Phase I/II trial of concurrent extracranial palliative radiation therapy with Dabrafenib and Trametinib in metastatic BRAF V600E/K mutation-positive cutaneous Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent treatment with BRAF inhibitors and palliative radiation therapy (RT) could be associated with increased toxicity, especially skin toxicity. Current Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) consensus guideline recommend ceasing BRAF inhibitors during RT. There is a lack of data regarding concurrent RT with combined BRAF and MEK inhibitors. This single-arm phase I/II trial was designed to assess the safety and tolerability of palliative RT with concurrent Dabrafenib and Trametinib in patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received Dabrafenib and Trametinib before and during palliative RT to soft tissue, nodal or bony metastases. The RT dose was escalated stepwise during the study period. Toxicity data including clinical photographs of the irradiated area was collected for up to 12 months following completion of RT. RESULTS: Between June 2016 to October 2019, ten patients were enrolled before the study was stopped early due to low accrual rate. Six patients were treated at level 1 (20 Gy in 5 fractions, any location) and 4 patients at level 2a (30 Gy in 10 fractions with no abdominal viscera exposed). All alive patients completed one year of post-RT follow-up. Of the 82 adverse events (AEs) documented, the majority (90%) were grade 1 and 2. Eight grade 3 events (10%) occurred in five patients, only one was treatment-related (grade 3 fever due to Dabrafenib and Trametinib). No patients experienced grade 3 or 4 RT related toxicities, including skin toxicities. One serious AE was documented in relation to a grade 3 fever due to Dabrafenib and Trametinib requiring hospitalisation. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of grade 3 and 4 RT-related toxicities in our study suggests that Dabrafenib and Trametinib may be continued concurrently during fractionated non-visceral palliative RT to extracranial sites.

Metastasis-specific patterns of response and progression with anti-PD-1 treatment in metastatic melanoma.

This study evaluated patterns of response as discerned by comprehensive metastasis-specific analysis in metastatic melanoma patients receiving anti-PD-1 antibodies. Bi-dimensional measurements of every metastasis in patients enrolled in the KEYNOTE-001 trial at a single institution were obtained at baseline and throughout treatment. Twenty-seven evaluable patients had 399 baseline metastases measurable on CT imaging. Complete response (CR) which occurred in 52.6% of metastases was smaller (mean 223 mm2 versus 760 mm2 , p < .01) and occurred more frequently in the lungs (65% versus 39.4%, p < .01). Response was heterogenous (new/progressing metastases alongside CR metastases) at first assessment in 4/14 patients with objective response (OR) as opposed to 7/13 patients with non-OR. CR of individual metastases is common and influenced by site and size. Most patients with OR demonstrate homogenous regression in all metastases at the first assessment. In contrast, patients with early heterogeneity had a poor outcome.

Cutaneous Toxic Effects of BRAF Inhibitors Alone and in Combination With MEK Inhibitors for Metastatic Melanoma.

IMPORTANCE: The cutaneous adverse effects of the BRAF inhibitors vemurafenib and dabrafenib mesylate in the treatment of metastatic melanoma have been well reported. The addition of a MEK inhibitor to a BRAF inhibitor improves the blockade of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway. The combination of dabrafenib with the MEK inhibitor trametinib dimethyl sulfoxide (CombiDT therapy) increases response rate and survival compared with a BRAF inhibitor alone. Clinical trials have suggested that CombiDT therapy induces fewer cutaneous toxic effects than a single-agent BRAF inhibitor. To our knowledge, a direct comparison has not been performed before. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cutaneous toxic effects of BRAF inhibitor monotherapy and CombiDT therapy in a large cohort of patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed a retrospective cohort study from September 1, 2009, through November 30, 2013. The study population included 185 Australian patients with unresectable stages IIIC and IV melanoma referred from Crown Princess Mary Cancer Care Centre who underwent review at the Department of Dermatology, Westmead Hospital. Of these, 119 patients received dabrafenib; 36, vemurafenib; and 30, CombiDT therapy. Data analysis were performed in December 2013. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Multiple cutaneous adverse effects between BRAF inhibitor monotherapy and CombiDT therapy were identified and compared in a cohort of patients who underwent the same dermatologic assessment. RESULTS: The most common cutaneous adverse effects seen in patients receiving the single-agent BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib or vemurafenib included Grover disease (51 patients [42.9%] and 14 [38.9%], respectively [P = .67]), plantar hyperkeratosis (47 [39.5%] and 14 [38.9%], respectively [P = .95]), verrucal keratosis (79 [66.4%] and 26 [72.2%], respectively [P = .51]), and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (31 [26.1%] and 13 [36.1%], respectively [P = .54]). Photosensitivity was more common with vemurafenib (14 patients [38.9%]) compared with dabrafenib (1 [0.8%]; P < .001). Compared with dabrafenib, CombiDT therapy showed a higher frequency of folliculitis (12 patients [40.0%] vs. 8 [6.7%]; P < .001) and a significant decrease of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (0 vs. 31 [26.1%]; P < .001), verrucal keratosis (0 vs. 79 [66.4%]; P < .001), and Grover disease (0 vs. 51 [42.9%]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study confirms that the prevalence of cutaneous toxic effects differs among vemurafenib, dabrafenib, and CombiDT therapies. Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma is the most concerning cutaneous toxic effect related to BRAF inhibitor monotherapy that did not appear with CombiDT therapy. Although CombiDT therapy has an improved profile of cutaneous toxic effects, continuous dermatologic assessments should be provided for all patients when receiving these treatments.

A case of bullous pemphigoid in a patient with metastatic melanoma treated with pembrolizumab.

The innovative blockade of immune checkpoints with targeted immunotherapies, such as monoclonal antibodies against programmed cell death-1, is pioneering the treatment for advanced melanoma. Potential adverse events of particular interest associated with immunotherapy are of an inflammatory or immune-related nature. Reported dermatological side effects mostly comprise nonspecific rash and pruritus. This is a report of a 75-year-old man with metastatic melanoma who was initially administered pembrolizumab at 10 mg/kg every 3 weeks. He developed spongiotic dermatitis that was partially treated with topical steroids after cycle 3. Pembrolizumab cycles were stopped because of disease progression after cycle 6. On the 30-day follow-up, the patient presented with extensive erythematous papules and plaques, in addition to a few intact and ruptured vesicles and bullae over the upper and lower limbs, especially over the knees and elbows. Both punch skin biopsies (haematoxylin and eosin and direct immunofluorescence studies) confirmed a bullous pemphigoid diagnosis. He was treated with a tapering dose of oral prednisone, resulting in rapid clinical improvement after only a week of treatment, which was switched to dexamethasone following the diagnosis of new brain metastases.

Arthritis and tenosynovitis associated with the anti-PD1 antibody pembrolizumab in metastatic melanoma.

We report the acute onset of polyarticular inflammatory arthritis in 2 patients receiving the immune check-point inhibitor, pembrolizumab (MK-3475), anti-PD1 drug for metastatic melanoma after 14 and 11 months therapy, respectively. The first patient had severe tenosynovitis, synovitis, bone marrow edema, and myositis, whereas the second patient had predominantly synovitis and tenosynovitis. Good symptomatic control was obtained with bisphosphonates and salazopyrin, avoiding the use of T-cell immunosuppressants. These cases raise important questions on whether anti-PD1 therapy allows preexisting autoimmune T-cell clones to escape tolerance by suppressing regulatory T cells or whether they allow autoimmunity to develop de novo. These conditions heighten our awareness of complications associated with the clinical use of these agents, and provide a prototypical model for future research into the understanding of autoimmunity.

The nature and management of metastatic melanoma after progression on BRAF inhibitors: effects of extended BRAF inhibition.

BACKGROUND: The v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B (BRAF) inhibitor (BRAFi) drugs dabrafenib and vemurafenib have high response rates in BRAF-mutant, metastatic melanoma; however, 50% of patients progress by 7 months. In this study, the authors examined the nature and management of disease progression (PD) on BRAFi treatment, including characteristics and outcomes of patients who received continued BRAFi treatment beyond disease progression (TBP). METHODS: Clinicopathologic data at baseline and at the time of PD were collected for all patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma who received BRAFi monotherapy within clinical trials between July 2009 and September 2012. Management and survival after PD were examined, including continued BRAFi TBP (> 28 days beyond Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor [RECIST]-defined PD). RESULTS: Ninety-five of 114 BRAFi-treated patients had PD. Fifty-three of those 95 patients (56%) progressed in extracranial sites alone, 18% (17 of 95 patients) progressed in intracranial and extracranial sites simultaneously, and 16% (15 of 95 patients) progressed in intracranial sites alone. Twenty-nine of the 95 patients (31%) who had PD progressed in a single site or organ, 48% (46 of 95 patients) progressed in existing metastases only, and 18% (17 of 95 patients) had new metastases alone. At the time of PD, 35 of 95 patients (37%) received no subsequent systemic treatment, 20% (19 of 95 patients) changed systemic treatments, and 39% (37 of 95 patients) continued BRAFi TBP for a median of 97 days. BRAFi TBP and known prognostic factors (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, lactate dehydrogenase, RECIST sum of the greatest dimensions of target lesions) were associated with overall survival (OS) from the time of PD; however, in multivariable analysis, BRAFi TBP improved OS (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.93; P = .029). CONCLUSIONS: Most BRAFi-treated patients progressed in existing extracranial sites, and 31% progressed in isolated sites. Compared with cessation, continued BRAFi TBP is associated with prolonged OS even after adjusting for potential prognostic factors at PD.

Features and management of pyrexia with combined dabrafenib and trametinib in metastatic melanoma.

The combination of dabrafenib and trametinib (CombiDT) is an effective treatment for BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma; however, over 70% of patients develop drug-related pyrexia, and little is known about this toxicity. We sought to examine the features and management of CombiDT pyrexia. The association between pyrexia and patient demographics, disease characteristics and outcome variables was assessed in patients treated with CombiDT at a single institution. The clinicopathological features of pyrexic events were analysed. Fourteen of 32 (44%) patients developed pyrexia (temperature≥38.5°C). Pyrexia was recurrent in 11/14 (79%). The median time to pyrexia was 38 days. Pyrexia was not associated with age, sex nor disease burden, and did not correlate with RECIST response, progression-free nor overall survival. Paracetamol, NSAIDs and/or dose reduction (DR) were ineffective secondary prophylaxis for pyrexia, whereas corticosteroids were effective in all patients (n=8), including two with multiple previous pyrexic events despite several DRs. In patients with previous DRs who commenced steroids (n=3), CombiDT doses were re-escalated without pyrexia. Pyrexia is a frequent and recurrent toxicity with CombiDT, with no predictive clinical characteristics. Pyrexia does not correlate with clinical outcome. Neither DR nor antipyretics are effective secondary prophylaxis, whereas corticosteroids are effective, prevent DR and enable re-escalation of CombiDT dosing.

Acneiform eruptions: a common cutaneous toxicity of the MEK inhibitor trametinib.

BACKGROUND: The MEK inhibitor trametinib is currently undergoing clinical trials as the treatment of metastatic melanoma both alone and in combination with the BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib. One of the most frequent side-effects associated with its use as a single agent is the development of acneiform eruptions. These eruptions seem to be reduced when dosed in combination with dabrafenib. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence of acneiform eruptions in patients taking the MEK inhibitor trametinib, both alone and in combination with dabrafenib. METHODS: All patients enrolled in the trametinib alone (n = 13) or trametinib and dabrafenib combination (n = 30) clinical trials at a single site underwent a retrospective file review. The development and management of acne or acneiform eruptions was noted. RESULTS: In total, 77% of the trametinib group developed an acneiform eruption on the trial, while only 10% developed acneiform lesions in the combination trial. The patients were treated with oral doxycycline, topical antibiotics or topical antiseptic washes, with a good response. However the condition recurred if these treatments were ceased and the patient was still on trametinib therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The MEK inhibitor trametinib is associated with the development of acneiform eruptions. When combined with dabrafenib the frequency of this side-effect is reduced.

BRAF inhibitor activity in V600R metastatic melanoma.

Activating mutations in the BRAF gene occur in approximately 50% of melanomas. More than 70% of BRAF mutations are V600E and 10-30% are V600K. Potent and selective BRAF inhibitors have demonstrated significant clinical benefits in patients with V600E and V600K BRAF-mutated melanoma. V600R mutations constitute approximately 3-7% of all BRAF mutations and the activity of BRAF inhibitors in patients with this mutation is unknown. We have treated 45 patients with V600 mutated melanoma including patients with V600R mutation between July 2011 and October 2012 with the selective BRAF inhibitor dabrafenib (n=43) or vemurafenib (n=2) via a compassionate access programme. The overall response rate was 50% for the whole population with a progression-free survival of 5.5 months. Five objective responses were seen in six assessable patients with V600R BRAF mutation (n=9). Our experience suggests that patients with V600R BRAF mutations can be treated successfully with oral BRAF inhibitors, and molecular diagnostic assays should include detection of this type of mutation.

Evidence for therapeutic drug monitoring of targeted anticancer therapies.

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) provides valuable guidance for dose adjustment of antibiotics, immunosuppressives, antiepileptics, and other drugs, but its use for traditional anticancer therapies has been limited. Perhaps the most important obstacle is the impractical requirement of multiple blood samples to adequately define systemic exposure of drugs that have a short elimination half-life and are given by intermittent intravenous injections. However, the newer targeted anticancer therapies have different pharmacokinetic (PK) and dosing characteristics compared with traditional cytotoxic drugs, making it possible to estimate the steady-state drug exposure with a single trough-level measurement. Recent evidence indicates that certain PK parameters, including trough levels, are correlated with clinical outcomes for many of these agents, including imatinib, sunitinib, rituximab, and cetuximab. Although the current evidence is insufficient to mandate TDM in routine practice, a concerted investigation should be encouraged to determine whether the steady-state trough measurements of targeted agents will have a practical place in the clinical care of patients with cancer.