Overall survival with first-line atezolizumab in combination with vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma (IMspire150): second interim analysis of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Primary analysis of the phase 3 IMspire150 study showed improved investigator-assessed progression-free survival with first-line atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (atezolizumab group) versus placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib (control group) in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma. With a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4-23·8) at the primary analysis, overall survival data were immature. Here, we report the results from the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis. METHODS: The multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, phase 3 IMspire150 study was done at 108 academic and community hospitals in 20 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with previously untreated unresectable stage IIIc or stage IV melanoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either atezolizumab (840 mg intravenously on day 1 and 15) or placebo plus vemurafenib (960 mg or 720 mg twice daily orally) and cobimetinib (60 mg once daily orally; 21 days on and 7 days off) in 28-day cycles. Atezolizumab and placebo were added to treatment regimens from cycle two onwards. Randomisation was done centrally (Durham, NC, USA) based on a permuted block randomisation scheme (block size of 4) using an interactive web-based response system and was stratified by geographical region and baseline lactate dehydrogenase concentration. Overall survival was analysed in the intention-to-treat population and safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug according to actual treatment received. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, which was previously reported. Here, we report the second, prespecified, interim overall survival analysis, which was planned after about 270 overall survival events had occurred. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer enrolling patients, and it is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02908672. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 514 patients (median age 54 years [IQR 43-63]; 299 [58%] men and 215 [42%] women) were enrolled in the trial and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (256 [50%] patients) or the control group (258 [50%] patients). At the data cutoff (Sept 8, 2021), 273 patients had died (126 in the atezolizumab group and 147 in the control group). Median follow-up was 29·1 months (IQR 10·1-45·4) for the atezolizumab group versus 22·8 months (10·6-44·1) for the control group. Median overall survival was 39·0 months (95% CI 29·9-not estimable) in the atezolizumab group versus 25·8 months (22·0-34·6) in the control group (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·66-1·06]; p=0·14). The most common adverse events of any grade in the atezolizumab group were blood creatine phosphokinase increased (123 [53%] of 231 patients), diarrhoea (116 [50%]), and pyrexia (115 [50%]). The most common adverse events of any grade in the control group were diarrhoea (157 [56%] of 280 patients), blood creatine phosphokinase increased (135 [48%]), and rash (119 [43%]). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were increased lipase (54 [23%] of 231 patients in the atezolizumab group vs 62 [22%] of 280 patients in the control group), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (51 [22%] vs 50 [18%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase (32 [14%] vs 26 [9%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 112 (48%) patients in the atezolizumab group and 117 (42%) patients in the control group. Grade 5 adverse events were reported in eight (3%) patients in the atezolizumab group versus six (2%) patients in the control group. Two grade 5 adverse events (hepatitis fulminant and hepatic failure) in the atezolizumab group were considered to be associated with the triplet combination, and one event in the control group (pulmonary haemorrhage) was considered to be associated with cobimetinib. INTERPRETATION: Additional follow-up of the IMspire150 trial showed that overall survival was not significantly improved with atezolizumab, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib compared with placebo, vemurafenib, and cobimetinib in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive advanced melanoma. Results of the final analysis are awaited to establish whether a significant improvement in overall survival can be achieved with long-term treatment with this triplet combination versus vemurafenib plus cobimetinib. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Phase 1b study of cobimetinib plus atezolizumab in patients with advanced BRAFV600 wild-type melanoma progressing on prior anti-programmed death-1 therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of cobimetinib plus atezolizumab in the treatment of patients with advanced BRAFV600 wild-type melanoma who had progressed on prior anti‒programmed death-1 (PD-1) therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase 1b, open-label, international multicentre study enrolled 3 cohorts. Herein, we report on patients in cohorts A and B who had progressed on prior anti‒PD-1 therapy. Patients in cohort A received cobimetinib 60 mg once daily for 21 days followed by a 7-day break and concurrent intravenous atezolizumab 840 mg every 2 weeks. Patients in cohort B received the same dosing regimen as cohort A except for cycle 1 in which patients received cobimetinib only for the first 14 days prior to initiation of atezolizumab on cycle 1 day 15. Coprimary end-points were objective response rate and disease control rate. Secondary end-points were duration of response, progression free survival and overall survival. RESULTS: Between 19th June 2017 and 12th December 2018, 103 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 6.9 months (interquartile range, 4.8-10.1 months); objective response rate was 14.6% and disease control rate was 38.8% (95% confidence interval, 29.39-48.94). The median duration of response, progression-free survival and overall survival was 12.7 months, 3.8 months and 14.7 months, respectively. The most common adverse events were diarrhoea (75/103; 72.8%), dermatitis acneiform (57/103; 55.3%) and nausea (52/103; 50.5%). Thirty-four patients (33.0%) died: 33 (91.7%) due to progressive disease and one (1%) due to treatment-related oesophagitis. CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy with cobimetinib and atezolizumab in patients with advanced BRAFV600 wild-type melanoma with disease progression on or after prior anti‒PD-1 therapy demonstrated limited activity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03178851.

Characterization of Serous Retinopathy Associated with Cobimetinib: Integrated Safety Analysis of Four Studies.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Serous retinopathy can be associated with MEK inhibitors, including cobimetinib. We present results of an integrated safety analysis to further characterize ocular functional and structural changes due to serous retinopathy. METHODS: Four studies evaluating cobimetinib at the approved dose and schedule in combination with other oncology drugs were included. Study CO39721 incorporated standardized ophthalmologic assessments to fully characterize serous retinopathy events over time and was the primary study for analysis. Supporting information was provided by studies GO28141, WO29479, and GO30182. RESULTS: In total, 655 patients received one or more doses of cobimetinib and comprised the safety-evaluable population. Overall, 117 patients (17.9%) had one or more serous retinopathy events, 24 (3.7%) had two or more events, and four (0.6%) had three or more events. Grade 3 events occurred in < 2.5% of patients. In CO39721, the median time to onset was 15 days (range 7-111); median time to resolution of first occurrence was 26 days (range 6-591 + days). Twelve of 25 patients (48.0%) recovered without a dose modification and 4/25 (16.0%) were recovered/recovering following a dose modification. The most frequent presentation of serous retinopathy was focal subretinal fluid on optical coherence tomography (62.8% of cases); in some instances (25.7% of cases), subretinal fluid was multifocal. There was no loss of visual function or visual acuity at serous retinopathy onset or resolution. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this integrated safety analysis indicate that cobimetinib-associated serous retinopathy can be managed with or without a dose modification of cobimetinib at the discretion of the treating physician. No visual loss or permanent retinal damage was identified on comprehensive ophthalmologic assessments. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT03178851, NCT01689519, NCT02322814, and NCT02788279.

First-line atezolizumab monotherapy in patients with advanced BRAFV600 wild-type melanoma.

Anti-programmed death-1 agents are an established option for advanced melanoma, but the anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) antibody atezolizumab, an agent approved for the treatment of multiple solid tumors, was not previously evaluated. This phase 1b study cohort (NCT03178851; cohort C) evaluated first-line atezolizumab 1,200 mg every 3 weeks in adults with BRAFV600 wild-type, histologically confirmed, advanced or metastatic melanoma. The co-primary end points were confirmed objective response rate (ORR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 and disease control rate (DCR = complete response [CR] +partial response [PR] +stable disease [SD] at 16 weeks). Of 52 enrolled patients, most had lactate dehydrogenase levels lower than the upper limit of normal (77%) and PD-L1-positive tumors (55%). Investigator-assessed confirmed ORR was 35% (95% CI, 22%-49%) and included three CRs (6%) and 15 PRs (29%); DCR was 46%. Median investigator-assessed progression-free survival was 3.7 months (95% CI, 2.1-7.3). The most common any-grade adverse events were anemia (27%), headache (19%), hypertension (19%), constipation (17%), diarrhea (17%), hypothyroidism (17%), asthenia (15%), and pain in extremity (15%). First-line atezolizumab monotherapy is safe and tolerable and has antitumor activity in patients with BRAFV600 wild-type advanced or metastatic melanoma.

Genomic Features of Exceptional Response in Vemurafenib ± Cobimetinib-treated Patients with BRAF V600-mutated Metastatic Melanoma.

PURPOSE: Previous investigations identified transcriptional signatures associated with innate resistance to anti-programmed cell death protein 1 therapy in melanoma. This analysis aimed to increase understanding of the role of baseline genetic features in the variability of response to BRAF and MEK inhibitor therapy for BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This exploratory analysis compared genomic features, using whole-exome and RNA sequencing, of baseline tumors from patients who had complete response versus rapid progression (disease progression at first postbaseline assessment) on treatment with cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib or vemurafenib alone. Associations of gene expression with progression-free survival or overall survival were assessed by Cox proportional hazards modeling. RESULTS: Whole-exome sequencing showed that MITF and TP53 alterations were more frequent in tumors from patients with rapid progression, while NF1 alterations were more frequent in tumors from patients with complete response. However, the low frequency of alterations in any one gene precluded their characterization as drivers of response/resistance. Analysis of RNA profiles showed that expression of immune response-related genes was enriched in tumors from patients with complete response, while expression of keratinization-related genes was enriched in tumors from patients who experienced rapid progression. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that enriched immune infiltration might be a shared feature favoring response to both targeted and immune therapies, while features of innate resistance to targeted and immune therapies were distinct.

Vismodegib and the Hedgehog Pathway Inhibitors: A Historical Perspective to Current Clinical Application.

Vismodegib (Erivedge, Genentech-Roche) is the first in class of Hedgehog pathway inhibitors approved for treatment of metastatic basal cell carcinoma (BCC), or locally advanced BCC that has recurred after surgery or is not amenable to surgery or radiation. Its path to discovery has been unique and traces its origin to corn lilies, sheep, Drosophila flies, and the Hedgehog signaling pathway. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(5):506-508.

Vismodegib Use in Clinical Practice: Analysis of a United States Medical Claims Database.

BACKGROUND: Information is limited on the use of vismodegib for treatment of advanced basal cell carcinoma beyond the setting of clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the treatment patterns and characteristics of patients treated with vismodegib in clinical practice. METHODS: A longitudinal, retrospective cohort study was undertaken using data from a US commercial insurance claims (Truven Health Analytics MarketScan) database. Eligible patients were ≥18 years of age, with ≥1 claim for vismodegib from January 2012 to December 2015. RESULTS: A total of 321 patients were included in the analysis. Approximately 20% of the patients took 1 or more treatment breaks of ≥ 30 days each before treatment discontinuation. Median duration of vismodegib treatment before the first treatment break and discontinuation was 4.0 and 5.5 months, respectively. Older age ( > 65 years) and absence of Gorlin syndrome were associated with increased risk for treatment interruption or discontinuation. Overall, 47% and 36% of patients underwent surgery or radiotherapy within the 6 months before and after vismodegib initiation, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world evidence indicates that vismodegib is being used in clinical practice as part of combination treatment strategies. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(2):143-148.

Elevated Levels of BRAFV600 Mutant Circulating Tumor DNA and Circulating Hepatocyte Growth Factor Are Associated With Poor Prognosis in Patients With Metastatic Melanoma.

PURPOSE: We performed a retrospective exploratory analysis to evaluate the prognostic and predictive effect of two circulating biomarkers, BRAFV600 mutant circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and circulating hepatocyte growth factor (cHGF), in metastatic melanoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study evaluated patients from BRIM-3, a phase III trial comparing vemurafenib and dacarbazine in 675 patients with BRAFV600 mutated advanced melanoma. ctDNA was measured using droplet digital polymerase chain reaction, and cHGF was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards modeling. Partitioning analysis was used to group patients into risk categories. RESULTS: Patients with elevated levels of baseline BRAFV600 ctDNA had significantly shorter median OS than those with undetectable levels of ctDNA (vemurafenib arm, 9.9 v 21.4 months, respectively, and dacarbazine arm: 6.1 v 21.0 months, respectively). Median OS was also shorter in patients with high levels of cHGF compared with those with low cHGF (vemurafenib arm, 11.9 v 17.3 months, respectively, and dacarbazine arm, 6.1 v 14.4 months, respectively). In a multivariable proportional hazards model with adjustment for lactate dehydrogenase, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, disease stage, and treatment, ctDNA and cHGF were both independent prognostic factors for OS, (HR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.35 to 2.28 for high v undetectable ctDNA; HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.53 for high v low cHGF). Using partitioning analysis, we found that patients with elevated ctDNA combined with elevated cHGF constituted the highest risk group with significantly shorter OS. CONCLUSION: Here, we report that BRIM-3 patients with high levels of ctDNA and cHGF have worse OS regardless of treatment and that these factors are independent prognostic markers for metastatic melanoma.

Carcinogenicity assessment of the Hedgehog pathway inhibitor, vismodegib in Tg.rasH2 mice and Sprague-Dawley rats.

Vismodegib (also known as GDC-0449) is a novel small molecule inhibitor of the Hedgehog (Hh) signaling pathway currently approved for the treatment of metastatic or locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC) in humans. Its tumorigenic potential was assessed in dedicated carcinogenicity studies in rasH2 transgenic (Tg.rasH2) mice and Sprague Dawley (SD) rats. Tumorigenicity potential of vismodegib was identified in rats only and was limited to benign hair follicle tumors, including pilomatricomas and keratoacanthomas at exposures of ≥0.1-fold and ≥0.6-fold, respectively, of the steady-state exposure (AUC0-24h) of the recommended human dose. No malignant tumors were identified in either species. Overall, the totality of pharmacology and nonclinical safety data (lack of genotoxicity, in vitro secondary pharmacological binding, and immunoregulatory effects, and limited effects on the endocrine system) suggests that the development of the benign hair follicle tumors may be related to pharmacologically-mediated disruption of hair follicle morphogenesis, although the exact mechanism of tumorigenesis is unclear. Hair follicle tumors have not been reported in vismodegib-treated patients. The relevance of this finding in rats to patients is uncertain.

Risk of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma after treatment of basal cell carcinoma with vismodegib.

BACKGROUND: Vismodegib is a first-in-class agent targeting the hedgehog signaling pathway for treatment of patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and metastatic BCC. There have been concerns about the development of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) in patients treated with this drug. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether treatment with vismodegib is associated with an increase in the risk of cutaneous SCC. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients treated with vismodegib as part of phase I and II clinical studies were compared with participants from the University of California, San Francisco, Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Cohort who received standard therapy for primary BCC. In total, 1675 patients were included in the analysis, and the development of SCC after vismodegib exposure was assessed. RESULTS: The use of vismodegib was not associated with an increased risk of subsequent development of SCC (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-1.16). Covariates including age, sex, history of previous nonmelanoma skin cancer, and number of visits per year were significantly associated with the development of SCC. LIMITATIONS: A limitation of the study was that a historic control cohort was used as a comparator. CONCLUSIONS: Vismodegib was not associated with an increased risk of subsequent SCC when compared with standard surgical treatment of BCC.

Gene Expression Profiling in BRAF-Mutated Melanoma Reveals Patient Subgroups with Poor Outcomes to Vemurafenib That May Be Overcome by Cobimetinib Plus Vemurafenib.

Purpose: The association of tumor gene expression profiles with progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes in patients with BRAFV600-mutated melanoma treated with vemurafenib or cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib was evaluated.Experimental Design: Gene expression of archival tumor samples from patients in four trials (BRIM-2, BRIM-3, BRIM-7, and coBRIM) was evaluated. Genes significantly associated with PFS (P < 0.05) were identified by univariate Cox proportional hazards modeling, then subjected to unsupervised hierarchical clustering, principal component analysis, and recursive partitioning to develop optimized gene signatures.Results: Forty-six genes were identified as significantly associated with PFS in both BRIM-2 (n = 63) and the vemurafenib arm of BRIM-3 (n = 160). Two distinct signatures were identified: cell cycle and immune. Among vemurafenib-treated patients, the cell-cycle signature was associated with shortened PFS compared with the immune signature in the BRIM-2/BRIM-3 training set [hazard ratio (HR) 1.8; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.3-2.6, P = 0.0001] and in the coBRIM validation set (n = 101; HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.0-2.5; P = 0.08). The adverse impact of the cell-cycle signature on PFS was not observed in patients treated with cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib (n = 99; HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7-1.8; P = 0.66).Conclusions: In vemurafenib-treated patients, the cell-cycle gene signature was associated with shorter PFS. However, in cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib-treated patients, both cell cycle and immune signature subgroups had comparable PFS. Cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib may abrogate the adverse impact of the cell-cycle signature. Clin Cancer Res; 23(17); 5238-45. ©2017 AACR.

A phase II, multicenter, open-label, 3-cohort trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of vismodegib in operable basal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Vismodegib is approved for treatment of advanced basal cell carcinoma. OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize vismodegib efficacy and safety in operable basal cell carcinoma. METHODS: Patients with new, operable, nodular basal cell carcinoma received vismodegib (150 mg/d) followed by excision and Mohs micrographic surgery to ensure clear margins. Cohort 1 received vismodegib for 12 weeks; cohort 2 received vismodegib for 12 weeks, then 24 weeks of observation before excision; and cohort 3 received vismodegib for 8 weeks on/4 weeks off/8 weeks on. RESULTS: In all, 24 patients enrolled in cohort 1, and 25 in cohorts 2 and 3. Complete histologic clearance was achieved by 42%, 16%, and 44% of patients in cohorts 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Muscle spasms (76%), alopecia (58%), and dysgeusia (50%) were the most frequent adverse events (AEs). Five (7%) patients discontinued treatment because of an AE. AE reversibility was evaluated in cohort 2 with 24 weeks of observation after treatment discontinuation. LIMITATIONS: Nonrandomized, small cohort sizes, and short observation durations for some patients are limitations. CONCLUSION: Primary efficacy end points were not met (predefined complete histologic clearance rate: >50% in cohorts 1 and 3; >30% in cohort 2). Safety was comparable when dosed continuously versus intermittently. Posttreatment reversibility of vismodegib-related AEs was demonstrated.

Ocular toxicity in BRAF mutant cutaneous melanoma patients treated with vemurafenib.

PURPOSE: To determine the frequency of ocular adverse effects associated with vemurafenib (PLX4032) treatment for metastatic cutaneous melanoma. DESIGN: Retrospective review of the clinical study reports from the clinical pharmacology, phase 1, phase 2, and phase 3 trials of vemurafenib. METHODS: The vemurafenib clinical trials were a multicenter series involving adult patients with histologically confirmed, BRAF(V600) mutation-positive, unresectable, stage IIIC or IV melanoma. A total of 855 patients were enrolled in the trials: 568 patients were treated with vemurafenib and 287 patients were treated with dacarbazine. RESULTS: Among the 568 patients treated with vemurafenib, ocular adverse effects developed in 22% (95% confidence interval [CI], 18.5-25.6). The most common ocular diagnosis was uveitis (4.0%; 95% CI, 2.6-6.0), followed by conjunctivitis (2.8%; 95% CI, 1.6-4.5) and dry eyes (2.0%; 95% CI, 1.1-3.7). All were successfully managed while vemurafenib therapy was continued. CONCLUSIONS: Ocular adverse events and symptoms may be seen in more than one-fifth of patients being treated with vemurafenib. However, vemurafenib can be continued while the ocular symptoms are being managed. The pathogenesis of ocular symptoms in this patient population is unclear; additional studies are necessary.

Clinical benefit assessment of vismodegib therapy in patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Vismodegib was approved for the treatment of advanced basal cell carcinoma (aBCC) based on the pivotal ERIVANCE BCC study. The primary endpoint (objective response rate [ORR]) was assessed 9 months after the last patient was enrolled. To confirm the clinical benefit of vismodegib, an additional analysis was performed 12 months after the primary analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ERIVANCE BCC was a multicenter, nonrandomized, two-cohort study of 104 patients with histologically confirmed aBCC. Patients received 150 mg oral vismodegib daily until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal. An independent review panel comprising three expert clinicians reviewed patient photographs individually and as a consensus panel to evaluate baseline disease severity and clinical benefit after vismodegib treatment in 71 patients with locally advanced BCC (laBCC). RESULTS: Sixty-three patients were efficacy evaluable; baseline and postprogression photographs for 61 were available for review. Baseline disease severity was judged as 5 or 4 (very severe or moderately severe) in 71.4%. Clinical benefit was observed in 76.2% (significant: 65.1%; some: 11.1%). Interpanelist agreement (maximum difference ≤1 point among panelists' scores in 65.1% and 87.3% of patients for clinical benefit and baseline disease severity, respectively) and correlation between individual and panel reviews were strong. Clinical benefit scores showed good concordance with the protocol-specified ORR obtained by an independent review facility and with investigator-assessed response. CONCLUSION: Clinical benefit assessed by independent review based on expert clinical judgment provides strong evidence that treatment with vismodegib results in clinically meaningful and durable responses in patients with laBCC.

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.

Targeting superficial or nodular Basal cell carcinoma with topically formulated small molecule inhibitor of smoothened.

PURPOSE: Inappropriate activation of the Hedgehog (Hh) signaling pathway in skin is critical for the development of basal cell carcinomas (BCC). We have investigated the anti-BCC efficacy of topically-applied CUR61414, an inhibitor of the Hh signal transduction molecule Smoothened. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In preclinical studies, we used a depilatory model to evaluate the ability of topical formulations of CUR61414 to repress Hh responsive cells found at the base of hair follicles in normal skin. We also tested the in vivo effects of topical CUR61414 on murine BCCs developed in Ptch1 (+/-) K14-CreER2 p53 fl/fl mice. In a phase I clinical study, we evaluated the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of a multidose regimen of CUR61414 (0.09%, 0.35%, 1.1%, and 3.1%) applied topically to human superficial or nodular BCCs for up to 28 days. RESULTS: In mice, topical CUR61414 significantly inhibited skin Hh signaling, blocked the induction of hair follicle anagen, and shrank existing BCCs. However, we observed no clinical activity of this formulation in human superficial or nodular BCCs in a phase I clinical study. CONCLUSIONS: Our data highlight some of the challenges of translating preclinical experience into successful human results for a topical anticancer agent.

Long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of vismodegib in two patients with metastatic basal cell carcinoma and basal cell nevus syndrome.

Tumor responses in advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC) have been observed in clinical trials with vismodegib, a SMO antagonist. The result of SMO antagonism is inhibition Hedgehog Signaling Pathway (HHSP) downstream target genes. HHSP inhibition has been shown to affect stem cells responsible for blood, mammary, and neural development. We report on our experience of treating two patients with advanced BCC participating. These two patients have had no new BCCs develop for at least 2.25 years. Both patients have been receiving ongoing daily treatment with vismodegib for greater than 2.75 years without experiencing any significant side effects. After prolonged continuous daily dosing with a SMO antagonist, we have not observed a significant alteration in hematologic parameters or physical abnormalities of the pectoral regions of two patients with advanced BCC.

The role of the hedgehog signaling pathway in the development of basal cell carcinoma and opportunities for treatment.

The hedgehog (Hh) signaling pathway plays an important role in embryogenesis across multiple species. Its activity is reduced or absent in adult organisms. However, activation of the pathway has been shown to be a factor in the development of a number of human malignancies and inhibition of the pathway is being investigated as a potential treatment for multiple cancers. The most extensively investigated and best characterized is basal cell carcinoma (BCC), which occurs in both an inherited form (basal cell nevus syndrome or Gorlin's syndrome) and a sporadic form. Sporadic BCCs are the most common human malignancy. There is recent data available on the use of a small molecule inhibitor of the pathway in BCC.

Safety of efalizumab therapy in patients with moderate to severe psoriasis: an open-label extension of a phase IIIb trial.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by infiltration of the dermis and epidermis by activated T cells and the hyperproliferation and abnormal differentiation of keratinocytes. It is a life-long disease with alternating periods of remission and recurrence. Efalizumab is a humanized, recombinant, T-cell targeting monoclonal antibody, approved for use in adults with chronic moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety of continued or newly initiated treatment with efalizumab for up to 48 weeks in patients with psoriasis who were treated previously with efalizumab or placebo. METHODS: This study was an open-label, 48-week extension of a previously published 12-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase IIIb study, carried out in the US and Canada between 24 October 2002 and 2 July 2004. Patients were followed and treated at the study clinic in an outpatient setting and also were trained to self-administer the drug at home. Patients comprising individuals with chronic moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who had completed the 12-week, placebo-controlled segment of the study were eligible for enrolment in the extension phase. Of the 686 patients enrolled in the study, 636 (92.7%) enrolled in the open-label extension of the study, 418 of whom had received 12 weeks of efalizumab therapy and 218 of whom had received 12 weeks of placebo. All patients entering the open-label phase of the study received efalizumab 1 mg/kg/wk for an additional 48 weeks, for a maximum exposure of up to 60 weeks. Safety was evaluated by an assessment of adverse events, including infections and serious adverse events. RESULTS: The rate of withdrawal due to adverse events remained low throughout the trial, ranging from 1.2% to 6.6% during the 12-week segments of the open-label extension phase of the trial. The incidence of adverse events decreased with increased exposure to efalizumab; the incidence during the initial 12 weeks of exposure to efalizumab was 79.0% compared with 72.9% for patients exposed to placebo. Patients treated with efalizumab for 13-24 weeks, 25-36 weeks, 37-48 weeks and 49-60 weeks experienced adverse events at an incidence of 66.8%, 54.3%, 49.6% and 48.5%, respectively. The incidence of serious adverse events ranged from 1.6% to 3.5% during the 12-week segments of efalizumab therapy, compared with an incidence of 3.4% for placebo-treated patients. The incidence of infection ranged from 9.9% to 14.7% during the 12-week segments of efalizumab therapy, compared with an incidence of 19.1% for placebo-treated patients. Malignancies were reported with an incidence of