scholarly journals Analysis of BRAF and NRAS mutation status in advanced melanoma patients treated with anti-CTLA-4 antibodies: Association with overall survival?

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9025-9025 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Mangana ◽  
Simone M. Goldinger ◽  
Katja Schindler ◽  
Sima Rozati ◽  
Anna L. Frauchiger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Braf Inhibitor ◽  
Mek Inhibitor ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Braf V600e ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Nras Mutation ◽  
Mutation Status ◽  
Mutational Status ◽  
Melanoma Patients

9025 Background: Ipilimumab and tremelimumab are human monoclonal antibodies against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4). Ipilimumab was the first agent to show a statistically significant benefit in overall survival with durable-long-term responses for advanced melanoma patients both in first-and second-line setting. Up to date, there is no proven association between the BRAF-V600E mutation and the disease control rate (DCR) in response to Ipilimumab. Moreover, significantly shorter survival rates have been reported in patients harboring an NRAS mutation than in those without. This retrospective analysis was carried out to assess if BRAF (V600) and NRAS mutation status affects the clinical outcome of Ipilimumab-treated melanoma patients. Methods: This is a retrospective multi-center analysisof 71 patients, with confirmed BRAF and NRAS mutation status, treated with anti-CTLA-4 antibodies from December 2006 until August 2012. The cut-off for the estimation of overall survival was end of November 2012. Results: The median overall survival of BRAFV600/NRAS mutant patients (n=44) was 1,41 years compared with 2.67 years in BRAF/NRAS wild-type patients (n=27). Although this difference was not statistically significant there was a trend for improved survival in wild-type patients. Of the 71 patients analyzed, 56 received chemotherapy prior to Ipilimumab. In the BRAF/NRAS mutant cohort, 12 patients received Ipilimumab following either a BRAF- or a MEK- inhibitor. Of those 12 patients, 8 progressed and were unable to complete Ipilimumab. Of the 4 patients who completed 4 cycles of Ipilimumab, 2 were subsequently treated with a BRAF inhibitor. Furthermore out of the 71 patients, 8 patients received a BRAF or a MEK inhibitor after progression; 5 of them are still alive. Conclusions: This is the first retrospective study to evaluate the association of both BRAF and NRAS mutational status with the overall survival of Ipilimumab-treated patients. There was a trend towards an improved survival in the BRAF/NRAS wild-type subpopulation. Additional patients will be examined to foster these preliminary results.

scholarly journals Electrochemotherapy with bleomycin is effective in BRAF mutated melanoma cells and interacts with BRAF inhibitors

2016 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanja Dolinsek ◽  
Lara Prosen ◽  
Maja Cemazar ◽  
Tjasa Potocnik ◽  
Gregor Sersa
Keyword(s):  
Clonogenic Assay ◽  
Braf Inhibitor ◽  
Melanoma Cells ◽  
Braf V600e ◽  
Concomitant Treatment ◽  
Braf Inhibitors ◽  
Mutation Status ◽  
Mutational Status ◽  
Melanoma Patients

Abstract Background The aim of the study was to explore the effectiveness of electrochemotherapy (ECT) during the treatment of melanoma patients with BRAF inhibitors. Its effectiveness was tested on BRAF mutated and non-mutated melanoma cells in vitro and in combination with BRAF inhibitors. Materials and methods ECT with bleomycin was performed on two human melanoma cell lines, with (SK-MEL-28) or without (CHL-1) BRAF V600E mutation. Cell survival was determined using clonogenic assay to determine the effectiveness of ECT in melanoma cells of different mutation status. Furthermore, the effectiveness of ECT in concomitant treatment with BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib was also determined in BRAF mutated cells SK-MEL-28 with clonogenic assay. Results The survival of BRAF V600E mutated melanoma cells was even lower than non-mutated cells, indicating that ECT is effective regardless of the mutational status of melanoma cells. Furthermore, the synergistic interaction between vemurafenib and ECT with bleomycin was demonstrated in the BRAF V600E mutated melanoma cells. Conclusions The effectiveness of ECT in BRAF mutated melanoma cells as well as potentiation of its effectiveness during the treatment with vemurafenib in vitro implies on clinical applicability of ECT in melanoma patients with BRAF mutation and/or during the treatment with BRAF inhibitors.

scholarly journals Analysis of BRAF and NRAS Mutation Status in Advanced Melanoma Patients Treated with Anti-CTLA-4 Antibodies: Association with Overall Survival?

PLoS ONE ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. e0139438 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Mangana ◽  
Phil F. Cheng ◽  
Katja Schindler ◽  
Benjamin Weide ◽  
Ulrike Held ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Nras Mutation ◽  
Mutation Status ◽  
Melanoma Patients

scholarly journals Advanced melanoma, a pharmacological evaluation

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anabela Andrade ◽  
Jorge Balteiro
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Braf Inhibitor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Mek Inhibitor ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
New Drugs ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Dismal Prognosis

Abstract Background Cutaneous melanoma is an aggressive cancer that occurs in melanocytes, located in the epidermis. Historically it has a high rate of morbidity and mortality, due to the resistance and toxicity of traditional therapies. Its incidence has increased annually by 4% to 8%. Until 2011 it was still considered a devastating and almost always fatal disease in a few months. Advances in therapies have significantly improved the results of most patients with advanced melanoma, especially those with a BRAFV600 mutation, which account for almost 50% of tumors. Before the recent evolution in treatment, the prognosis and overall survival were considered very bad. The introduction of new drugs has improved progression-free survival and overall survival, as well as producing faster clinical responses. Methods Comparison of endpoints such as progression-free survival and overall melanoma survival from the Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) studies of each drug in the therapeutic groups under assessment used in the disease. The variables used were the Endpoints Global Survival at various times (12 months, 24 months, 36 months and the median) and Progression-Free Survival. Results Combined immunotherapy (Nivolumab and Ipilimumab) improves overall survival and progression-free survival, achieving better results than targeted therapy. In this, the combination of a BRAF inhibitor and a MEK inhibitor, presents better results with the combination of Encorafenib and Binimetinib. Conclusions Both targeted therapy and immunotherapy transform melanoma with a dismal prognosis into a life-threatening illness.

scholarly journals Rapid BRAF mutation detection in melanoma patients by immunohistochemistry

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
László Fülöp ◽  
Katalin Götzer ◽  
Erzsébet Csernák ◽  
Danyil Szergejevics Kuznyecov ◽  
Erika Tóth
Keyword(s):  
Braf Inhibitor ◽  
Pcr Amplification ◽  
Diagnostic Algorithm ◽  
Braf V600e ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Braf Gene ◽  
Braf Mutations ◽  
Activating Mutation ◽  
Melanoma Patients ◽  
Braf V600 Mutation

The V600E mutation is the most common (~90%) activating mutation of the BRAF gene. BRAF mutations have been frequently investigated in melanoma, colorectal cancer and papillary thyroid carcinoma. The importance of the detection of BRAF mutations has been rising by the routine use of Braf inhibitor therapy. We evaluated the usefulness of the BRAF V600E mutation-specific monoclonal antibody (VE1) in metastatic melanoma patients. To confirm the results of immunohistochemistry (IHC), we used COBAS 4800 BRAF V600 mutation test and PCR amplification followed by Sanger sequencing.36 of 105 patients have wild-type BRAF gene, 64 have V600E mutation and 5 of 105 have V600K mutation. Predicting the mutation only by IHC using VE1 antibody, all 58 positively scored specimen were V600E mutant. The V600K, the wild-type patients and 7 patients from the V600E mutant group scored as negative. Thus the specificity is 100% and the positive predictive value is 1 of the IHC method. After processing our data we could establish a cheaper diagnostic algorithm for rapid detection ofBRAF mutation.

scholarly journals Magnetic Resonance Imaging Derived Biomarkers of IDH Mutation Status and Overall Survival in Grade III Astrocytomas

Diagnostics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 247
Author(s):  
Paola Feraco ◽  
Antonella Bacci ◽  
Patrizia Ferrazza ◽  
Luc van den Hauwe ◽  
Riccardo Pertile ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Idh Mutation ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Characteristic Analysis ◽  
Mutation Status ◽  
Mutational Status ◽  
Adc Values

The evaluation of the isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutation status in the glioma decision-making process has diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic implications. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) can noninvasively predict the most common IDH mutational status (R132H) in GIII-astrocytomas and the overall survival (OS). Hence, twenty-two patients (9-F, 13-M) with a histological diagnosis of GIII-astrocytoma and evaluation of IDH-mutation status (12-wild type, 10-mutant) were retrospectively evaluated. Imaging studies were reviewed for the morphological feature and mean ADC values (ADCm). Statistics included a Fisher’s exact test, Student’s t-test, Spearman’s Test and receiver operating characteristic analysis. A p ≤ 0.05 value was considered statistically significant for all the tests. A younger age and a frontal location were more likely related to mutational status. IDH-wild type (Wt) exhibited a slight enhancement (p = 0.039). The ADCm values in IDH-mutant (Mut) patients were higher than those of IDH-Wt patients (p < 0.0004). The value of ADC ≥ 0.99 × 10−3 mm2/s emerged as a “cut-off” to differentiate the mutation state. In the overall group, a positive relationship between the ADCm values and OS was detected (p = 0.003; r = 0.62). Adding quantitative measures of ADC values to conventional MR imaging could be used routinely as a noninvasive marker of specific molecular patterns.

Efficacy of hypofractionated radiotherapy (Rx) in melanoma patients who failed anti-PD-1 monotherapy: Assessing the abscopal effect.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9537-9537
Author(s):  
Philippe Saiag ◽  
Bouchra Baghad ◽  
Magali Fort ◽  
Iman Aouidadd ◽  
Anissa Roger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Abscopal Effect ◽  
Nras Mutation ◽  
Mutation Status ◽  
Fractionated Radiotherapy ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Melanoma Patients ◽  
Metastatic Sites ◽  
Prospective Database

9537 Background: Radiotherapy (Rx) and anti-PD-1 mAb are potentially synergistic. No study has tested this combination only in pts who failed on anti-PD-1 mAb, which allows to assess the abscopal effect. We evaluated this combination in a cohort of advanced melanoma pts after failure of anti-PD-1 monotherapy. Methods: Analysis of a prospective database in a referral center searching for advanced melanoma pts with confirmed (2 CT-scans) progressive (PD) or stable (SD) disease on anti-PD-1 monotherapy, who later received concurrent Rx without modification of anti-PD-1 mAb regimen. Radiologists performed independent tumor evaluations (RECIST 1.1) every 3 m, both on radiated and non-radiated lesions, with abscopal effect defined as a partial (PR) or complete (CR) response outside radiated fields. Results: 26 pts (21 achieving PD, 5 SD, 10 pt ≥3 involved organs), mean age 70 Y, were included. Anti-PD-1 mAb was first line in 50% of pts. Rx, consisting of hypofractionnated Rx (3-5 sessions, 26 Gy), standard palliative Rx, or gamma-knife in respectively 23, 2, and 1 pts, was begun on a single site in 73% of pts or on 2 sites after a median of 5 m after beginning anti-PD-1 mAb. Median follow-up after onset of anti-PD-1 mAb was 17 (7-35) m, with 65% of pts alive at last follow-up. Best response was 7 CR (27%, including CR in 4 pts with prior PD) 1 PR, 3 SD (12%), 15 PD (58%). Abscopal effect was seen in 10 pts (38%). No correlation between the occurrence of CR and BRAF/NRAS mutation status, number of metastatic sites, presence or absence of brain metastases, and LDH level was seen. Anti-PD-1 mAb could be discontinued in 6 pts with CR, without relapse to date. No unusual adverse event was recorded. Conclusions: In pts who have previously failed on anti-PD-1 mAb, obtaining with concurrent Rx and without modifying anti-PD-1 mAb, CR or PR in 30% of pts, median OS not achieved, and abscopal effect in > 1/3 of pts is probably not due only to late efficacy of anti-PD-1 mAb but suggests a synergy with RT. Release after radiation of tumor neoantigens may stimulate immune response. Hypo-fractionated radiotherapy may enhance anti-PD1 monotherapy efficacy in melanoma pts who failed on anti-PD-1 mAb. Controlled studies are needed.

Second primary melanoma in advanced melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e22025-e22025
Author(s):  
Elisa Funck-Brentano ◽  
Estelle Charvet ◽  
Louise Chaplain ◽  
Amelie Gantzer ◽  
Oula Kassem ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Monoclonal Antibodies ◽  
Metastatic Melanoma ◽  
Braf Inhibitor ◽  
Primary Melanoma ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Heterozygous Mutation ◽  
Second Primary ◽  
Exon 2 ◽  
Mutational Status ◽  
Melanoma Patients

e22025 Background: Development of a second primary melanoma (SCPM) has not been reported in melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibodies (mAb), in contrast with those reported in BRAF-inhibitor-treated patients. Our aim was to report arising SCPM in patients with advanced melanoma treated with anti-PD-1 therapy. Methods: Retrospective study, conducted in 2 referral centres, including advanced melanoma patients who developed a SCPM after anti-PD-1 mAb initiation, between September 2010 and May 2019. BRAF or NRAS mutational status was assessed by targeted NGS panels, real-time PCR, and immunohistochemistry. Results: Among a total of 509 patients treated with anti-PD-1 mAb, 4 had a SCPM (incidence: 0.8%; 95%CI: 0.02-1.57%). All patients were treated with nivolumab, in first (N = 3) or second line after progression with BRAF + MEK inhibitors (N = 1). No immune-related adverse event greater than grade 2 according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. was observed in these 4 cases; a vitiligo-like depigmentation (grade 1) was observed in two patients. The median time from the first nivolumab infusion to the SCPM diagnosis was 17.5 months (range: 5-21). All patients developed the SCPM after achieving a complete response. Nivolumab administration had been discontinued (4 months prior) in one patient. Histology revealed 4 superficial spreading melanomas (SSM): one invasive (without BRAFV600 mutation) and 3 intraepidermal melanomas (2 with a BRAFV600E mutation and one with a NRASQ61H mutation). 3 patients had risk factors for developing multiple melanomas: a dysplastic nevus syndrome, a high number of nevi (≥100 nevi), and a family history of melanoma in first-degree relatives and constitutional heterozygous mutation of exon 2 of the CDKN2A gene. Occurrence of SPCM did not alter advanced melanoma treatment. With a median follow-up of 29 months [range: 18-41] from the first anti-PD-1 mAb infusion, all patients had prolonged CR, and treatment was discontinued in all patients, without relapse after a median 11.5 months [0-18] off therapy. The median duration of nivolumab treatment was 15.5 months [10-24]. Conclusions: Although anti-PD-1 mAb could theoretically decrease the risk of developing another melanoma in metastatic melanoma patients, we found 4 such cases, highlighting the importance of regular clinical screenings for new primary melanoma in patients with metastatic melanoma even when responsive to anti-PD-1 therapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors do not totally prevent the risk of occurrence a SCPM.

scholarly journals Combined Therapy with Anti-PD1 and BRAF and/or MEK Inhibitor for Advanced Melanoma: A Multicenter Cohort Study

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 1666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra Huynh ◽  
Laurent Mortier ◽  
Caroline Dutriaux ◽  
Eve Maubec ◽  
Marie Boileau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Combined Therapy ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Braf Inhibitor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Tumor Control ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Multicenter Cohort Study ◽  
Melanoma Patients

Despite significant progress in melanoma survival, therapeutic options are still needed in case of progression under immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI), and resistance to targeted therapies (TT) in BRAF-mutated melanomas. This study aimed to assess the safety of combined ICI and TT as a rescue line in real-life clinical practice. We conducted a study within the prospective French multicentric MelBase cohort, including patients treated with a combination of anti-PD1 (pembrolizumab/nivolumab) and BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi: dabrafenib/vemurafenib) and/or MEK inhibitors (MEKi: trametinib/cobimetinib) for BRAF mutated or wild-type advanced melanoma. Fifty-nine patients were included: 30% received the triple combination, 34% an anti-PD1 and BRAFi, and 36% an anti-PD1 and MEKi. Grade 3–4 adverse events occurred in 12% of patients. Permanent discontinuation or dose reduction of one of the treatments for toxicity was reported in 14% and 7% of patients, respectively. In the BRAF wild-type subgroup, treatment with MEKi and anti-PD1 induced a tumor control rate of 83% and median progression-free survival of 7.1 months. The combination of anti-PD1 and BRAFi and/or MEKi was a safe rescue line for advanced melanoma patients previously treated with ICI/TT. The benefit of these combinations, specifically anti-PD1 and MEKi in BRAF wild-type melanoma patients, needs to be prospectively studied.

scholarly journals Association of NRAS Mutation With Clinical Outcomes of Anti-PD-1 Monotherapy in Advanced Melanoma: A Pooled Analysis of Four Asian Clinical Trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Zhou ◽  
Xuan Wang ◽  
Zhihong Chi ◽  
Xinan Sheng ◽  
Yan Kong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cutaneous Melanoma ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Wild Type ◽  
Nras Mutation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Melanoma Patients ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundAnti-PD-1 monotherapy is the standard therapy for advanced melanoma patients, including those with NRAS mutations. The influence of NRAS mutation on immunotherapy, especially in noncutaneous melanoma, is largely uncharacterized.Materials and MethodsWe analyzed clinical data of four clinical trials for advanced melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1 monotherapy between 2016 and 2019. The impact of NRAS mutation on efficacy and outcome of immunotherapy were analyzed in cutaneous and noncutaneous groups separately.ResultsA total of 206 patients were assessed, including 92 cutaneous melanoma patients with 12 NRAS mutations and 114 noncutaneous melanoma patients with 21 NRAS mutations. In cutaneous melanoma, the response rates of NRAS mutant patients were lower than patients without NRAS mutations (9.5% vs. 23.9%), the median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were shorter for patients with NRAS mutations, although without significant difference for OS (P=0.081). In noncutaneous melanoma, the response rates were 0 and 13.7% for NRAS mutant and wild-type patients, the median PFS were 3.6 months (95% CI: 0.9-6.3) and 4.3 months (95%CI: 2.9-5.7) (P=0.015), and the median OS were 10.8 months (95% CI: 1.5-20.1) and 15.3 months (95% CI: 13.2-17.4) (P=0.025), respectively. In multivariate analysis, NRAS mutation, along with ECOG performance score and LDH level, was negatively associated with both PFS (HR 1.912, P=0.044) and OS (HR 2.210, P=0.025) in noncutaneous melanoma.ConclusionIn advanced Asian melanoma treated with anti-PD-1 monotherapy, NRAS mutant patients had lower response rates and poorer prognoses compared to wild-type patients, especially in noncutaneous subtypes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document