Crizotinib in patients with tumors harboring ALK or ROS1 rearrangements in the NCI-MATCH trial.

The NCI-MATCH was designed to characterize the efficacy of targeted therapies in histology-agnostic driver mutation-positive malignancies. Sub-protocols F and G were developed to evaluate the role of crizotinib in rare tumors that harbored either ALK or ROS1 rearrangements. Patients with malignancies that progressed following at least one prior systemic therapy were accrued to the NCI-MATCH for molecular profiling, and those with actionable ALK or ROS1 rearrangements were offered participation in sub-protocols F or G, respectively. There were five patients who enrolled on Arm F (ALK) and four patients on Arm G (ROS1). Few grade 3 or 4 toxicities were noted, including liver test abnormalities, and acute kidney injury. For sub-protocol F (ALK), the response rate was 50% (90% CI 9.8-90.2%) with one complete response among the 4 eligible patients. The median PFS was 3.8 months, and median OS was 4.3 months. For sub-protocol G (ROS1) the response rate was 25% (90% CI 1.3-75.1%). The median PFS was 4.3 months, and median OS 6.2 months. Data from 3 commercial vendors showed that the prevalence of ALK and ROS1 rearrangements in histologies other than non-small cell lung cancer and lymphoma was rare (0.1% and 0.4% respectively). We observed responses to crizotinib which met the primary endpoint for ALK fusions, albeit in a small number of patients. Despite the limited accrual, some of the patients with these oncogenic fusions can respond to crizotinib which may have a therapeutic role in this setting.

Image-guided biopsy in the age of personalised medicine: strategies for success and safety.

Oncology has progressed into an era of personalised medicine, whereby the therapeutic regimen is tailored to the molecular profile of the patient's cancer. Determining personalised therapeutic options is achieved by using tumour genomics and proteomics to identify the specific molecular targets against which candidate drugs can interact. Several dozen targeted drugs, many for multiple cancer types are already widely in clinical use. Molecular profiling of tumours is contingent on high-quality biopsy specimens and the most common method of tissue sampling is image-guided biopsy. Thus, for radiologists performing these biopsies, the paradigm has now shifted away from obtaining specimens simply for histopathological diagnosis to acquiring larger amounts of viable tumour cells for DNA, RNA, or protein analysis. These developments have highlighted the central role now played by radiologists in the delivery of personalised cancer care. This review describes the principles of molecular profiling assays and biopsy techniques for optimising yield, and describes a scoring system to assist in patient selection for percutaneous biopsy.

Cobimetinib plus atezolizumab in BRAFV600 wild-type melanoma: primary results from the randomized phase III IMspire170 study.

BACKGROUND: Emerging data suggest that the combination of MEK inhibitors and immunotherapeutic agents may result in improved efficacy in melanoma. We evaluated whether combining MEK inhibition and immune checkpoint inhibition was more efficacious than immune checkpoint inhibition alone in patients with previously untreated BRAFV600 wild-type advanced melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: IMspire170 was an international, randomized, open-label, phase III study. Patients were randomized 1 : 1 to receive cobimetinib (60 mg, days 1-21) plus anti-programmed death-ligand 1 atezolizumab (840 mg every 2 weeks) in 28-day cycles or anti-programmed death-1 pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) alone until loss of clinical benefit, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS), assessed by an independent review committee in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Between 11 December 2017, and 29 January 2019, 446 patients were randomized to receive cobimetinib plus atezolizumab (n = 222) or pembrolizumab (n = 224). Median follow-up was 7.1 months [interquartile range (IQR) 4.8-9.9] for cobimetinib plus atezolizumab and 7.2 months (IQR 4.9-10.1) for pembrolizumab. Median PFS was 5.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.8-7.2] with cobimetinib plus atezolizumab versus 5.7 months (95% CI 3.7-9.6) with pembrolizumab [stratified hazard ratio 1.15 (95% CI 0.88-1.50); P = 0.30]. Hazard ratios for PFS were consistent across prespecified subgroups. In exploratory biomarker analyses, higher tumor mutational burden was associated with improved clinical outcomes in both treatment arms. The most common grade 3-5 adverse events (AEs) were increased blood creatine phosphokinase (10.0% with cobimetinib plus atezolizumab versus 0.9% with pembrolizumab), diarrhea (7.7% versus 1.9%), rash (6.8% versus 0.9%), hypertension (6.4% versus 3.7%), and dermatitis acneiform (5.0% versus 0). Serious AEs occurred in 44.1% of patients with cobimetinib plus atezolizumab and 20.8% with pembrolizumab. CONCLUSION: Cobimetinib plus atezolizumab did not improve PFS compared with pembrolizumab monotherapy in patients with BRAFV600 wild-type advanced melanoma.

Targeted and immunotherapies in BRAF mutant melanoma: where we stand and what to expect.

The therapeutic landscape for melanoma has evolved drastically in the past decade. Currently, immune checkpoint inhibitors and small-molecule inhibitors targeting the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway are the two mainstay therapies for BRAFV600 mutant advanced melanoma. Although MAPK dependence has been variably demonstrated in melanomas lacking BRAFV600 mutations, definitive evidence of benefit with MAPK inhibitors has not been demonstrated. Thus, in the BRAFV600 'wild-type' setting, immune checkpoint inhibitors are the standalone option(s). In the BRAFV600 mutant setting, there is no definitive evidence prioritizing one therapeutic modality over another. Herein, we review the updated data of the pivotal phase III randomized controlled trials that established the standard-of-care first-line treatment for advanced melanoma, as it provides insights into long-term benefit, which is a major factor in therapy selection. We discuss the clinical considerations for choosing between these therapies in the front-line setting and beyond, specifically for patients with BRAFV600 mutant melanoma based on currently available evidence. We have previously proposed a time-dependent resistance paradigm in which future therapeutic development strategies can be rooted. We also discuss how these Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved therapeutic modalities are being pursued earlier in the course of disease management, namely in adjuvant and neoadjuvant settings. FDA-approved interlesional oncolytic virotherapy in the modern era is also briefly discussed.

The prognostic value of quantitating and localizing F-18 FDG uptake in cardiac sarcoidosis.

BACKGROUND: There is no identified level of FDG uptake in cardiac sarcoidosis (CS) associated with increased risk of arrhythmias, conduction disease, heart failure, or death. We aim to utilize standardized uptake value (SUV) quantitation and localization to identify patients at increased risk of cardiac events. METHODS AND RESULTS: F18-FDG PET/CT with MPI was used in CS diagnosis (N = 67). Mean and max SUV were measured and grouped as basal, mid, and apical disease. Post-scan ventricular tachycardia, AICD placement, complete heart block, pacemaker placement, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and cardiac-related hospital admissions were recorded (mean follow up 2.98 ± 2 years). Poisson regression analysis revealed that max SUV, mean SUV, as well as mean basal SUV, and LVEF were significantly associated with total cardiac events. Max SUV odds ratio (OR) = 1.068 (95% CI 1.024-1.114, P = 0.002), mean SUV OR = 1.059 (95% CI 1.008-1.113, P = 0.023), mean SUV OR = 1.061 (95% CI 1.012-1.112, P = 0.014), scan LVEF OR = 0.731 (95% CI 0.664-0.805, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: SUV at time of CS diagnosis has significant associations with future cardiac events. Patients with higher SUV, particularly in basal segments, are at increased risk of events. Further studies are needed to identify treatment methods utilizing risk stratification of CS.

Ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in patients with HER2-amplified tumors excluding breast and gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinomas: results from the NCI-MATCH trial (EAY131) subprotocol Q.

BACKGROUND: The National Cancer Institute-Molecular Analysis for Therapy Choice (NCI-MATCH) is a national precision medicine study incorporating centralized genomic testing to direct refractory cancer patients to molecularly targeted treatment subprotocols. This treatment subprotocol was designed to screen for potential signals of efficacy of ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in HER2-amplified histologies other than breast and gastroesophageal tumors. METHODS: Eligible patients had HER2 amplification at a copy number (CN) >7 based on targeted next-generation sequencing (NGS) with a custom Oncomine AmpliSeq™ (ThermoFisher Scientific) panel. Patients with prior trastuzumab, pertuzumab or T-DM1 treatment were excluded. Patients received T-DM1 at 3.6 mg/kg i.v. every 3 weeks until toxicity or disease progression. Tumor assessments occurred every three cycles. The primary end point was centrally assessed objective response rate (ORR). Exploratory end points included correlating response with HER2 CN by NGS. The impact of co-occurring genomic alterations and PTEN loss by immunohistochemistry were also assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were enrolled and 36 included in efficacy analysis. Median prior therapies in the metastatic setting was 3 (range 0-9; unknown in one patient). Median HER2 CN was 17 (range 7-139). Partial responses were observed in two (5.6%) patients: one mucoepidermoid carcinoma of parotid gland and one parotid gland squamous cell cancer. Seventeen patients (47%) had stable disease including 8/10 (80%) with ovarian and uterine carcinomas, with median duration of 4.6 months. The 6-month progression-free survival rate was 23.6% [90% confidence interval 14.2% to 39.2%]. Common toxicities included fatigue, anemia, fever and thrombocytopenia with no new safety signals. There was a trend for tumor shrinkage with higher levels of gene CN as determined by the NGS assay. CONCLUSION: T-DM1 was well tolerated. While this subprotocol did not meet the primary end point for ORR in this heavily pre-treated diverse patient population, clinical activity was seen in salivary gland tumors warranting further study in this tumor type in dedicated trials.

Vemurafenib in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive metastatic melanoma: final overall survival results of the randomized BRIM-3 study.

BACKGROUND: The BRIM-3 trial showed improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for vemurafenib compared with dacarbazine in treatment-naive patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive metastatic melanoma. We present final OS data from BRIM-3. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned in a 1 : 1 ratio to receive vemurafenib (960 mg twice daily) or dacarbazine (1000 mg/m2 every 3 weeks). OS and PFS were co-primary end points. OS was assessed in the intention-to-treat population, with and without censoring of data for dacarbazine patients who crossed over to vemurafenib. RESULTS: Between 4 January 2010 and 16 December 2010, a total of 675 patients were randomized to vemurafenib (n = 337) or dacarbazine (n = 338, of whom 84 crossed over to vemurafenib). At the time of database lock (14 August 2015), median OS, censored at crossover, was significantly longer for vemurafenib than for dacarbazine {13.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 12.0-15.4] versus 9.7 months [95% CI 7.9-12.8; hazard ratio (HR) 0.81 [95% CI 0.67-0.98]; P = 0.03}, as was median OS without censoring at crossover [13.6 months (95% CI 12.0-15.4) versus 10.3 months (95% CI 9.1-12.8); HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.68-0.96); P = 0.01]. Kaplan-Meier estimates of OS rates for vemurafenib versus dacarbazine were 56% versus 46%, 30% versus 24%, 21% versus 19% and 17% versus 16% at 1, 2, 3 and 4 years, respectively. Overall, 173 of the 338 patients (51%) in the dacarbazine arm and 175 of the 337 (52%) of those in the vemurafenib arm received subsequent anticancer therapies, most commonly ipilimumab. Safety data were consistent with the primary analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Vemurafenib continues to be associated with improved median OS in the BRIM-3 trial after extended follow-up. OS curves converged after ≈3 years, likely as a result of crossover from dacarbazine to vemurafenib and receipt of subsequent anticancer therapies. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT01006980.

Dabrafenib plus trametinib versus dabrafenib monotherapy in patients with metastatic BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma: long-term survival and safety analysis of a phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Previous analysis of COMBI-d (NCT01584648) demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with combination dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib monotherapy in BRAF V600E/K-mutant metastatic melanoma. This study was continued to assess 3-year landmark efficacy and safety after ≥36-month follow-up for all living patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This double-blind, phase 3 study enrolled previously untreated patients with BRAF V600E/K-mutant unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma. Patients were randomized to receive dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily) plus trametinib (2 mg once daily) or dabrafenib plus placebo. The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints were OS, overall response, duration of response, safety, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Between 4 May and 30 November 2012, a total of 423 of 947 screened patients were randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib (n = 211) or dabrafenib monotherapy (n = 212). At data cut-off (15 February 2016), outcomes remained superior with the combination: 3-year PFS was 22% with dabrafenib plus trametinib versus 12% with monotherapy, and 3-year OS was 44% versus 32%, respectively. Twenty-five patients receiving monotherapy crossed over to combination therapy, with continued follow-up under the monotherapy arm (per intent-to-treat principle). Of combination-arm patients alive at 3 years, 58% remained on dabrafenib plus trametinib. Three-year OS with the combination reached 62% in the most favourable subgroup (normal lactate dehydrogenase and <3 organ sites with metastasis) versus only 25% in the unfavourable subgroup (elevated lactate dehydrogenase). The dabrafenib plus trametinib safety profile was consistent with previous clinical trial observations, and no new safety signals were detected with long-term use. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that durable (≥3 years) survival is achievable with dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma and support long-term first-line use of the combination in this setting.

PIPELINEs: Creating Comparable Clinical Knowledge Efficiently by Linking Trial Platforms.

Adaptive, seamless, multisponsor, multitherapy clinical trial designs executed as large scale platforms, could create superior evidence more efficiently than single-sponsor, single-drug trials. These trial PIPELINEs also could diminish barriers to trial participation, increase the representation of real-world populations, and create systematic evidence development for learning throughout a therapeutic life cycle, to continually refine its use. Comparable evidence could arise from multiarm design, shared comparator arms, and standardized endpoints-aiding sponsors in demonstrating the distinct value of their innovative medicines; facilitating providers and patients in selecting the most appropriate treatments; assisting regulators in efficacy and safety determinations; helping payers make coverage and reimbursement decisions; and spurring scientists with translational insights. Reduced trial times and costs could enable more indications, reduced development cycle times, and improved system financial sustainability. Challenges to overcome range from statistical to operational to collaborative governance and data exchange.

Hypersensitivity pneumonitis and antigen identification--An alternate approach.

OBJECTIVES: Identification of the causal antigen for patients with hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) is challenging in a standard clinical setting. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine whether it was possible to evaluate the home/workplace of patients, and identify the causal antigen. METHODS: Using a case-control study design we compared the presence of antibody to antigen collected in the environment of individuals with HP and controls consisting of family members/co-workers. Based on patient interviews, homes/workplaces were evaluated and suspected sources of antigen collected for use in immunoassays. RESULTS: Nineteen individuals with HP participated with 15 classified as having fibrotic disease. Up to 54 bulk samples were collected from each patient's environment, with multiple isolates (antigens) cultured from each. Of the seven individuals who tested positive to one or more environmental samples, three had a positive response to more than 1 antigen from the environmental sample (range 1-9). Twelve individuals tested positive to antigen(s) on a standard panel, with only one overlapping with the antigen from the home/workplace sample. A significant association existed between results of interviews/site evaluations, and ability to collect antigen eliciting a positive response (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Antigen identification was successful for patients with 'active' disease. Antigens for which patients test positive on standard panels may not be present in their environment. One benefit to patient-centered testing is the ability to develop recommendations specific to their environment. As most individuals tested positive for >1 antigen, further investigation is warranted to determine the actual antigen responsible for disease.

Fibronectin induction abrogates the BRAF inhibitor response of BRAF V600E/PTEN-null melanoma cells.

The mechanisms by which some melanoma cells adapt to Serine/threonine-protein kinase B-Raf (BRAF) inhibitor therapy are incompletely understood. In the present study, we used mass spectrometry-based phosphoproteomics to determine how BRAF inhibition remodeled the signaling network of melanoma cell lines that were BRAF mutant and PTEN null. Short-term BRAF inhibition was associated with marked changes in fibronectin-based adhesion signaling that were PTEN dependent. These effects were recapitulated through BRAF siRNA knockdown and following treatment with chemotherapeutic drugs. Increased fibronectin expression was also observed in mouse xenograft models as well as specimens from melanoma patients undergoing BRAF inhibitor treatment. Analysis of a melanoma tissue microarray showed loss of PTEN expression to predict for a lower overall survival, with a trend for even lower survival being seen when loss of fibronectin was included in the analysis. Mechanistically, the induction of fibronectin limited the responses of these PTEN-null melanoma cell lines to vemurafenib, with enhanced cytotoxicity observed following the knockdown of either fibronectin or its receptor α5ß1 integrin. This in turn abrogated the cytotoxic response to BRAF inhibition via increased AKT signaling, which prevented the induction of cell death by maintaining the expression of the pro-survival protein Mcl-1. The protection conveyed by the induction of FN expression could be overcome through combined treatment with a BRAF and PI3K inhibitor.

Characteristics of pyrexia in BRAFV600E/K metastatic melanoma patients treated with combined dabrafenib and trametinib in a phase I/II clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Pyrexia is a frequent adverse event with combined dabrafenib and trametinib therapy (CombiDT), but little is known of its clinical associations, etiology, or appropriate management. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients on the BRF133220 phase I/II trial of CombiDT treated at the standard dose (150/2) were included for assessment of pyrexia (n = 201). BRAF and MEK inhibitor-naïve patients (n = 117) were included for efficacy analyses. Pyrexia was defined as temperature ≥38°C (≥100.4(°)F) or related symptoms. RESULTS: Fifty-nine percent of patients developed pyrexia during treatment, 24% of which had pyrexia symptoms without a recorded elevation in body temperature. Pyrexia was grade 2+ in 60% of pyrexia patients. Median time to onset of first pyrexia was 19 days, with a median duration of 9 days. Pyrexia patients had a median of two pyrexia events, but 21% had three or more events. Various pyrexia management approaches were conducted in this study. A trend was observed between dabrafenib and hydroxy-dabrafenib exposure and pyrexia. No baseline clinical characteristics predicted pyrexia, and pyrexia was not statistically significantly associated with treatment outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Pyrexia is a frequent and recurrent toxicity with CombiDT treatment. No baseline features predict pyrexia, and it is not associated with clinical outcome. Dabrafenib and metabolite exposure may contribute to the etiology of pyrexia. The optimal secondary prophylaxis for pyrexia is best studied in a prospective trial.

Major therapeutic developments and current challenges in advanced melanoma.

Malignant melanoma is rising in incidence. The treatment options have been very limited but advances in molecular biology and immunology have led to a greater understanding of the pathogenesis of the disease. Four drugs have been approved for the treatment of advanced melanoma in the past 2 years and two new classes of agents have recently been shown to lead to durable responses in a substantial minority of patients. The identification of biomarkers has helped clinicians and researchers segregate patients into molecular subgroups, which facilitates the selection of therapy. Preliminary work has begun on determining the ideal sequences of the various therapies. Investigations have been carried out on why these treatments work and what the mechanisms of resistance are to these therapies. It is hoped that combinations of therapies will emerge that lead to a high percentage of durable responses.

MAP kinase signaling and inhibition in melanoma.

The mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway is critical to oncogenic signaling in the majority of patients with malignant melanoma. Driver mutations in both NRAS and BRAF have important implications for prognosis and treatment. The development of inhibitors to mediators of the MAPK pathway, including those to CRAF, BRAF, and MEK, has led to major advances in the treatment of patients with melanoma. In particular, the selective BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib has been shown to improve overall survival in patients with tumors harboring BRAF mutations. However, the duration of benefit is limited in many patients and highlights the need for understanding the limitations of therapy in order to devise more effective strategies. MEK inhibitors have proven to particularly active in BRAF mutant melanomas also. Emerging knowledge about mechanisms of resistance as well as a more complete understanding of the biology of MAPK pathway signaling provides insight into rational combination regimens and sequences of molecularly targeted therapies.

Cutaneous effects of BRAF inhibitor therapy: a case series.

BACKGROUND: The cutaneous effects of rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma kinase B (BRAF) inhibitors are not well understood. Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), keratoacanthoma, and photosensitivity have been described in patients taking BRAF inhibitors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To characterize the timing and frequency of skin lesions in patients receiving BRAF inhibitor therapy, we utilized a retrospective case review of 53 patients undergoing treatment with BRAF inhibitors for 4-92 weeks of therapy. Patients were evaluated at baseline, and then followed at 4- to 12-week intervals. Charts were retrospectively reviewed, and the morphology and timing of cutaneous events were recorded. RESULTS: Thirty-three of the 53 charts met exclusion/inclusion criteria, 15 were treated with vemurafenib, and 18 were treated with GSK 2118436/GSK 1120212. Of 33 patients treated with BRAF inhibitor, 13 developed photosensitivity (39.4%), 10 developed actinic keratoses (30.3%), 10 developed warts (30.3%), and 6 developed SCC (18.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Multiple cutaneous findings were observed in the 33 patients taking BRAF inhibitors. The previously described association with SCC and photosensitivity was observed in these patients as well. Over half of the observed SCCs were invasive in nature. Photosensitivity continues to be frequent with BRAF inhibitors. Patients taking BRAF inhibitors should have regular full body skin exams. Further studies are necessary to better elucidate the rates of these adverse cutaneous effects.

Pulmonary function measures predict mortality differently in IPF versus combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema.

The composite physiologic index (CPI) was derived to represent the extent of fibrosis on high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT), adjusting for emphysema in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). We hypothesised that longitudinal change in CPI would better predict mortality than forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)), forced vital capacity (FVC) or diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (D(L,CO)) in all patients with IPF, and especially in those with combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE). Cox proportional hazard models were performed on pulmonary function data from IPF patients at baseline (n = 321), 6 months (n = 211) and 12 months (n = 144). Presence of CPFE was determined by HRCT. A five-point increase in CPI over 12 months predicted subsequent mortality (HR 2.1, p = 0.004). At 12 months, a 10% relative decline in FVC, a 15% relative decline in D(L,CO) or an absolute increase in CPI of five points all discriminated median survival by 2.1 to 2.2 yrs versus patients with lesser change. Half our cohort had CPFE. In patients with moderate/severe emphysema, only a 10% decline in FEV(1) predicted mortality (HR 3.7, p = 0.046). In IPF, a five-point increase in CPI over 12 months predicts mortality similarly to relative declines of 10% in FVC or 15% in D(L,CO). For CPFE patients, change in FEV(1) was the best predictor of mortality.

Recovery of phospho-ERK activity allows melanoma cells to escape from BRAF inhibitor therapy.

BACKGROUND: Resistance to BRAF inhibitors is an emerging problem in the melanoma field. Strategies to prevent and overcome resistance are urgently required. METHODS: The dynamics of cell signalling, BrdU incorporation and cell-cycle entry after BRAF inhibition was measured using flow cytometry and western blot. The ability of combined BRAF/MEK inhibition to prevent the emergence of resistance was demonstrated by apoptosis and colony formation assays and in 3D organotypic cell culture. RESULTS: BRAF inhibition led to a rapid recovery of phospho-ERK (pERK) signalling. Although most of the cells remained growth arrested in the presence of drug, a minor population of cells retained their proliferative potential and escaped from BRAF inhibitor therapy. A function for the rebound pERK signalling in therapy escape was demonstrated by the ability of combined BRAF/MEK inhibition to enhance the levels of apoptosis and abrogate the onset of resistance. CONCLUSION: Combined BRAF/MEK inhibition may be one strategy to prevent the emergence of drug resistance in BRAF-V600E-mutated melanomas.