Porocarcinomas with PAK1/2/3 fusions: a series of 12 cases.

AIMS: Porocarcinoma is a malignant sweat gland tumour differentiated toward the upper part of the sweat duct and may arise from the transformation of a preexisting benign poroma. In 2019, Sekine et al. demonstrated the presence of YAP1::MAML2 and YAP1::NUTM1 fusions in most poromas and porocarcinomas. Recently, our group identified PAK2-fusions in a subset of benign poromas. Herein we report a series of 12 porocarcinoma cases harbouring PAK1/2/3 fusions. METHODS AND RESULTS: Five patients were male and the median age was 79 years (ranges: 59-95). Tumours were located on the trunk (n = 7), on the thigh (n = 3), neck (n = 1), or groin area (n = 1). Four patients developed distant metastases. Microscopically, seven cases harboured a benign poroma component and a malignant invasive part. Ductal formations were observed in all, while infundibular/horn cysts and cells with vacuolated cytoplasm were detected in seven and six tumours, respectively. In three cases, the invasive component consisted of a proliferation of elongated cells, some of which formed pseudovascular spaces, whereas the others harboured a predominant solid or trabecular growth pattern. Immunohistochemical staining for CEA and EMA confirmed the presence of ducts. Focal androgen receptor expression was detected in three specimens. Whole RNA sequencing evidenced LAMTOR1::PAK1 (n = 2), ZDHHC5::PAK1 (n = 2), DLG1::PAK2, CTDSP1::PAK1, CTNND1::PAK1, SSR1::PAK3, CTNNA1::PAK2, RNF13::PAK2, ROBO1::PAK2, and CD47::PAK2. Activating mutation of HRAS (G13V, n = 3, G13R, n = 1, Q61L, n = 2) was present in six cases. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that PAK1/2/3 fusions is the oncogenic driver of a subset of porocarcinomas lacking YAP1 rearrangement.

Radiotherapy and prognostic factors in adnexal carcinomas: A retrospective study of 657 patients from the French CARADERM network.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous adnexal carcinomas are a heterogeneous group of rare neoplasms. Surgical excision is the first-line treatment in localized stage. The use and effectiveness of radiotherapy have not been thoroughly evaluated in these neoplasms. OBJECTIVES: The present work analyses prognostic factors on outcomes in skin adnexal carcinomas, based on data from the CARADERM (CAncers RAres DERMatologiques) database. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively including demographic data, tumour types and therapeutic characteristics of all patients included in the CARADERM database, with at least one informative follow-up visit. Analyses were performed on three populations: patients with complete resection of the primary tumour (ADJ/primary population), patients achieving complete remission after complete resection of a recurrent tumour (ADJ/recurrent population) and patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic tumours (ADV/MET population). Overall and recurrence/progression-free survivals at 3-year were analysed using Cox regression models. RESULTS: Radiotherapy did not affect overall survival (OS) in the ADJ/primary population. Adjusted recurrence-free survival (RFS) was significantly lower in the radiotherapy group in ADJ/primary group. Older patients had significantly poorer OS and RFS. Tumour size and immunosuppression were significantly associated with poorer RFS only. Radiotherapy had no effect on OS and RFS in the ADJ/recurrent population. Age was the only factor associated with a poorer OS. Radiotherapy was significantly associated with longer progression-free survival (PFS) in age-sex adjusted analysis in the ADV/MET population, without effect on OS. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that age, tumour size and immunosuppression are significantly associated with survival in localized adnexal carcinomas. Radiotherapy may improve PFS in the ADV/MET population but not in localized and recurrent carcinomas after complete excision.

Recurrent FOXK1::GRHL and GPS2::GRHL fusions in trichogerminoma.

We report 21 cases of trichogerminoma harbouring previously undescribed FOXK1::GRHL1/2 or GPS2::GRHL1/2/3 in-frame fusion transcripts. Microscopic examination of a preliminary set of five cases revealed well-delimitated tumours located in the dermis with frequent extension to the subcutaneous tissue. Tumours presented a massive and nodular architecture and consisted of a proliferation of basaloid cells. A biphasic pattern sometime resulting in tumour cell nests ('cell balls') was present. Immunohistochemistry demonstrated the expression of cytokeratins (CKs) 15, 17, and PHLDA1. In addition, numerous CK20-positive Merkel cells were detected. RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) revealed a FOXK1::GRHL1 chimeric transcript in three cases and a FOXK1::GRHL2 fusion in two cases. In a second series for validation (n = 88), FOXK1::GRHL1/2 fusion transcripts were detected by RT-qPCR or FISH in an additional 12 trichogerminomas and not in any other follicular tumour entities or basal cell carcinoma cases (n = 66). Additional RNA-seq analysis in trichogerminoma cases without detected FOXK1::GRHL1/2 rearrangements revealed GPS2::GRHL1 fusion transcripts in two cases, GPS2::GRHL2 in one case, and GPS2::GRHL3 fusion transcript in one case. Therefore, our study strongly suggests that GRHL1/2/3 gene rearrangements might represent the oncogenic driver in trichogerminoma, a subset of follicular tumours characterized by immature features and numerous Merkel cells. © 2022 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Effectiveness and safety of nivolumab in patients with advanced melanoma: A multicenter, observational study.

This retrospective observational study aimed to determine the effectiveness, safety and patterns of the use of nivolumab in patients with advanced melanoma in real-world clinical practice in France using data from a Temporary Authorization for Use Program (ATU). Data were collected from patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma enrolled in a French national database (Réseau pour la Recherche et l'Investigation Clinique sur le Mélanome: Ric-Mel) and treated with nivolumab during the ATU program (12 September 2014 to 31 August 2015). The primary objectives of the study were to evaluate the effect of patient characteristics on clinical response and overall survival (OS). Among 400 included patients (median age 66 years), the majority (83%) received nivolumab as second- or subsequent-line therapy. The median durations of progression-free survival and OS were 3.3 and 14.1 months, respectively, and 31.6% of patients achieved an objective response with a median duration of 20.1 months (range: 0-34.7). The safety profile of nivolumab was manageable and consistent with those of previous clinical trials, with an incidence of grade 3-5 adverse events of 13.8%. The safety and effectiveness of nivolumab in patients with advanced melanoma in real-world clinical practice in France were in line with the data reported in the Phase 3 trials CheckMate 066 and 037 of nivolumab in this patient population.

MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic as adjuvant therapy for patients with resected, MAGE-A3-positive, stage III melanoma (DERMA): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite newly approved treatments, metastatic melanoma remains a life-threatening condition. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic in patients with stage IIIB or IIIC melanoma in the adjuvant setting. METHODS: DERMA was a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial done in 31 countries and 263 centres. Eligible patients were 18 years or older and had histologically proven, completely resected, stage IIIB or IIIC, MAGE-A3-positive cutaneous melanoma with macroscopic lymph node involvement and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0 or 1. Randomisation and treatment allocation at the investigator sites were done centrally via the internet. We randomly assigned patients (2:1) to receive up to 13 intramuscular injections of recombinant MAGE-A3 with AS15 immunostimulant (MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic; 300 µg MAGE-A3 antigen plus 420 µg CpG 7909 reconstituted in AS01B to a total volume of 0·5 mL), or placebo, over a 27-month period: five doses at 3-weekly intervals, followed by eight doses at 12-weekly intervals. The co-primary outcomes were disease-free survival in the overall population and in patients with a potentially predictive gene signature (GS-positive) identified previously and validated here via an adaptive signature design. The final analyses included all patients who had received at least one dose of study treatment; analyses for efficacy were in the as-randomised population and for safety were in the as-treated population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00796445. FINDINGS: Between Dec 1, 2008, and Sept 19, 2011, 3914 patients were screened, 1391 randomly assigned, and 1345 started treatment (n=895 for MAGE-A3 and n=450 for placebo). At final analysis (data cutoff May 23, 2013), median follow-up was 28·0 months [IQR 23·3-35·5] in the MAGE-A3 group and 28·1 months [23·7-36·9] in the placebo group. Median disease-free survival was 11·0 months (95% CI 10·0-11·9) in the MAGE-A3 group and 11·2 months (8·6-14·1) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·01, 0·88-1·17, p=0·86). In the GS-positive population, median disease-free survival was 9·9 months (95% CI 5·7-17·6) in the MAGE-A3 group and 11·6 months (5·6-22·3) in the placebo group (HR 1·11, 0·83-1·49, p=0·48). Within the first 31 days of treatment, adverse events of grade 3 or worse were reported by 126 (14%) of 894 patients in the MAGE-A3 group and 56 (12%) of 450 patients in the placebo group, treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse by 36 (4%) patients given MAGE-A3 vs six (1%) patients given placebo, and at least one serious adverse event by 14% of patients in both groups (129 patients given MAGE-A3 and 64 patients given placebo). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or worse were neoplasms (33 [4%] patients in the MAGE-A3 group vs 17 [4%] patients in the placebo group), general disorders and administration site conditions (25 [3%] for MAGE-A3 vs four [<1%] for placebo) and infections and infestations (17 [2%] for MAGE-A3 vs seven [2%] for placebo). No deaths were related to treatment. INTERPRETATION: An antigen-specific immunotherapeutic alone was not efficacious in this clinical setting. Based on these findings, development of the MAGE-A3 immunotherapeutic for use in melanoma has been stopped. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA.

Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition versus BRAF inhibition alone in melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition, as compared with BRAF inhibition alone, delays the emergence of resistance and reduces toxic effects in patients who have melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 423 previously untreated patients who had unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma with a BRAF V600E or V600K mutation to receive a combination of dabrafenib (150 mg orally twice daily) and trametinib (2 mg orally once daily) or dabrafenib and placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, response rate, response duration, and safety. A preplanned interim overall survival analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The median progression-free survival was 9.3 months in the dabrafenib-trametinib group and 8.8 months in the dabrafenib-only group (hazard ratio for progression or death in the dabrafenib-trametinib group, 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57 to 0.99; P=0.03). The overall response rate was 67% in the dabrafenib-trametinib group and 51% in the dabrafenib-only group (P=0.002). At 6 months, the interim overall survival rate was 93% with dabrafenib-trametinib and 85% with dabrafenib alone (hazard ratio for death, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.94; P=0.02). However, a specified efficacy-stopping boundary (two-sided P=0.00028) was not crossed. Rates of adverse events were similar in the two groups, although more dose modifications occurred in the dabrafenib-trametinib group. The rate of cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma was lower in the dabrafenib-trametinib group than in the dabrafenib-only group (2% vs. 9%), whereas pyrexia occurred in more patients (51% vs. 28%) and was more often severe (grade 3, 6% vs. 2%) in the dabrafenib-trametinib group. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of dabrafenib and trametinib, as compared with dabrafenib alone, improved the rate of progression-free survival in previously untreated patients who had metastatic melanoma with BRAF V600E or V600K mutations. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; Clinical Trials.gov number, NCT01584648.).

Pattern and Severity of Psoriasiform Eruptions in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases, Arthritis or Skin Inflammatory Disorders Treated with TNF-alpha Inhibitors.

Psoriasiform eruptions are a classical adverse skin reaction of tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors. The aim of this study was to identify the association between the severity or pattern of psoriasiform reactions and the underlying disease. A retrospective study was conducted between January 2012 and May 2015. Adult patients who developed psoriasiform eruptions whilst being treated with TNFα inhibitors were included. For each patient, 3 independent blinded dermatologists graded twice the severity of the lesions according to 6 clinical psoriasiform eruption types. Inter- and intra-individual kappa tests were performed to evaluate the robustness of the scoring system. The association between severity score levels or the pattern of reactions and the underlying disease was assessed. The severity scoring system showed good inter- and intra-observer reproducibility. Women patients treated with TNFα inhibitors for inflammatory bowel diseases showed a higher risk of developing severe reactions with scalp and skin-fold involvement.

Dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib and placebo for Val600 BRAF-mutant melanoma: a multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previously, a study of ours showed that the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib improves progression-free survival compared with dabrafenib and placebo in patients with BRAF Val600Lys/Glu mutation-positive metastatic melanoma. The study was continued to assess the secondary endpoint of overall survival, which we report in this Article. METHODS: We did this double-blind phase 3 study at 113 sites in 14 countries. We enrolled previously untreated patients with BRAF Val600Glu or Val600Lys mutation-positive unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma. Participants were computer-randomised (1:1) to receive a combination of dabrafenib (150 mg orally twice daily) and trametinib (2 mg orally once daily), or dabrafenib and placebo. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival and overall survival was a secondary endpoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01584648. FINDINGS: Between May 4, 2012, and Nov 30, 2012, we screened 947 patients for eligibility, of whom 423 were randomly assigned to receive dabrafenib and trametinib (n=211) or dabrafenib only (n=212). The final data cutoff was Jan 12, 2015, at which time 222 patients had died. Median overall survival was 25·1 months (95% CI 19·2-not reached) in the dabrafenib and trametinib group versus 18·7 months (15·2-23·7) in the dabrafenib only group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·71, 95% CI 0·55-0·92; p=0·0107). Overall survival was 74% at 1 year and 51% at 2 years in the dabrafenib and trametinib group versus 68% and 42%, respectively, in the dabrafenib only group. Based on 301 events, median progression-free survival was 11·0 months (95% CI 8·0-13·9) in the dabrafenib and trametinib group and 8·8 months (5·9-9·3) in the dabrafenib only group (HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·53-0·84; p=0·0004; unadjusted for multiple testing). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 181 (87%) of 209 patients in the dabrafenib and trametinib group and 189 (90%) of 211 patients in the dabrafenib only group; the most common was pyrexia (108 patients, 52%) in the dabrafenib and trametinib group, and hyperkeratosis (70 patients, 33%) in the dabrafenib only group. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 67 (32%) patients in the dabrafenib and trametinib group and 66 (31%) patients in the dabrafenib only group. INTERPRETATION: The improvement in overall survival establishes the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib as the standard targeted treatment for BRAF Val600 mutation-positive melanoma. Studies assessing dabrafenib and trametinib in combination with immunotherapies are ongoing. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Vismodegib in patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma (STEVIE): a pre-planned interim analysis of an international, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: The Hedgehog pathway inhibitor vismodegib has shown clinical benefit in patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma and is approved for treatment of patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma for whom surgery is inappropriate. STEVIE was designed to assess the safety of vismodegib in a situation similar to routine practice, with a long follow-up. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label trial, adult patients with histologically confirmed locally advanced basal cell carcinoma or metastatic basal cell carcinoma were recruited from regional referral centres or specialist clinics. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, and adequate organ function. Patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma had to have been deemed ineligible for surgery. All patients received 150 mg oral vismodegib capsules once a day on a continuous basis in 28-day cycles. The primary objective was safety (incidence of adverse events until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects), with assessments on day 1 of each treatment cycle (28 days) by principal investigator and coinvestigators at the site. Efficacy variables were assessed as secondary endpoints. The safety evaluable population included all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. Patients with histologically confirmed basal cell carcinoma who received at least one dose of study drug were included in the efficacy analysis. An interim analysis was pre-planned after 500 patients achieved 1 year of follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01367665. The study is still ongoing. FINDINGS: Between June 30, 2011, and Nov 6, 2014, we enrolled 1227 patients. At clinical cutoff (Nov 6, 2013), 499 patients (468 with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma and 31 with metastatic basal cell carcinoma) had received study drug and had the potential to be followed up for 12 months or longer. Treatment was discontinued in 400 (80%) patients; 180 (36%) had adverse events, 70 (14%) had progressive disease, and 51 (10%) requested to stop treatment. Median duration of vismodegib exposure was 36·4 weeks (IQR 17·7-62·0). Adverse events happened in 491 (98%) patients; the most common were muscle spasms (317 [64%]), alopecia (307 [62%]), dysgeusia (269 [54%]), weight loss (162 [33%]), asthenia (141 [28%]), decreased appetite (126 [25%]), ageusia (112 [22%]), diarrhoea (83 [17%]), nausea (80 [16%]), and fatigue (80 [16%]). Most adverse events were grade 1 or 2. We recorded serious adverse events in 108 (22%) of 499 patients. Of the 31 patients who died, 21 were the result of adverse events. As assessed by investigators, 302 (66·7%, 62·1-71·0) of 453 patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma had an overall response (153 complete responses and 149 partial responses); 11 (37·9%; 20·7-57·7) of 29 patients with metastatic basal cell carcinoma had an overall response (two complete responses, nine partial responses). INTERPRETATION: This study assessed the use of vismodegib in a setting representative of routine clinical practice for patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma. Our results show that treatment with vismodegib adds a novel therapeutic modality from which patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma can benefit substantially. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Sentinel node status and immunosuppression: recurrence factors in localized Merkel cell carcinoma.

The prognostic value of the sentinel lymph node in Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) has been examined previously in heterogeneous retrospective studies. The current retrospective study included a homogeneous population of patients with a localized MCC, all staged with sentinel lymph node biopsy. Factors associated with 3-year progression-free survival were analysed using logistic regression. The sentinel lymph node was positive in 32% of patients. The recurrence rate was 26.9%. In first analyses (n = 108), gender (p = 0.0115) and the presence of immunosuppression (p = 0.0494) were the only significant independent factors. In further analyses (n = 80), excluding patients treated with regional radiotherapy, sentinel lymph node status was the only significant prognostic factor (p = 0.0281). Immunosuppression and positive sentinel lymph node are associated with a worse prognosis in patients with MCC. Nodal irradiation impacts on the prognostic value of the sentinel lymph node status.

Safety and efficacy of vemurafenib in BRAF(V600E) and BRAF(V600K) mutation-positive melanoma (BRIM-3): extended follow-up of a phase 3, randomised, open-label study.

BACKGROUND: In the BRIM-3 trial, vemurafenib was associated with risk reduction versus dacarbazine of both death and progression in patients with advanced BRAF(V600) mutation-positive melanoma. We present an extended follow-up analysis of the total population and in the BRAF(V600E) and BRAF(V600K) mutation subgroups. METHODS: Patients older than 18 years, with treatment-naive metastatic melanoma and whose tumour tissue was positive for BRAF(V600) mutations were eligible. Patients also had to have a life expectancy of at least 3 months, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate haematological, hepatic, and renal function. Patients were randomly assigned by interactive voice recognition system to receive either vemurafenib (960 mg orally twice daily) or dacarbazine (1000 mg/m(2) of body surface area intravenously every 3 weeks). Coprimary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (n=675), with data censored at crossover. A sensitivity analysis was done. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01006980. FINDINGS: 675 eligible patients were enrolled from 104 centres in 12 countries between Jan 4, 2010, and Dec 16, 2010. 337 patients were randomly assigned to receive vemurafenib and 338 to receive dacarbazine. Median follow-up was 12·5 months (IQR 7·7-16·0) on vemurafenib and 9·5 months (3·1-14·7) on dacarbazine. 83 (25%) of the 338 patients initially randomly assigned to dacarbazine crossed over from dacarbazine to vemurafenib. Median overall survival was significantly longer in the vemurafenib group than in the dacarbazine group (13·6 months [95% CI 12·0-15·2] vs 9·7 months [7·9-12·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·57-0·87]; p=0·0008), as was median progression-free survival (6·9 months [95% CI 6·1-7·0] vs 1·6 months [1·6-2·1]; HR 0·38 [95% CI 0·32-0·46]; p<0·0001). For the 598 (91%) patients with BRAF(V600E) disease, median overall survival in the vemurafenib group was 13·3 months (95% CI 11·9-14·9) compared with 10·0 months (8·0-14·0) in the dacarbazine group (HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·60-0·93]; p=0·0085); median progression-free survival was 6·9 months (95% CI 6·2-7·0) and 1·6 months (1·6-2·1), respectively (HR 0·39 [95% CI 0·33-0·47]; p<0·0001). For the 57 (9%) patients with BRAF(V600K) disease, median overall survival in the vemurafenib group was 14·5 months (95% CI 11·2-not estimable) compared with 7·6 months (6·1-16·6) in the dacarbazine group (HR 0·43 [95% CI 0·21-0·90]; p=0·024); median progression-free survival was 5·9 months (95% CI 4·4-9·0) and 1·7 months (1·4-2·9), respectively (HR 0·30 [95% CI 0·16-0·56]; p<0·0001). The most frequent grade 3-4 events were cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma (65 [19%] of 337 patients) and keratoacanthomas (34 [10%]), rash (30 [9%]), and abnormal liver function tests (38 [11%]) in the vemurafenib group and neutropenia (26 [9%] of 287 patients) in the dacarbazine group. Eight (2%) patients in the vemurafenib group and seven (2%) in the dacarbazine group had grade 5 events. INTERPRETATION: Inhibition of BRAF with vemurafenib improves survival in patients with the most common BRAF(V600E) mutation and in patients with the less common BRAF(V600K) mutation. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche-Genentech.

Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation.

BACKGROUND: Phase 1 and 2 clinical trials of the BRAF kinase inhibitor vemurafenib (PLX4032) have shown response rates of more than 50% in patients with metastatic melanoma with the BRAF V600E mutation. METHODS: We conducted a phase 3 randomized clinical trial comparing vemurafenib with dacarbazine in 675 patients with previously untreated, metastatic melanoma with the BRAF V600E mutation. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either vemurafenib (960 mg orally twice daily) or dacarbazine (1000 mg per square meter of body-surface area intravenously every 3 weeks). Coprimary end points were rates of overall and progression-free survival. Secondary end points included the response rate, response duration, and safety. A final analysis was planned after 196 deaths and an interim analysis after 98 deaths. RESULTS: At 6 months, overall survival was 84% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78 to 89) in the vemurafenib group and 64% (95% CI, 56 to 73) in the dacarbazine group. In the interim analysis for overall survival and final analysis for progression-free survival, vemurafenib was associated with a relative reduction of 63% in the risk of death and of 74% in the risk of either death or disease progression, as compared with dacarbazine (P<0.001 for both comparisons). After review of the interim analysis by an independent data and safety monitoring board, crossover from dacarbazine to vemurafenib was recommended. Response rates were 48% for vemurafenib and 5% for dacarbazine. Common adverse events associated with vemurafenib were arthralgia, rash, fatigue, alopecia, keratoacanthoma or squamous-cell carcinoma, photosensitivity, nausea, and diarrhea; 38% of patients required dose modification because of toxic effects. CONCLUSIONS: Vemurafenib produced improved rates of overall and progression-free survival in patients with previously untreated melanoma with the BRAF V600E mutation. (Funded by Hoffmann-La Roche; BRIM-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01006980.).

Ipilimumab in melanoma patients with brain metastasis: a retro-spective multicentre evaluation of thirty-eight patients.

Treatment with ipilimumab, a monoclonal antibody that antagonizes cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), results in improved survival of patients with stage IIIc-IV melanoma. However, there is a lack of data on the efficacy of ipilimumab in patients with brain metastases. To evaluate the efficacy of ipilimumab for the treatment of brain metastasis in melanoma, a multicentre, retrospective analysis of 38 patients with brain metastases in melanoma, treated with ipilimumab in the context of the French Expanded Access Program, was performed. Three patients had a 3 partial response, 5 stable disease, 15 disease progression and 15 patients died during the induction phase due to disease progression. Median overall survival was 101 days (range 54-154). The brain metastases control rate was 16% (6/38). Ipilimumab may be effective in a few patients with central nervous system metastasis. However, patients with brain metastases and a low life expectancy may not benefit sufficiently from treatment with ipilimumab.

Melanoma prone families with CDK4 germline mutation: phenotypic profile and associations with MC1R variants.

BACKGROUND: CDKN2A and CDK4 are high risk susceptibility genes for cutaneous malignant melanoma. Melanoma families with CDKN2A germline mutations have been extensively characterised, whereas CDK4 families are rare and lack a systematic investigation of their phenotype. METHODS: All known families with CDK4 germline mutations (n=17) were recruited for the study by contacting the authors of published papers or by requests via the Melanoma Genetics Consortium (GenoMEL). Phenotypic data related to primary melanoma and pigmentation characteristics were collected. The CDK4 exon 2 and the complete coding region of the MC1R gene were sequenced. RESULTS: Eleven families carried the CDK4 R24H mutation whereas six families had the R24C mutation. The total number of subjects with verified melanoma was 103, with a median age at first melanoma diagnosis of 39 years. Forty-three (41.7%) subjects had developed multiple primary melanomas (MPM). A CDK4 mutation was found in 89 (including 62 melanoma cases) of 209 tested subjects. CDK4 positive family members (both melanoma cases and unaffected subjects) were more likely to have clinically atypical nevi than CDK4 negative family members (p<0.001). MPM subjects had a higher frequency of MC1R red hair colour variants compared with subjects with one tumour (p=0.010). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that families with CDK4 germline mutations cannot be distinguished phenotypically from CDKN2A melanoma families, which are characterised by early onset of disease, increased occurrence of clinically atypical nevi, and development of MPM. In a clinical setting, the CDK4 gene should therefore always be examined when a melanoma family tests negative for CDKN2A mutation.

Dabrafenib in BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma: a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Dabrafenib, an inhibitor of mutated BRAF, has clinical activity with a manageable safety profile in studies of phase 1 and 2 in patients with BRAF(V600)-mutated metastatic melanoma. We studied the efficacy of dabrafenib in patients with BRAF(V600E)-mutated metastatic melanoma. METHODS: We enrolled patients in this open-label phase 3 trial between Dec 23, 2010, and Sept 1, 2011. This report is based on a data cutoff date of Dec 19, 2011. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated, stage IV or unresectable stage III BRAF(V600E) mutation-positive melanoma were randomly assigned (3:1) to receive dabrafenib (150 mg twice daily, orally) or dacarbazine (1000 mg/m(2) intravenously every 3 weeks). Patients were stratified according to American Joint Committee on Cancer stage (unresectable III+IVM1a+IVM1b vs IVM1c). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival and was analysed by intention to treat; safety was assessed per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01227889. FINDINGS: Of the 733 patients screened, 250 were randomly assigned to receive either dabrafenib (187 patients) or dacarbazine (63 patients). Median progression-free survival was 5·1 months for dabrafenib and 2·7 months for dacarbazine, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0·30 (95% CI 0·18-0·51; p<0·0001). At data cutoff, 107 (57%) patients in the dabrafenib group and 14 (22%) in the dacarbazine group remained on randomised treatment. Treatment-related adverse events (grade 2 or higher) occurred in 100 (53%) of the 187 patients who received dabrafenib and in 26 (44%) of the 59 patients who received dacarbazine. The most common adverse events with dabrafenib were skin-related toxic effects, fever, fatigue, arthralgia, and headache. The most common adverse events with dacarbazine were nausea, vomiting, neutropenia, fatigue, and asthenia. Grade 3-4 adverse events were uncommon in both groups. INTERPRETATION: Dabrafenib significantly improved progression-free survival compared with dacarbazine. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Variant of TYR and autoimmunity susceptibility loci in generalized vitiligo.

BACKGROUND: Generalized vitiligo is an autoimmune disease characterized by melanocyte loss, which results in patchy depigmentation of skin and hair, and is associated with an elevated risk of other autoimmune diseases. METHODS: To identify generalized vitiligo susceptibility loci, we conducted a genomewide association study. We genotyped 579,146 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 1514 patients with generalized vitiligo who were of European-derived white (CEU) ancestry and compared the genotypes with publicly available control genotypes from 2813 CEU persons. We then tested 50 SNPs in two replication sets, one comprising 677 independent CEU patients and 1106 CEU controls and the other comprising 183 CEU simplex trios with generalized vitiligo and 332 CEU multiplex families. RESULTS: We detected significant associations between generalized vitiligo and SNPs at several loci previously associated with other autoimmune diseases. These included genes encoding major-histocompatibility-complex class I molecules (P=9.05x10(-23)) and class II molecules (P=4.50x10(-34)), PTPN22 (P=1.31x10(-7)), LPP (P=1.01x10(-11)), IL2RA (P=2.78x10(-9)), UBASH3A (P=1.26x10(-9)), and C1QTNF6 (P=2.21x10(-16)). We also detected associations between generalized vitiligo and SNPs in two additional immune-related loci, RERE (P=7.07x10(-15)) and GZMB (P=3.44x10(-8)), and in a locus containing TYR (P=1.60x10(-18)), encoding tyrosinase. CONCLUSIONS: We observed associations between generalized vitiligo and markers implicating multiple genes, some associated with other autoimmune diseases and one (TYR) that may mediate target-cell specificity and indicate a mutually exclusive relationship between susceptibility to vitiligo and susceptibility to melanoma.

Severity of Local Skin Reactions with 4% 5-Fluorouracil Plus Emollient versus 4% 5-Fluorouracil Alone in Patients with Actinic Keratosis: A Single-Blind Randomised Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Topical 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-containing treatments are effective for actinic keratosis (AK); however, they frequently lead to transient local skin reactions (LSRs), which often result in treatment non-adherence. METHODS: The aim of this international, phase IV clinical trial was to investigate whether addition of an emollient to topical 4% 5-FU would reduce the frequency and severity of LSRs over 4 weeks of treatment (intervention group) compared with 4% 5-FU alone (control group) in patients with AK. The primary objective was to assess the severity of LSRs (i.e. erythema, flaking/scaling, crusting, swelling, vesiculation/pustulation and erosion/ulceration) at week 4 of treatment (or before, in case of a major local reaction). Key secondary objectives were LSR total scores at weeks 2 and 8, the scores of individual LSR items at each visit, and the proportions of patients with 100% and ≥ 75% AK lesion clearance at week 8. RESULTS: In total, 141 patients were included in the efficacy analysis (71 in the intervention group and 70 in the control group). There were no statistically or clinically significant differences between the treatment groups in terms of LSR total score at week 4 (overall and by subgroups defined by the number of lesions and patient age at baseline), scores of individual LSR items at any time point, and AK lesion clearance rates at week 8. LSR scores with topical 4% 5-FU alone were lower than expected. Skin reactions were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events in both groups, leading to treatment discontinuation in nine patients (12.3%) in the intervention group and seven (9.9%) in the control group. No new safety signals were observed with the addition of an emollient to 4% 5-FU. CONCLUSIONS: Daily emollient applications during the 4-week treatment course did not impact the safety and efficacy profile of 4% 5-FU.