk, resected RCC. LVEF was measured by multigated acquisition (MUGA) scans at standard intervals. Additional CV adverse events were reported according to NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). RESULTS: Among 1,943 patients randomized, 1,599 had at least 1 post-baseline MUGA. Within 6 months, 21 patients (1.3%) experienced a cardiac event, defined as an LVEF decline from baseline that was >15% and below the institutional lower limit of normal. Nine of 513 patients (1.8%) were on sunitinib, 7 of 508 (1.4%) on sorafenib, and 5 of 578 (0.9%) on placebo (P = 0.28 and 0.56 comparing sunitinib and sorafenib to placebo, respectively). With dose interruption or adjustment, 16 of the 21 recovered their LVEF to >50%. The incidence of symptomatic heart failure, arrhythmia, or myocardial ischemia did not differ among groups. CONCLUSIONS: In the adjuvant setting, we prospectively define low incidence of cardiotoxicity with sunitinib and sorafenib. These findings may be related to close CV monitoring, or potentially to fewer CV comorbidities in our nonmetastatic population.

The Hippo effector YAP promotes resistance to RAF- and MEK-targeted cancer therapies.

Resistance to RAF- and MEK-targeted therapy is a major clinical challenge. RAF and MEK inhibitors are initially but only transiently effective in some but not all patients with BRAF gene mutation and are largely ineffective in those with RAS gene mutation because of resistance. Through a genetic screen in BRAF-mutant tumor cells, we show that the Hippo pathway effector YAP (encoded by YAP1) acts as a parallel survival input to promote resistance to RAF and MEK inhibitor therapy. Combined YAP and RAF or MEK inhibition was synthetically lethal not only in several BRAF-mutant tumor types but also in RAS-mutant tumors. Increased YAP in tumors harboring BRAF V600E was a biomarker of worse initial response to RAF and MEK inhibition in patients, establishing the clinical relevance of our findings. Our data identify YAP as a new mechanism of resistance to RAF- and MEK-targeted therapy. The findings unveil the synthetic lethality of combined suppression of YAP and RAF or MEK as a promising strategy to enhance treatment response and patient survival.

Correlation of somatic mutations and clinical outcome in melanoma patients treated with Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, and sorafenib.

PURPOSE: Sorafenib is an inhibitor of VEGF receptor (VEGFR), platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR), and RAF kinases, amongst others. We assessed the association of somatic mutations with clinicopathologic features and clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic melanoma treated on E2603, comparing treatment with carboplatin, paclitaxel ± sorafenib (CP vs. CPS) EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Pretreatment tumor samples from 179 unique individuals enrolled on E2603 were analyzed. Genotyping was performed using a custom iPlex panel interrogating 74 mutations in 13 genes. Statistical analysis was performed using Fisher exact test, logistic regression, and Cox proportional hazards models. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: BRAF and NRAS mutations were found at frequencies consistent with other metastatic melanoma cohorts. BRAF-mutant melanoma was associated with worse performance status, increased number of disease sites, and younger age at diagnosis. NRAS-mutant melanoma was associated with better performance status, fewer sites of disease, and female gender. BRAF and NRAS mutations were not significantly predictive of response or survival when treated with CPS versus CP. However, patients with NRAS-mutant melanoma trended toward a worse response and PFS on CP than those with BRAF-mutant or WT/WT melanoma, an association that was reversed for this group on the CPS arm. CONCLUSIONS: This study of somatic mutations in melanoma is the last prospectively collected phase III clinical trial population before the era of BRAF-targeted therapy. A trend toward improved clinical response in patients with NRAS-mutant melanoma treated with CPS was observed, possibly due to the effect of sorafenib on CRAF.

Expression of drug targets in patients treated with sorafenib, carboplatin and paclitaxel.

INTRODUCTION: Sorafenib, a multitarget kinase inhibitor, targets members of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway and VEGFR kinases. Here we assessed the association between expression of sorafenib targets and biomarkers of taxane sensitivity and response to therapy in pre-treatment tumors from patients enrolled in ECOG 2603, a phase III comparing sorafenib, carboplatin and paclitaxel (SCP) to carboplatin, paclitaxel and placebo (CP). METHODS: Using a method of automated quantitative analysis (AQUA) of in situ protein expression, we quantified expression of VEGF-R2, VEGF-R1, VEGF-R3, FGF-R1, PDGF-Rß, c-Kit, B-Raf, C-Raf, MEK1, ERK1/2, STMN1, MAP2, EB1 and Bcl-2 in pretreatment specimens from 263 patients. RESULTS: An association was found between high FGF-R1 and VEGF-R1 and increased progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in our combined cohort (SCP and CP arms). Expression of FGF-R1 and VEGF-R1 was higher in patients who responded to therapy ((CR+PR) vs. (SD+PD+ un-evaluable)). CONCLUSIONS: In light of the absence of treatment effect associated with sorafenib, the association found between FGF-R1 and VEGF-R1 expression and OS, PFS and response might reflect a predictive biomarker signature for carboplatin/paclitaxel-based therapy. Seeing that carboplatin and pacitaxel are now widely used for this disease, corroboration in another cohort might enable us to improve the therapeutic ratio of this regimen.

MRI assessment of early tumor response in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients treated with sorafenib.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine early MRI changes in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) treated with the antiangiogenic agent sorafenib and to identify MRI biomarkers of RCC response to sorafenib. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen patients with RCC were evaluated by MRI before and 3-12 weeks after commencing treatment with sorafenib. Two experienced MR radiologists, blinded to treatment status, independently graded tumor appearance on T1-weighted, T2-weighted, and gadolinium-enhanced images. The proportional odds mixed model was used to compare qualitative appearance of tumors before and after therapy. Time-to-progression was correlated with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.0 and MR-modified Choi criteria, incorporating changes in both tumor enhancement and size. RESULTS: After sorafenib therapy, there was a significant increase in T1 signal intensity of tumors (p < 0.0001) and a significant decrease in degree of tumor enhancement (p < 0.0001). The sum of unidimensional tumor diameters decreased significantly after therapy (p = 0.005). However, the average decrease in size at early follow-up was 13%, and all patients except one had stable disease by RECIST 1.0. Early responders defined by MR-modified Choi criteria had increased time-to-progression compared with nonresponders, whereas early RECIST evaluation did not predict clinical outcome. CONCLUSION: Decreased enhancement and T1 shortening of tumors on MRI may be useful biomarkers of RCC response to angiogenesis inhibitors. Response criteria combining early changes in size and enhancement lead to better correlation with clinical outcome compared with size decrease alone.

Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in a subset of patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma from a Phase II randomized discontinuation trial.

AIM: Phase II multi-disease randomized discontinuation trial to assess the safety and efficacy of sorafenib including patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS). METHODS: Sorafenib (400 mg twice daily) was initially administered for 12 weeks. Patients with: ≥25% tumour shrinkage continued sorafenib; ≥25% tumour growth discontinued; other patients were randomized and received sorafenib or placebo. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients (median age 55 years) were enrolled. Common drug-related adverse events, including fatigue, hand-foot skin reaction, rash or gastrointestinal disturbances, were manageable, reversible and generally low grade. Fatigue, skin toxicity, nausea, diarrhoea and hypertension occurred at grade ≥3 in 19% of patients. After 12 weeks eight (31%) patients had not progressed. Three patients who experienced tumour shrinkage and continued on sorafenib, and five (19%) were randomized either to continue sorafenib or to receive placebo. Of the three patients randomized to sorafenib, one achieved a partial response and two had SD. Overall one patient achieved a partial response and three further patients achieved minor responses. CONCLUSIONS: There was evidence of disease activity in STS as defined by tumor regressions including one objective partial response. Further investigation in STS is warranted.

Vascular endothelial growth factor targeted therapy in the perioperative setting: implications for patient care.

Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeted therapy, either alone or in combination with chemotherapy, has become the standard of care in several solid tumours, including colorectal cancer, renal-cell carcinoma, breast cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer, and glioblastoma. VEGF is crucial in the process of angiogenesis and wound healing and, thus, its inhibition has the potential to affect wound healing in patients undergoing surgery. In this review, we summarise the data available on the use of VEGF-targeted therapies, and their effect on perioperative wound complications. Surgery in patients receiving VEGF-targeted therapies seems to be safe when an appropriate interval of time is allowed between surgical procedures and treatment. Recommendations regarding this interval are provided in a disease and agent site-specific manner. We also discuss complications arising from the use of VEGF-directed therapies that might require surgical intervention and the considerations important in their management. At this juncture, safety data on the use of VEGF-targeted therapies in the perioperative period are sparse, and investigators are urged to continue to study this issue prospectively in current and future clinical trials to establish firm guidelines.

Development of a novel chemical class of BRAF inhibitors offers new hope for melanoma treatment.

Evaluation of: Niculescu-Duvaz D, Gaulon C, Dijkstra HP et al.: Pyridoimidazolones as novel potent inhibitors of v-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homologue B1 (BRAF). J. Med. Chem. 52, 2255-2264 (2009). There are currently no therapies known to alter the clinical course of disseminated melanoma. Mutational profiling studies have shown that the majority of melanomas harbor activating mutations in the serine/threonine kinase BRAF at the V600E position. Preclinical work has validated mutated BRAF as a therapeutic target in melanoma, and a number of BRAF-selective small-molecule inhibitors are now undergoing clinical evaluation. The only BRAF inhibitor to be investigated extensively in clinical trials of melanoma at this time is sorafenib--a compound with very limited single-agent activity. As sorafenib has poor cellular activity against the BRAF V600E mutation, the conclusion that many researchers have arrived at is that sorafenib did not provide a test of the therapeutic value of BRAF inhibition. Thus, more highly selective BRAF inhibitors have been sought. The current paper describes the identification of a new class of BRAF inhibitors that contain pyridoimidazolone as the ATP hinge-binding domain and a rigid imidazolone group. Building upon this novel scaffold, the authors derived a series of compounds with low nanomolar potency against mutated BRAF in isolated kinase assays, and low micromolar potency in cellular assays. These new chemical leads represent a significant step forward in the search for new, potent BRAF-selective small-molecule inhibitors.

Where are we with adjuvant therapy of stage III and IV melanoma in 2009?

Adjuvant therapy options for advanced melanoma in 2009 remain active observation, high-dose interferon, or clinical trial participation. Close observation is currently the only required adjuvant management, with the purpose of detecting the emergence of regional or metastatic disease early, when surgical management may still be possible. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for the workup and follow-up of all stages of melanoma must be tailored to specific patients by the treating physician. This article explores the factors to consider when individualizing care within the scope of these guidelines.

Expression of sorafenib targets in melanoma patients treated with carboplatin, paclitaxel and sorafenib.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib, a multitarget kinase inhibitor, inhibits members of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway and receptor tyrosine kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGF-R2). Sorafenib, carboplatin, and paclitaxel (SCP) has antitumor activity in melanoma patients, but no association was found between response and activating B-Raf V600E mutations. We assessed the expression of sorafenib targets in SCP-treated patient specimens and evaluated the association with response and progression-free survival. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Using automated quantitative analysis, we quantified the expression of VEGF-R1, VEGF-R2, VEGF-R3, fibroblast growth factor receptor 1, platelet-derived growth factor receptor beta, c-Kit, B-Raf, C-Raf, meiosis-specific serine/threonine protein kinase 1, and extracellular regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) in pretreatment specimens from 46 patients. Furthermore, we assessed ERK1/2 expression in 429 archival melanomas. RESULTS: VEGF-R2 expression was significantly higher in patients with a complete or partial response (P = 0.0435), whereas ERK1/2 was higher in patients who did not respond (P = 0.0417). High ERK1/2 was an independent predictor of poor survival. High ERK1/2 was associated with decreased survival in the archival melanoma cohort, suggesting that high ERK1/2-expressing tumors are biologically more aggressive. All of the six patients with both high VEGF-R2 and low ERK1/2 responded to SCP. CONCLUSIONS: High VEGF-R2 expression is associated with response to SCP in melanoma, whereas high ERK1/2 is associated with resistance. Collection of specimens from SCP-treated melanoma patients in a cooperative group phase III trial comparing this regimen with the chemotherapy alone is ongoing, and confirmation of these findings is necessary. These markers might be useful for predicting response to sorafenib when given with other chemotherapies and in other diseases, resulting in the possible elimination of unnecessary treatment of patients unlikely to respond.

A phase I trial of the oral, multikinase inhibitor sorafenib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the safety, maximum tolerated dose, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of sorafenib, a multikinase inhibitor, combined with paclitaxel and carboplatin in patients with solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with advanced cancer (24 with melanoma) received oral sorafenib 100, 200, or 400 mg twice daily on days 2 to 19 of a 21-day cycle. All patients received carboplatin corresponding to AUC6 and 225 mg/m(2) paclitaxel on day 1. Pharmacokinetic analyses were done for sorafenib on days 2 and 19 of cycle 1 and for paclitaxel on day 1 of cycles 1 and 2. Pretreatment tumor samples from 17 melanoma patients were analyzed for BRAF mutations. RESULTS: Sorafenib was well tolerated at the doses evaluated. The most frequent severe adverse events were hematologic toxicities (grade 3 or 4 in 33 patients, 85%). Twenty-seven (69%) patients had sorafenib-related adverse events, the most frequent of which were dermatologic events (26 patients, 67%). Exposure to paclitaxel was not altered by intervening treatment with sorafenib. Treatment with sorafenib, paclitaxel, and carboplatin resulted in one complete response and nine partial responses, all among patients with melanoma. There was no correlation between BRAF mutational status and treatment responses in patients with melanoma. CONCLUSIONS: The recommended phase II doses are oral 400 mg twice daily sorafenib, carboplatin at an AUC6 dose, and 225 mg/m(2) paclitaxel. The tumor responses observed with this combined regimen in patients with melanoma warrant further investigation.