Toxicities from BRAF and MEK Inhibitors: Strategies to Maximize Therapeutic Success.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This report highlights several of the recent therapeutic advancements in the treatment of BRAF-mutant tumors, discusses the most common adverse events observed with BRAF-targeted agents, and suggests strategies to manage and mitigate treatment-related toxicities. RECENT FINDINGS: BRAF and MEK inhibitors represent a significant advancement in the treatment of BRAF-mutated malignancies with data across tumor types demonstrating the anti-tumor efficacy of dual MAPK inhibition. Although these agents have a reasonable toxicity profile, variable side effects across organ systems can develop. The discovery of activating BRAF mutations and subsequent development of BRAF and MEK inhibitors has transformed the treatment algorithms of BRAF-mutant malignancies. With increased application of these targeted regimens, identification and prompt management of their unique adverse events are crucial.

Identification of Benzothiazoles Bearing 1,3,4-Thiadiazole as Antiproliferative Hybrids Targeting VEGFR-2 and BRAF Kinase: Design, Synthesis, BIO Evaluation and In Silico Study.

Cancer remains a leading cause of death worldwide, often resulting from uncontrolled growth in various organs. Protein kinase inhibitors represent an important class of targeted cancer therapies. Recently, the kinases BRAF and VEGFR-2 have shown synergistic effects on tumor progression. Seeking to develop dual BRAF/VEGFR-2 inhibitors, we synthesized 18 amino-benzothiazole derivatives with structural similarities to reported dual inhibitors. Four compounds-4a, 4f, 4l, and 4r-demonstrated remarkable cytotoxicity, with IC50 values ranging from 3.58 to 15.36 µM, against three cancer cell lines. Furthermore, these compounds showed IC50 values of 38.77-66.22 µM in the case of a normal cell line, which was significantly safer than the reference, sorafenib. Subsequent investigation revealed that compound 4f exhibited the capacity to inhibit the BRAF and VEGFR-2 enzymes, with IC50 values similar to sorafenib (0.071 and 0.194 µM, respectively). Moreover, compound 4f caused G2-M- and S-phase cycle arrest. Molecular modeling demonstrated binding patterns compatible with inhibition for both targets, where 4f exerted the critical interactions in the BRAF site and interacted in the VEGFR-2 site in a manner akin to sorafenib, demonstrating affinity similar to dabrafenib.

A phase I/II study of MCS110 with BRAF/MEK inhibition in patients with melanoma after progression on BRAF/MEK inhibition.

BACKGROUND: Prognosis for patients with metastatic melanoma has been improved dramatically with the development of BRAF/MEK directed therapy and immune checkpoint inhibition. However, resistance to therapy remains a challenge, particularly with BRAF/MEK targeted therapy which often has a limited duration of efficacy. Pre-clinical data suggest that adding CSF1 inhibition to BRAF/MEK targeted therapy may reduce resistance and increase efficacy. METHODS: We performed a phase I/II study to determine the safety and efficacy of CSF1 inhibition with MCS110 in combination with BRAF/MEK inhibition with dabrafenib/trametinib in patients with BRAF V600E/K mutant metastatic melanoma. The trial was terminated early due to a decision by the study sponsor to cease further development of MCS110. RESULTS: Between September 2018 to July 2019 six patients were enrolled on the study. Patients were evenly split between female (50%) and male (50%) with a median age of 59.5 yrs. (26-71). Five patients experienced grade 3 toxicities that were possibly related to one of the therapies, there were no grade 4 or grade 5 events. One patient had a partial response (PR) by RECIST 1.1, one patient had stable disease (SD), 3 patients had disease progression (PD). Median progression free survival was 2.3 months (90% CI: 1.3 mos to not reached). CONCLUSION: MCS110 in combination with dabrafenib and trametinib was reasonably well tolerated in a small melanoma population. One response was observed in this small sample of patients suggesting this combination might be worthy of further exploration.

A phase I/II study of LY3022855 with BRAF/MEK inhibition in patients with Melanoma.

BRAF/MEK targeted therapies and immune checkpoint inhibition have dramatically improved disease control and survival of patients with advanced melanoma. However, most patients do not have durable benefit from either of these therapies. BRAF targeted therapy often has a limited duration of efficacy due to the development of resistance. Pre-clinical data suggest that one possible way to overcome resistance to BRAF/MEK targeted therapy may be the addition of CSF1R inhibition. In this phase I/II study we evaluated the safety and efficacy of LY3022855, an anti-colony stimulating factor-1 receptor (CSF-1R) monoclonal antibody in combination with the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib and the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib in patients with BRAF V600E/K mutant metastatic melanoma. The trial was terminated early due to discontinuation of the development program for LY3022855 by the sponsor. Between August 2017 and May 2018 five pts were enrolled. Three patients experienced grade 3 events that were deemed possibly related to LY3022855. There were no grade 4 or grade 5 events related to LY3022855. One of the 5 patients had a complete response (CR), whereas the other 4 had progressive disease (PD). Median progression free survival was 3.9 months (90% CI: 1.9-37.2 mos). CSF1R inhibition with LY3022855 in combination with BRAF/MEK inhibition with vemurafenib and cobimetinib was difficult to tolerate in a small melanoma population. One response was observed in this small sample of patients suggesting this combination might be worthy of further exploration.

Antitumor activity of ipilimumab or BRAF ± MEK inhibition after pembrolizumab treatment in patients with advanced melanoma: analysis from KEYNOTE-006.

BACKGROUND: Antitumor activity of ipilimumab or BRAF ± MEK inhibitors (BRAFi ± MEKi) following pembrolizumab administration in melanoma is poorly characterized. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the phase III KEYNOTE-006 study, patients with unresectable stage III/IV melanoma received pembrolizumab (10 mg/kg) once every 2 or 3 weeks (Q3W) or ipilimumab (3 mg/kg) Q3W. The current post hoc analysis evaluates outcomes with ipilimumab or BRAFi ± MEKi as first subsequent systemic therapy after pembrolizumab administration and includes patients who completed or discontinued pembrolizumab after one or more dose. Pembrolizumab arms were pooled. RESULTS: At data cut-off (4 December 2017), median follow-up was 46.9 months. Of 555 pembrolizumab-treated patients, first subsequent therapy was ipilimumab for 103 (18.6%) and BRAFi ± MEKi for 59 (10.6%) [33 received BRAFi + MEKi, 26 BRAFi alone; 37 (62.7%) were BRAFi ± MEKi naïve]. In the subsequent ipilimumab group, ORR with previous pembrolizumab was 17.5% [1 complete response (CR); 17 partial response (PR)]; 79.6% had discontinued pembrolizumab due to progressive disease (PD); median overall survival (OS) was 21.5 months. ORR with subsequent ipilimumab was 15.5%; 11/16 responses (8 CRs; 3 PRs) were ongoing. ORR with subsequent ipilimumab was 9.7% for patients with PD as best response to pembrolizumab. Median OS from ipilimumab initiation was 9.8 months. In the subsequent BRAFi ± MEKi group, ORR with previous pembrolizumab was 13.5% (8 PR); 76.3% had discontinued pembrolizumab due to PD; median OS was 17.9 months. ORR with subsequent BRAFi ± MEKi was 30.5%, 7/18 responses (4 CR, 3 PR) were ongoing. Median OS from BRAFi ± MEKi initiation was 12.9 months. ORR for BRAFi ± MEKi-naïve patients who received subsequent BRAFi ± MEKi was 43.2%; 6/16 were ongoing (3 CR, 3 PR). CONCLUSIONS: Ipilimumab and BRAFi ± MEKi have antitumor activity as first subsequent therapy after pembrolizumab in patients with advanced melanoma.

Inhibition of the DAPKs-L13a axis prevents a GAIT-like motif-mediated HuR insufficiency in melanoma cells.

We previously showed that the adaptive response of BRAFV600-mutated melanoma cells to BRAF inhibition emerges from a subpopulation of cells expressing an intermittent lower level of the mRNA-binding protein HuR. In this study, following initial overexpression experiments in which we confirm our previous results, we use wild-type and mutants HuR full-length mRNA constructs and in vivo-interacting assays and demonstrate that a highly conserved interferon-γ-activated inhibitor of translation (GAIT)-like motif located upstream of the GU-rich elements of HuR major polyadenylation site (PAS2), interacts with constituents of the GAIT complex and affects HuR post-transcriptional expression regulation. Knockdown of the ribosomal protein L13a or the inhibition of the DAPK1-ZIPK axis involved in L13a phosphorylation, reduces the proportion of HuRLow cells at steady-state and attenuates the adaptive response of the whole melanoma-cell population to BRAF inhibition. These results have further potential therapeutic implications for disease conditions associated with HuR insufficient expression.

Metabolic imaging using hyperpolarized 13 C-pyruvate to assess sensitivity to the B-Raf inhibitor vemurafenib in melanoma cells and xenografts.

Nearly all melanoma patients with a BRAF-activating mutation will develop resistance after an initial clinical benefit from BRAF inhibition (BRAFi). The aim of this work is to evaluate whether metabolic imaging using hyperpolarized (HP) 13 C pyruvate can serve as a metabolic marker of early response to BRAFi in melanoma, by exploiting the metabolic effects of BRAFi. Mice bearing human melanoma xenografts were treated with the BRAFi vemurafenib or vehicle. In vivo HP 13 C magnetic resonance spectroscopy was performed at baseline and 24 hours after treatment to evaluate changes in pyruvate-to-lactate conversion. Oxygen partial pressure was measured via electron paramagnetic resonance oximetry. Ex vivo qRT-PCR, immunohistochemistry and WB analysis were performed on tumour samples collected at the same time-points selected for in vivo experiments. Similar approaches were applied to evaluate the effect of BRAFi on sensitive and resistant melanoma cells in vitro, excluding the role of tumour microenvironment. BRAF inhibition induced a significant increase in the HP pyruvate-to-lactate conversion in vivo, followed by a reduction of hypoxia. Conversely, the conversion was inhibited in vitro, which was consistent with BRAFi-mediated impairment of glycolysis. The paradoxical increase of pyruvate-to-lactate conversion in vivo suggests that such conversion is highly influenced by the tumour microenvironment.

The risk of dermatological toxicities of combined BRAF and MEK inhibition versus BRAF inhibition alone in melanoma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the risk of dermatological toxicities of combined BRAF and MEK inhibition versus BRAF inhibition alone in melanoma patients. METHODS: We considered relevant prospective randomized phase I, II, and III trials of melanoma patients on the combined BRAF and MEK inhibition versus BRAF inhibition, describing events of rash, photosensitivity reaction (PR), hyperkeratosis (HK), alopecia, cutaneous squamous-cell carcinom(cSCC), skin papilloma(SP), pruritus, and hand-foot syndrome(HFS), as eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Eight trials comprising 3163 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The relative risks(RRs) of developing all-grade rash with combined BRAF and MEK inhibition versus BRAF inhibition was 1.59 (95%CI, 1.35-1.86, p < 0.00001), HK 0.33(95%CI, 0.16-0.66, p = 0.002), SP 0.09(95%CI, 0.04-0.24, p < 0.00001), alopecia 0.30(95%CI, 0.19-0.48, p < 0.00001), cSCC 0.23(95%CI, 0.17-0.31, p < 0.00001), HFS 0.18(95%CI, 0.13-0.26, p < 0.00001) and PR 0.40(95%CI, 0.26-0.61, p < 0.0001), while the RRs of high-grade dermatological toxicities from all included trials were: rash 0.54(95%CI, 0.20-1.43, p = 0.21), HK 0.18(95%CI, 0.06-0.53, p = 0.002), SP 0.14(95%CI, 0.02-1.16, p = 0.07), alopecia 0.72(95%CI, 0.14-3.62, p = 0.69), cSCC 0.23(95%CI, 0.17-0.33, p < 0.00001), HFS 0.40(95%CI, 0.08-2.06, p = 0.27), and PR 0.14(95%CI, 0.04-0.51, p = 0.003), respectly. CONCLUSION: Our analysis of data has demonstrated that combined BRAF and MEK inhibitor-based treatment is associated with an increased risk of all-grade rash and a decreased risk of all-grade and high-grade HK, SP, alopecia, cSCC, HFS, and PR compared with single BRAF inhibitor alone in melanoma patients. Appropriate prevention and management are recommended.

A multicenter DeCOG study on predictors of vemurafenib therapy outcome in melanoma: pretreatment impacts survival.

BACKGROUND: Kinase inhibitors targeting the BRAF V600 mutation have become standard in the treatment of metastatic melanoma. Albeit in wide clinical use, the patterns associated with therapy outcome are not fully elucidated. The present study was aimed to identify predictive factors of therapy response and survival under the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study analyzed patient, tumor, and pretreatment characteristics collected in BRAF V600-mutated stage IV melanoma patients before single-agent therapy with the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib. RESULTS: A total of 300 patients from 14 centers were included into this study with a median follow-up time of 13.0 months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.1 months; median overall survival (OS) was 7.6 months. Best response under vemurafenib was associated with serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH; ≤ versus >upper normal limit; P = 0.0000001), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) overall performance status (OPS) (0 versus ≥ 1; P = 0.00089), and BRAF mutation subtype (V600E versus V600K; P = 0.016). Multivariate analysis identified ECOG OPS ≥ 1 [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.88; P = 0.00005], immunotherapy pretreatment (HR = 0.53; P = 0.0067), elevated serum LDH (HR = 1.45; P = 0.012), age >55 years (HR = 0.72; P = 0.019), and chemotherapy pretreatment (HR = 1.39; P = 0.036) as independent predictors of PFS. For OS, elevated serum LDH (HR = 1.99; P = 0.00012), ECOG OPS ≥ 1 (HR = 1.90; P = 0.00063), age >55 years (HR = 0.65; P = 0.011), kinase inhibitor pretreatment (HR = 1.86; P = 0.014), immunotherapy pretreatment (HR = 0.57; P = 0.025), chemotherapy pretreatment (HR = 2.17; P = 0.039), and male gender (HR = 0.70; 95% confidence interval 0.50-0.98; P = 0.039) were found as predictors. CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate that the type of pretreatment strongly influences the outcome of vemurafenib therapy, with a precedent immunotherapy showing a positive, and a prior chemotherapy and kinase inhibitors showing a negative impact on survival, respectively. Moreover, we show that the patient's OPS, serum LDH, age, and gender independently impact vemurafenib therapy outcome. These findings should be taken into account for the future design of therapy sequencing in BRAF V600 mutation-positive melanoma patients.

The outcomes of Polish patients with advanced BRAF-positive melanoma treated with vemurafenib in a safety clinical trial.

AIM OF THE STUDY: The BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib has improved progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with BRAFV600-mutation-positive metastatic melanoma. Here we present the results of an open-label safety study with vemurafenib in patients with metastatic melanoma enrolled in Polish oncological centres. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with untreated or previously treated Stage IIIC/IV BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma were treated with oral vemurafenib in an initial dose of 960 mg twice daily. Assessments for safety and efficacy were made every 28 days. For the survival analysis the Kaplan-Meier estimator was used with the log-rank tests for bivariate comparisons. RESULTS: In total, 75 Polish patients were enrolled in the safety study across four centres. At data cut-off, 28 patients died (37%), mainly (26) due to disease progression; 33 (44%) patients continued vemurafenib after disease progression. The objective response rate was 46%, including two patients with a complete response and 29 with a partial response. Median progression-free survival was 7.4 months. The one-year overall survival rate was 61.9% (median overall survival was not reached). Seventy-three (97.3%) patients reported adverse events (AEs), and grade 3-5 toxicity was reported in 49.4% (37) patients. The most common AEs were: skin lesions (including rash and photosensitivity), arthralgia, and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: The overall safety profile and response rate of vemurafenib were comparable to those reported in previous studies of this drug. Our study confirmed the value of well-established prognostic features for overall survival, such as initial LDH (lactate dehydrogenase) level and AJCC staging.

EGF/EGFR-YAP1/TEAD2 signaling upregulates STIM1 in vemurafenib resistant melanoma cells.

Stromal interaction molecule 1 (STIM1) is the endoplasmic reticulum Ca2+ sensor for store-operated calcium entry and is closely associated with carcinogenesis and tumor progression. Previously, we found that STIM1 is upregulated in melanoma cells resistant to the serine/threonine-protein kinase B-raf inhibitor vemurafenib, although the mechanism underlying this upregulation is unknown. Here, we show that vemurafenib resistance upregulates STIM1 through an epidermal growth factor (EGF)/epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-Yes-associated protein 1 (YAP1)/TEA domain transcription factor 2 (TEAD2) signaling axis. Vemurafenib resistance can lead to an increase in EGF and EGFR levels, causing activation of the EGFR signaling pathway, which promotes YAP1 nuclear localization to increase the expression of STIM1. Our findings not only reveal the mechanism by which vemurafenib resistance promotes STIM1 upregulation, but also provide a rationale for combined targeting of the EGF/EGFR-YAP1/TEAD2-STIM1 axis to improve the therapeutic efficacy of BRAF inhibitor in melanoma patients.

A topical BRAF inhibitor (LUT-014) for treatment of radiodermatitis among women with breast cancer.

Background: Modern radiotherapy is associated with dermatitis (RD) in approximately one-third of patients treated for breast cancer. There is currently no standard for treating RD. Objective: The objective of this study was to determine whether LUT014, a topical BRAF inhibitor which paradoxically activates mitogen-activated protein kinase, can safely improve RD. Methods: A phase I/II study was designed to first follow a small cohort of women with grade 2 RD regarding toxicity and response. Then, 20 patients were randomized to compare LUT014 to "vehicle" relative to safety and response (measured with common terminology criteria for adverse events, Dermatology Life Quality Index). Results: No substantial toxicity (eg, 0 serious adverse event) was associated with LUT014. All 8 women receiving LUT014 achieved treatment success (5-point Dermatology Life Quality Index reduction at day 14) compared to 73% (8/11) on the placebo arm (P = .591). The time to complete recovery was shorter in the treatment arm. Limitations: The sample size was limited. Only 2 hospitals were included. Conclusions: Topical LU014 is tolerable and may be efficacious for grade 2 RD.

BRAF Inhibition and UVB Light Synergistically Promote Mus musculus Papillomavirus 1-Induced Skin Tumorigenesis.

The development of keratinocytic skin tumors, presumably attributable to paradoxical activation of the MAPK pathway, represents a relevant side effect of targeted therapies with BRAF inhibitors (BRAFis). The role of cutaneous papillomavirus infection in BRAFi-associated skin carcinogenesis, however, is still inconclusive. Employing the Mus musculus papillomavirus 1 (MmuPV1) skin infection model, the impact of BRAFis and UVB exposure on papillomavirus induced skin tumorigenesis was investigated in immunocompetent FVB/NCrl mice. Systemic BRAF inhibition in combination with UVB light induced skin tumors in 62% of the MmuPV1-infected animals. In contrast, significantly fewer tumors were observed in the absence of either BRAF inhibition, UVB irradiation or virus infection, as demonstrated by lesional outgrowth in 20%, 5% and 0% of the mice, respectively. Combinatory exposure to BRAFis and UVB favored productive viral infection, which was shown by high numbers of MmuPV1 genome copies and E1^E4 spliced transcripts and an abundance of E6/E7 oncogene mRNA and viral capsid proteins. BRAF inhibition, but not viral infection or UVB light, activated ERK1/2, whereas γH2AX expression, inducible by UVB light, remained unaltered by BRAFis. These results provide experimental evidence that BRAF inhibition and UVB irradiation synergistically promote MmuPV1-induced skin tumor development in vivo. This indicates an alternative pathway by which papillomavirus skin infection may contribute to BRAFi-associated skin tumorigenesis.

Secretome Screening of BRAFV600E-Mutated Colon Cancer Cells Resistant to Vemurafenib.

Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) carrying BRAFV600E mutation have worse response to chemotherapy and poor prognosis. The BRAFV600E inhibitor vemurafenib has shown modest efficacy as monotherapy in BRAF-mutated mCRC due to the development of resistance. The aim of this study was to conduct a comparative proteomics profiling of the secretome from vemurafenib-sensitive vs. -resistant colon cancer cells harboring BRAFV600E mutation in order to identify specific secretory features potentially associated with changes in the resistant cells' phenotype. Towards this aim, we employed two complementary proteomics approaches including two-dimensional gel electrophoresis coupled with MALDI-TOF/TOF mass spectrometry and label-free quantitative LC-MS/MS analysis. Obtained results pointed to aberrant regulation of DNA replication and endoplasmic reticulum stress as the major secretome features associated with chemoresistant phenotype. Accordingly, two proteins implicated in these processes including RPA1 and HSPA5/GRP78 were discussed in more details in the context of biological networks and their importance as potential secretome targets for further functional and clinical evaluation. Expression patterns of RPA1 and HSPA5/GRP78 in tumor tissues from colon cancer patients were also found in additional in silico analyses to be associated with BRAFV600E mutation status, which opens the possibility to extrapolate our findings and their clinical implication to other solid tumors harboring BRAFV600E mutation, such as melanoma.

Intracranial Control With Combination BRAF and MEK Inhibitor Therapy in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma.

Purpose/Objectives Combination BRAF (vemurafenib, dabrafenib, or encorafenib) plus MEK (trametinib, cobimetinib, or binimetinib) inhibitor therapy is now widely used in the treatment of metastatic melanoma. However, data for intracranial response to these drugs are limited. We aimed to evaluate the intracranial efficacy of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma with brain metastases (BM) and to determine patterns of failure of these new agents to inform optimal integration of local intracranial therapy. Materials and methods We retrospectively reviewed charts of patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma with metastasis to the brain with at least one untreated brain metastasis at the time of initiation of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors at our institution from 2006 to 2020. We collected per-patient and per-lesion data on demographics, treatment modality, and outcomes. The cumulative incidence of local (LF), distant intracranial (DF), and extracranial failure (EF) were calculated with competing risk analysis with death as a competing risk and censored at the last brain MRI follow-up. LF was calculated on a per-lesion basis while DF and EF were calculated on a per-patient basis. DF was defined as any new intracranial lesions. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors for LF. Results We identified 10 patients with 63 untreated brain metastases. The median age was 50.5 years. The median sum of the diameters of the five largest untreated brain metastases per patient was 20 mm (interquartile range 15-39 mm) and the median diameter for all measurable lesions was 4 mm. Median follow-up time was 9.0 months (range 1.4 months-46.2 months). Median OS was 13.6 months. The one-year cumulative incidence of LF, DF, and EF was 17.1%, 88.6, and 71.4%, respectively. The median time to LF, DF, and EF from the start of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors was 9.0 months, 4.7 months, and 7.0 months, respectively. The larger size of the BM was associated with LF on univariate analysis (odds ratio 1.13 per 1 mm increase in diameter, 95% confidence interval 1.019 to 1.308, p<0.02). Two (20%) patients eventually received stereotactic radiosurgery, and 2 (20%) received whole-brain radiotherapy for intracranial progression. Conclusion Although patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma with BM had fair local control on BRAF plus MEK inhibitors, the competing risk of death and distant intracranial and extracranial progression was high. Patients with larger brain metastases may benefit from local therapy.

Harnessing the polyamine transport system to treat BRAF inhibitor-resistant melanoma.

BRAF mutations are present in over half of all melanoma tumors. Although BRAF inhibitors significantly improve survival of patients with metastatic melanoma, recurrences occur within several months. We previously reported that BRAF mutant melanoma cells are more sensitive to a novel arylmethyl-polyamine (AP) compound that exploits their increased polyamine uptake compared to that of BRAF wildtype cells. Using an animal model of BRAF inhibitor-resistant melanoma, we show that co-treatment with the BRAF inhibitor, PLX4720, and AP significantly delays the recurrence of PLX4720-resistant melanoma tumors and decreases tumor-promoting macrophages. Development of BRAF inhibitor-resistance enriches for metastatic cancer stem cells (CSC) and increases tumor-promoting macrophages. In vitro studies demonstrated that CD304+, CXCR4+ spheroid cultures of BRAF mutant melanoma cells are resistant to PLX4720 but are more sensitive to AP compared to monolayer cultures of the same cells. AP significantly inhibited YUMM1.7 melanoma cell invasiveness across a Matrigel-coated filter using the CXCR4 ligand, SDF-1α, as the chemoattractant. AP also blocked the chemotactic effect of SDF-1α on CXCR4+ macrophages and inhibited M2 polarization of macrophages. In melanoma-macrophage co-cultures, AP prevented the PLX4720-induced release of pro-tumorigenic growth factors, such as VEGF, from macrophages and prevented the macrophage rescue of BRAF mutant melanoma cells treated with PLX4720. Our study offers a novel therapy (AP) to treat chemo-resistant melanoma. AP is unique because it targets the polyamine transport system in BRAF inhibitor-resistant CSCs and also blocks CXCR4 signaling in invasive melanoma cells and pro-tumorigenic macrophages.

Ocoxin Increases the Antitumor Effect of BRAF Inhibition and Reduces Cancer Associated Fibroblast-Mediated Chemoresistance and Protumoral Activity in Metastatic Melanoma.

Whereas the prevalence of several cancer types is decreasing, skin malignancies are growing more common every year. Malignant melanoma is the most aggressive form of skin cancer with high metastatic capacity. In most cases, malignant melanoma shows acquired therapy resistance. We evaluated the ability of Ocoxin, a natural compound-based antioxidant and anti-inflammatory nutritional complement, to exert an antitumor effect in melanoma. To do so, the cytotoxicity of Ocoxin in a panel of BRAF-mutated murine and human melanoma cell lines was tested alone and in combination with BRAF inhibitor Vemurafenib. Our results revealed a potent cytotoxic effect of Ocoxin against melanoma cells and a synergic effect when combined with Vemurafenib, reducing viability and increasing apoptosis. Besides, Ocoxin interferes with the cell cycle, impairs the inherent and fibroblast-mediated melanoma cell migration, and reduces resistance to BRAF inhibition. Proteomic analysis revealed reduced tumor secretion of inflammatory factors Galectin-1, Osteopontin, CCL5, and CCL9 upon treatment with Ocoxin. Moreover, RNASeq showed that Ocoxin downregulated the cell cycle and proliferation-related genes. In vivo, Ocoxin reduced the number of lung metastasis of YUMM-1.7 melanoma cells. Therefore, Ocoxin arises as a good candidate for clinical trials analyzing the beneficial effects in patients suffering from this cutaneous malignancy.

Triple Combination Therapy With PD-1/PD-L1, BRAF, and MEK Inhibitor for Stage III-IV Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Triple combination of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy and anti-BRAF plus anti-MEK targeted therapy is a promising antitumor strategy and is increasingly being used in clinical trials. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of triple combination of PD-1/PD-L1, BRAF, and MEK inhibition in patients diagnosed with stage III-IV melanoma, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched for all studies published from inception to January 2021. The progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and risk of adverse events (AEs) were extracted by two independent investigators and pooled hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI were determined using the random-effects model for data synthesis. Overall, five randomized controlled trials encompassing 1,266 patients with stage III-IV melanoma were selected. Triple combination therapy significantly improved PFS (HR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.86; P = 0.0005) and 2-year OS (RR = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.23; P = 0.01), but had no impact on ORR (RR = 1.09; 95% CI = 0.91 to 1.30; P = 0.37) when compared with controlled treatment group. In addition, triple combination therapy was associated with increased risks of hypothyroidism, arthralgia, myalgia, ALT increased, AST increased, asthenia, and pyrexia compared with control group. Triple combination therapy of PD-1/PD-L1, BRAF, and MEK inhibition achieved better survival benefits but had higher incidence of some adverse events over two-drug combination or monotherapy. Further randomized controlled clinical trials are needed to verify our results. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021235845 Available from https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021235845.

Case Report: Opposite Effects of BRAF Inhibition on Closely Related Clonal Myeloid Disorders.

Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) commonly co-occurs with additional myeloid malignancies. The introduction of targeted therapies, blocking "driver" mutations (e.g., BRAF V600E), enabled long-term remission in patients with LCH. The effect of BRAF inhibition on the course and the prognosis of co-existing clonal hematopoiesis is poorly understood. We report on a 61-year-old patient with systemic BRAF V600E positive LCH and concomitant BRAF wild-type (wt) clonal cytopenia of unknown significance (CCUS) with unfavorable somatic mutations including loss of function (LOF) of NF1. While manifestations of LCH improved after blocking BRAF by dabrafenib treatment, the BRAF wt CCUS progressed to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). The patient eventually underwent successful allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). We performed an in-depth analyzes of the clonal relationship of CCUS and the tissue affected by LCH by using next-generation sequencing (NGS). The findings suggest activation of the mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase pathway in the CCUS clone due to the presence of the RAS deregulating NF1 mutations and wt BRAF, which is reportedly associated with paradoxical activation of CRAF and hence MEK. Patients with LCH should be carefully screened for potential additional clonal hematological diseases. NGS can help predict outcome of the latter in case of BRAF inhibition. Blocking the MAP kinase pathway further downstream (e.g., by using MEK inhibitors) or allogeneic HSCT may be options for patients at risk.

Using personalized medicine in gliomas: a genomic approach to diagnosis and overcoming treatment resistance in a case with pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma.

INTRODUCTION: A patient who was initially considered to have a glioblastoma (GBM) had molecular analysis, showing that it was a pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma (PXA). Up to 78% of PXA tumors have BRAF V600E mutations. Primary brain tumors with BRAF mutations can have a good response to BRAF MEK inhibitors (BRAF MEKi), and there may be a synergistic response when combined with autophagy inhibitors. PRESENTATION OF THE CASE: A 20-year-old man found to have a large brain mass with midline shift underwent resection. He was diagnosed with "GBM" and treated with radiation and temozolomide with subsequent disease recurrence. Review of histology showed malignant PXA with BRAF V600E mutation. Treatment with Dabrafenib and Trametinib was started, and tumor size increased in size after 14 months of treatment. Given studies showing that resistance to BRAF inhibition can be overcome by autophagy inhibition, chloroquine was added. Patient has been on "triple" therapy for 15 months and has radiographically Stable Disease. At MCC, 3% of patients with gliomas have BRAF mutations who could potentially benefit from this combination therapy. CONCLUSION: This is the first report of a PXA patient receiving therapy with BRAF MEKi and an autophagy inhibitor with prolonged stable disease. This patient highlights the importance of a molecular interrogation in gliomas to provide an integrated diagnosis and effective treatment. This may be useful in up to 3% of glioma patients with BRAF mutations. Molecular testing in neuro-oncology is providing new avenues of diagnosis and treatment, and detailed molecular interrogation should be considered routine.