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.

A randomized and open-label trial evaluating the addition of pazopanib to lapatinib as first-line therapy in patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer.

This phase II study (VEG20007; NCT00347919) with randomized and open-label components evaluated first-line lapatinib plus pazopanib therapy and/or lapatinib monotherapy in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2)-positive advanced/metastatic breast cancer. Patients were enrolled sequentially into two cohorts: Cohort 1, patients were randomly assigned to lapatinib 1,000 mg plus pazopanib 400 mg or lapatinib 1,500 mg monotherapy; Cohort 2, patients received lapatinib 1,500 mg plus pazopanib 800 mg. The primary endpoint was week-12 progressive disease rate (PDR) for Cohort 1. The principal secondary endpoint was week-12 response rate (RR) for Cohort 2. Efficacy was assessed in patients with centrally confirmed HER2 positivity (modified intent-to-treat population [MITT]). The study enrolled 190 patients (Cohort 1, combination n = 77, lapatinib n = 73; Cohort 2, n = 40). The MITT population comprised n = 141 (Cohort 1) and n = 36 (Cohort 2). In Cohort 1, week-12 PDRs were 36.2 % (combination) versus 38.9 % (lapatinib; P = 0.37 for the difference). Week-12 RRs were 36.2 % (combination) versus 22.2 % (lapatinib). In Cohort 2, week-12 RR was 33.3 %. In Cohort 1, grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) included diarrhea (combination, 9 %; lapatinib, 5 %) and hypertension (combination, 5 %; lapatinib, 0 %). Grades 3/4 AEs in Cohort 2 included diarrhea (40 %), hypertension (5 %), and fatigue (5 %). Alanine aminotransferase elevations >5 times the upper limit of normal occurred in Cohort 1 (combination, 18 %; lapatinib, 5 %) and Cohort 2 (20 %). Upon conclusion, the combination of lapatinib plus pazopanib did not improve PDR compared with lapatinib monotherapy, although RR was increased. Toxicity was higher with the combination, including increased diarrhea and liver enzyme elevations.

Dabrafenib in patients with Val600Glu or Val600Lys BRAF-mutant melanoma metastatic to the brain (BREAK-MB): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases are common in patients with metastatic melanoma and median overall survival from their diagnosis is typically 17-22 weeks. We assessed dabrafenib in patients with Val600Glu or Val600Lys BRAF-mutant melanoma metastatic to the brain. METHODS: We undertook a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial in 24 centres in six countries. We enrolled patients with histologically confirmed Val600Glu or Val600Lys BRAF-mutant melanoma and at least one asymptomatic brain metastasis (≥5 mm and ≤40 mm in diameter). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and had adequate organ function. Patients were split into two cohorts: those in cohort A had not received previous local treatment for brain metastases and those in cohort B had progressive brain metastases after previous local treatments. Patients received 150 mg oral dabrafenib twice a day until disease progression, death, or unacceptable adverse events. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with Val600Glu BRAF-mutant melanoma who achieved an overall intracranial response, which was defined as a complete response or partial response assessed with a modified form of Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1). We included patients who received at least one dose of dabrafenib in efficacy and safety analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01266967. FINDINGS: Between Feb 2, 2011, and Aug 5, 2011, we enrolled 172 patients: 89 (52%) in cohort A and 83 (48%) in cohort B. 139 (81%) had Val600Glu BRAF-mutant melanoma. 29 (39·2%, 95% CI 28·0-51·2) of 74 patients with Val600Glu BRAF-mutant melanoma in cohort A achieved an overall intracranial response, as did 20 (30·8%, 19·9-43·4) of 65 in cohort B. One (6·7%, 0·2-31·9) of 15 patients with Val600Lys BRAF-mutant melanoma achieved an overall intracranial response in cohort A, as did four (22·2%, 6·4-47·6) of 18 such patients in cohort B. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse occurred in 38 (22%) patients. Eleven (6%) patients developed squamous-cell carcinoma (five [6%] patients in cohort A, of whom one also had keratoacanthoma; six [7%] in cohort B). Four grade 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in cohort A: one blood amylase increase, one convulsion, one lipase increase, and one neutropenia. Two grade 4 events occurred in cohort B: one agranulocytosis and one intracranial haemorrhage. 51 (30%) patients had a serious adverse event. The three most frequent serious adverse events were pyrexia (ten [6%] patients), intracranial haemorrhage (ten [6%]; one treatment-related), and squamous-cell carcinoma (11 [6%]). INTERPRETATION: Dabrafenib has activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with Val600Glu BRAF-mutant melanoma and brain metastases irrespective of whether they are untreated or have been previously treated but have progressed. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline.

Association of the hemochromatosis gene with pazopanib-induced transaminase elevation in renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Pazopanib has demonstrated clinical benefit in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and is generally well tolerated. However, transaminase elevations have commonly been observed. This 2-stage study sought to identify genetic determinants of alanine transaminase (ALT) elevations in pazopanib-treated white patients with RCC. METHODS: Data from two separate clinical studies were used to examine the association of genetic polymorphisms with maximum on-treatment ALT levels. RESULTS: Of 6852 polymorphisms in 282 candidate genes examined in an exploratory dataset of 115 patients, 92 polymorphisms in 40 genes were significantly associated with ALT elevation (p<0.01). Two markers (rs2858996 and rs707889) in the HFE gene, which are not yet known to be associated with hemochromatosis, showed evidence for replication. Because of multiple comparisons, there was a 12% likelihood the replication occurred by chance. These two markers demonstrated strong linkage disequilibrium (r(2)=0.99). In the combined dataset, median (25-75th percentile) maximum ALT values were 1.2 (0.7-1.9), 1.1 (0.8-2.5), and 5.4 (1.9-7.6)×ULN for rs2858996 GG (n=148), GT (n=82), and TT (n=1 2) genotypes, respectively. All 12 TT patients had a maximum ALT>ULN, and 8 (67%) had ALT≥3×ULN. The odds ratio (95% CI) for ALT≥3×ULN for TT genotype was 39.7 (2.2-703.7) compared with other genotypes. As a predictor of ALT≥3×ULN, the TT genotype had a negative predictive value of 0.83 and positive predictive value of 0.67. No TT patients developed liver failure. CONCLUSIONS: The rs2858996/rs707889 polymorphisms in the HFE gene may be associated with reversible ALT elevation in pazo-panib-treated patients with RCC.

Sprycel for chronic myeloid leukemia and Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia resistant to or intolerant of imatinib mesylate.

PURPOSE: On June 28, 2006, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved dasatinib (Sprycel; Bristol-Myers Squibb), a new small-molecule inhibitor of multiple tyrosine kinases, for the treatment of adults with chronic phase, accelerated phase, or myeloid or lymphoid blast phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) or Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph(+) ALL) with resistance or intolerance to prior therapy including imatinib. This summary reviews the database supporting this approval. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Four single-arm multicenter studies supported the efficacy and safety of dasatinib. The primary efficacy end point in chronic phase CML was major cytogenetic response. The primary end point in accelerated phase, myeloid phase, and lymphoid blast phase CML, and Ph(+) ALL was major hematologic response. RESULTS: The four studies combined enrolled 445 patients. In patients with chronic phase CML, the major cytogenetic response rate was 45% with a complete cytogenetic response rate of 33%. Major hematologic response rates in patients with accelerated phase CML, myeloid CML, lymphoid blast CML, and Ph(+) ALL were 59%, 32%, 31%, and 42%, respectively. Median response durations in chronic phase, accelerated phase, and myeloid phase CML had not been reached. The median durations of major hematologic response were 3.7 months in lymphoid blast CML and 4.8 months in Ph(+) ALL. Common toxicities with dasatinib included myelosuppression, bleeding, and fluid retention. CONCLUSIONS: This report describes the Food and Drug Administration review supporting the approval of dasatinib for CML and Ph(+) ALL based on the rates and durability of cytogenetic and hematologic responses.

Approval summary: sunitinib for the treatment of imatinib refractory or intolerant gastrointestinal stromal tumors and advanced renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To describe the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review and approval of sunitinib malate (Sutent). Sunitinib received regular approval for the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) after disease progression or intolerance to imatinib mesylate (Gleevec). Additionally, sunitinib received accelerated approval for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: For the GIST indication, FDA reviewed data from a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with supportive evidence from a single-arm study. For the advanced renal cell carcinoma indication, FDA reviewed data from two single-arm studies of patients with cytokine-refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma. RESULTS: In patients with imatinib refractory or intolerant GIST, time-to-tumor progression of sunitinib-treated patients was superior to that of placebo-treated patients. Median time-to-tumor progression of sunitinib-treated patients was 27.3 weeks, compared with 6.4 weeks for placebo-treated patients (P < 0.0001). Partial responses were observed in 6.8% of sunitinib-treated patients. In patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, partial responses were observed in 25.5% (95% confidence interval, 17.5, 34.9) and 36.5% (95% confidence interval, 24.7, 49.6) of patients treated with sunitinib. Median response durations were 27.1 and 54 weeks. The most common adverse events attributed to sunitinib included diarrhea, mucositis, skin abnormalities, and altered taste. Reductions in left ventricular ejection fraction and severe hypertension were also more common in sunitinib-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: On January 26, 2006, the FDA approved sunitinib for the treatment of patients with imatinib refractory or intolerant GIST. Accelerated approval was granted for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Control of copper status for cancer therapy.

Copper is a trace element which is tightly regulated in mammals and lower animals. Disruptions of copper homeostasis in humans are rare and they cause serious disorders such as Wilson's disease and Menke's disease. Copper plays an important role in promoting physiological and malignant angiogenesis. Formation of new blood vessels by a tumor enables tumor growth, invasion, and metastasis are copper requiring processes. The copper chelator tetrathiomolybdate (TM), which quickly and effectively depletes copper stores, is under investigation as an anti-angiogenic agent. Promising results from in vitro experiments, in pre-clinical animal models, and in a phase I clinical trial have led to several phase II trials of TM in patients with advanced cancers.

Correlation of BRAF Mutation Status in Circulating-Free DNA and Tumor and Association with Clinical Outcome across Four BRAFi and MEKi Clinical Trials.

PURPOSE: Tumor-derived circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is a potential alternative source from which to derive tumor mutation status. cfDNA data from four clinical studies of the BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) dabrafenib or the MEK inhibitor (MEKi) trametinib were analyzed to determine the association between BRAF mutation status in cfDNA and tumor tissue, and the association of BRAF cfDNA mutation status with baseline factors and clinical outcome. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with BRAF V600 mutation-positive melanoma were enrolled in each study after central confirmation of BRAF status in tumor using a PCR-based assay. BRAF mutation status in cfDNA from patient plasma collected at baseline, 732 of 836 (88%) enrolled patients in total, was determined. RESULTS: BRAF mutations were detectable in cfDNA in 76% and 81% of patients with BRAF V600E/V600K-positive tumors, respectively. Patients negative for BRAF mutations in cfDNA had longer progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival in each of the four studies, compared with patients with detectable cfDNA BRAF mutations. The presence of BRAF-mutant cfDNA was an independent prognostic factor for PFS after multivariate adjustment for baseline factors in three of four studies. Patients negative for BRAF mutation-positive cfDNA in plasma had higher response rates to dabrafenib and trametinib. CONCLUSIONS: BRAF mutations in cfDNA are detectable in >75% of late-stage melanoma patients with BRAF mutation-positive tumors. The lack of circulating, BRAF mutation-positive cfDNA is clinically significant for metastatic melanoma patients, and may be a prognostic marker for better disease outcome.

BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib in patients with metastatic BRAF-mutant thyroid cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mutations of v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B (BRAF) are commonly identified in papillary and anaplastic thyroid carcinoma and are associated with worse prognosis compared with the wild type. BRAF inhibition in papillary thyroid carcinoma cell lines and xenografts inhibits proliferation and decreases downstream phosphorylation. Our objectives were to analyze safety and efficacy of the selective BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib in patients with metastatic BRAF-mutant thyroid carcinoma. METHODS: We present the subset of patients with BRAF-mutant thyroid carcinoma enrolled in a larger phase 1 study, the main results of which are reported elsewhere. RESULTS: Fourteen patients with BRAF(V600E)-mutant thyroid carcinoma were enrolled, of whom 13 (93%) had received prior radioactive iodine. The median duration on treatment was 8.4 months, and seven (50%) patients received treatment for ≥10 months. The most common treatment-related adverse events were skin papillomas (n=8, 57%), hyperkeratosis (n=5, 36%), and alopecia (n=4, 29%), all of which were grade 1. Treatment-related adverse events grade ≥3 included grade 4 elevated lipase and grade 3 elevated amylase, fatigue, febrile neutropenia, and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (n=1 for each). Four (29%) partial responses were observed, and nine (64%) patients achieved at least 10% decrease. Only one responder progressed while on the study drug after a response duration of 9.3 months. The other three responders had not progressed, with response duration of 4.6+, 10.4+, and 21.4+ months. With seven (50%) patients showing no progression at the time of study completion, the median progression-free survival was 11.3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Dabrafenib was well tolerated and resulted in durable responses in BRAF-mutant differentiated thyroid carcinoma patients.

Population pharmacokinetics of dabrafenib, a BRAF inhibitor: effect of dose, time, covariates, and relationship with its metabolites.

Dabrafenib is a BRAF kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of BRAF V600E mutation-positive melanoma. The population pharmacokinetics of dabrafenib, including changes over time and relevant covariates, were characterized based on results from four clinical studies using a nonlinear mixed effects model with a full covariate approach. Steady-state exposures of dabrafenib metabolites (hydroxy-, carboxy-, and desmethyl-dabrafenib) were characterized separately. The pharmacokinetics of dabrafenib were adequately described by non-inducible and inducible apparent clearance that increased with dose and time. Total steady-state clearance (CL/F) at 150 mg BID dose was 34.3 L/h. Based on the induction half-life (67 hours), steady state should be achieved within 14 days of dosing. Capsule shell was the most significant covariate (55%) while sex and weight had only a small impact on exposure (<20%). The AUC ratio (hypromellose:gelatin capsule) is predicted to be 1.80 and 1.42 following single and repeat dosing, respectively. Age, renal (mild and moderate), and hepatic (mild) impairment were not significant covariates. Steady-state pre-dose concentration (%CV) of dabrafenib and of hydroxy-, carboxy-, and desmethyl-dabrafenib at 150 mg BID were 46.6 ng/mL (83.5%), 69.3 ng/mL (64.1%), 3608 ng/mL (14.7%), and 291 ng/mL (17.2%), respectively. Capsule shell, concomitant medications, older age, and weight were predictors of metabolite exposure.

Phase II trial (BREAK-2) of the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib (GSK2118436) in patients with metastatic melanoma.

PURPOSE: Dabrafenib (GSK2118436) is a potent inhibitor of mutated BRAF kinase. Our multicenter, single-arm, phase II study assessed the safety and clinical activity of dabrafenib in BRAF(V600E/K) mutation-positive metastatic melanoma (mut(+) MM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Histologically confirmed patients with stage IV BRAF(V600E/K) mut(+) MM received oral dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily until disease progression, death, or unacceptable adverse events (AEs). The primary end point was investigator-assessed overall response rate in BRAF(V600E) mut(+) MM patients. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Exploratory objectives included the comparison of BRAF mutation status between tumor-specific circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and tumor tissue, and the evaluation of cfDNA as a predictor of clinical outcome. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients with BRAF(V600E) and 16 patients with BRAF(V600K) mut(+) MM were enrolled onto the study. In the BRAF(V600E) group, 45 patients (59%) had a confirmed response (95% CI, 48.2 to 70.3), including five patients (7%) with complete responses. Two patients (13%) with BRAF(V600K) mut(+) MM had a confirmed partial response (95% CI, 0 to 28.7). In the BRAF(V600E) and BRAF(V600K) groups, median PFS was 6.3 months and 4.5 months, and median OS was 13.1 months and 12.9 months, respectively. The most common AEs were arthralgia (33%), hyperkeratosis (27%), and pyrexia (24%). Overall, 25 patients (27%) experienced a serious AE and nine patients (10%) had squamous cell carcinoma. Baseline cfDNA levels predicted response rate and PFS in BRAF(V600E) mut(+) MM patients. CONCLUSION: Dabrafenib was well tolerated and clinically active in patients with BRAF(V600E/K) mut(+) MM. cfDNA may be a useful prognostic and response marker in future studies.

BRAF(V600) inhibitor GSK2118436 targeted inhibition of mutant BRAF in cancer patients does not impair overall immune competency.

PURPOSE: An intact immune system likely contributes to the outcome of treatment and may be important for clearance of drug-resistant tumor cells and for prevention of recurrence. Although pharmacologic inhibition of BRAF(V600E) in melanoma patients, which is linked to immune suppression, results in an initial response rate, these responses are typically of limited duration. Combining immunotherapeutic drugs with kinase-targeted agents is an attractive strategy to increase clinical efficacy. Evidence suggesting that mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway activation in tumor cells contributes to immune suppression suggests that the two approaches may be synergistic, provided that BRAF(V600E) inhibitors are nontoxic to immune cells. METHODS: To assess effects of mutant BRAF inhibition on systemic immunity, we studied 13 patients with tumors carrying a BRAF mutation who underwent treatment with GSK2118436, a V600 mutant BRAF-specific inhibitor. We carried out peripheral blood immunomonitoring before and following one or two 28-day cycles of treatment. RESULTS: GSK2118436 treatment had no detectable impact on most immune parameters tested, including serum cytokine levels, peripheral blood cell counts, leukocyte subset frequencies, and memory CD4(+) and CD8(+) T-cell recall responses. A slight increase in serum TNF-α over the course of treatment was observed. In addition, three of the four human leukocyte antigen-A2-positive patients experienced a modest increase in circulating tumor antigen-specific CD8(+) T cells following BRAF(V600) inhibitor therapy. CONCLUSIONS: GSK2118436 treatment results in no detectable negative impact on existing systemic immunity or the de novo generation of tumor-specific T cells. These findings suggest that future trials combining specific BRAF(V600E) inhibition with immunotherapy should not impair immune response.

Food and Drug Administration drug approval summary: Sunitinib malate for the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumor and advanced renal cell carcinoma.

On January 26, 2006, sunitinib (Sutent) received regular approval as monotherapy for the treatment of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor after disease progression on or intolerance to imatinib mesylate (Gleevec). Time-to-tumor progression (TTP) of sunitinib-treated patients was superior to that of placebo-treated patients. Median TTP of sunitinib-treated patients was 27.3 weeks, compared with 6.4 weeks for placebo-treated patients (p < .0001). Partial responses were observed in 6.8% of sunitinib-treated patients and no placebo-treated patients. Sunitinib also received accelerated approval on January 26, 2006, as monotherapy for treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC). In two single-arm trials of sunitinib in patients with metastatic RCC, partial responses were observed in 25.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17.5, 34.9) and 36.5% (95% CI, 24.7, 49.6) of patients. Median response durations in the two trials were 27.1 weeks (95% CI, 24.4, incalculable) and 54 weeks (95% CI, 34.3, 70.1). Treatment-emergent adverse events in sunitinib-treated patients included diarrhea, mucositis, skin abnormalities, altered taste, electrolyte abnormalities, hypertension, and diminution in left ventricular ejection fraction. Cardiac safety of sunitinib in patients with preexisting cardiac abnormalities remains unknown. Based on nonclinical findings, physicians prescribing sunitinib should monitor for adrenal insufficiency in patients who undergo stressors such as surgery, trauma, or severe infection. Caution should be exercised when administering sunitinib in combination with known CYP3A4 inducers or inhibitors.