Dataset Information

Fatal gastrointestinal toxicity with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination in a melanoma patient achieving pathological complete response.

ABSTRACT: Approximately 50% of metastatic melanoma patients harbor BRAF mutations. Several treatment options including the combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi) and immunotherapy (mainly anti CTLA-4 and anti PD-1 antibodies), have been shown to improve survival in these patients. Although preclinical data support the synergistic effect of both modalities in combination, data confirming the activity and tolerability of these combinations are not yet available in the clinical setting. Herein, we report the case of a melanoma patient treated with sequential BRAF/MEKi (dabrafenib plus trametinib) followed by the anti CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab who achieved a pathological complete response. Unfortunately, the patient died due to fatal gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity. Analysis of the BRAFV600E mutation in circulating tumoral DNA (ctDNA) from peripheral blood samples and serial tumor tissue biopsies throughout treatment demonstrated a good correlation with clinical evolution.

SUBMITTER: Gonzalez-Cao M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5302939 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Fatal gastrointestinal toxicity with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination in a melanoma patient achieving pathological complete response.

Gonzalez-Cao Maria M Boada Aram A Teixidó Cristina C Fernandez-Figueras María Teresa MT Mayo Clara C Tresserra Francesc F Bustamante Jean J Viteri Santiago S Puertas Enrique E Santarpia Mariacarmela M Riso Aldo A Barron Feliciano F Karachaliou Niki N Rosell Rafael R

Oncotarget 20160801 35

Approximately 50% of metastatic melanoma patients harbor BRAF mutations. Several treatment options including the combination of BRAF and MEK inhibitors (BRAF/MEKi) and immunotherapy (mainly anti CTLA-4 and anti PD-1 antibodies), have been shown to improve survival in these patients. Although preclinical data support the synergistic effect of both modalities in combination, data confirming the activity and tolerability of these combinations are not yet available in the clinical setting. Herein, w ...[more]

PMID: 27447748

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundApproved first-line treatments for patients with BRAF V600-mutant advanced melanoma include nivolumab (a programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor) plus ipilimumab (a cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 inhibitor; NIVO+IPI) and the BRAF/MEK inhibitors dabrafenib plus trametinib (DAB+TRAM), encorafenib plus binimetinib (ENCO+BINI), and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib (VEM+COBI). Results from prospective randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing these treatments have not yet been reported. This analysis evaluated the relative efficacy and safety of NIVO+IPI versus DAB+TRAM, ENCO+BINI, and VEM+COBI in patients with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma using a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC).Patients and methodsA systematic literature review identified RCTs for DAB+TRAM, ENCO+BINI, and VEM+COBI in patients with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma. Individual patient-level data for NIVO+IPI were derived from the phase III CheckMate 067 trial (BRAF-mutant cohort) and restricted to match the inclusion/exclusion criteria of the comparator trials. Treatment effects for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards and time-varying hazard ratio (HR) models. Safety outcomes (grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events) with NIVO+IPI and the comparators were compared.ResultsIn the Cox proportional hazards analysis, NIVO+IPI showed improved OS compared with DAB+TRAM (HR = 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-0.73), ENCO+BINI (HR = 0.60; CI, 0.42-0.85), and VEM+COBI (HR = 0.50; CI, 0.36-0.70) for the overall study period. In the time-varying analysis, NIVO+IPI was associated with significant improvements in OS and PFS compared with the BRAF/MEK inhibitors 12 months after treatment initiation. There were no significant differences between NIVO+IPI and BRAF/MEK inhibitor treatment from 0 to 12 months. Safety outcomes favored DAB+TRAM over NIVO+IPI, whereas NIVO+IPI was comparable to VEM+COBI.ConclusionResults of this MAIC demonstrated durable OS and PFS benefits for patients with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma treated with NIVO+IPI compared with BRAF/MEK inhibitors, with the greatest benefits noted after 12 months.

Project description:IntroductionImmunotherapy has revolutionized metastatic Melanoma therapy. The most active regimen is combination therapy of Ipilimumab-Nivolumab (Ipi-Nivo) with response rates (RR) of ~60% and median overall survival (OS) of ~6 years. Immune-related adverse events (irAE) are common (~60% develop grade 3-4) and pose a challenge when treating frail patients. We sought to examine whether Ipi-Nivo therapy is feasible in elderly metastatic melanoma patients.MethodsElectronic records of patients treated at the Ella Lemelbaum Institute with Ipi-Nivo between the years 2017-2021 were screened for age. Elderly patients were defined as age 75 and older (group A) and were matched with records of patients age <75 (group B). Records were analyzed for baseline parameters, immunotherapy regimen, RR, toxicity and progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsTwenty-six relevant patients age >75 (median 77) were identified and were matched to 34 younger patients (median age 57). No statistically significant differences were noted in terms of baseline parameters except for BRAF mutation status (group A 15%, group B 47%, p=0.008). Response rate in group A was 38% and is consistent with previously published data. Median PFS was the same for both groups (A = 5.5 months, B= 7.5 months, p=NS). Treatment was similarly tolerated: 35% of group A patients completed 4 cycles of therapy compared to 28% for group B (p=NS). Grade 2-4 irAE were the same (A=58%, B=66%, p=NS) and there was no difference in the need for hospitalization for G3-4 events between the groups. (A=63%, B=69%, p=NS). Further division into 4 age groups (>80 vs 75-79 in group A and 65-74 vs <65 in group B) found no difference in terms of response rate or G3-4 toxicity.ConclusionIpilimumab-Nivolumab combination therapy in elderly metastatic Melanoma patients seems to be well tolerated and efficient in selected elderly patients based on performance status and comorbidities, just as in younger patients. This regimen seems to be a feasible treatment option for this age group.

Project description:Purpose/Objectives Combination BRAF (vemurafenib, dabrafenib, or encorafenib) plus MEK (trametinib, cobimetinib, or binimetinib) inhibitor therapy is now widely used in the treatment of metastatic melanoma. However, data for intracranial response to these drugs are limited. We aimed to evaluate the intracranial efficacy of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors in patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma with brain metastases (BM) and to determine patterns of failure of these new agents to inform optimal integration of local intracranial therapy. Materials and methods We retrospectively reviewed charts of patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma with metastasis to the brain with at least one untreated brain metastasis at the time of initiation of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors at our institution from 2006 to 2020. We collected per-patient and per-lesion data on demographics, treatment modality, and outcomes. The cumulative incidence of local (LF), distant intracranial (DF), and extracranial failure (EF) were calculated with competing risk analysis with death as a competing risk and censored at the last brain MRI follow-up. LF was calculated on a per-lesion basis while DF and EF were calculated on a per-patient basis. DF was defined as any new intracranial lesions. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors for LF. Results We identified 10 patients with 63 untreated brain metastases. The median age was 50.5 years. The median sum of the diameters of the five largest untreated brain metastases per patient was 20 mm (interquartile range 15-39 mm) and the median diameter for all measurable lesions was 4 mm. Median follow-up time was 9.0 months (range 1.4 months-46.2 months). Median OS was 13.6 months. The one-year cumulative incidence of LF, DF, and EF was 17.1%, 88.6, and 71.4%, respectively. The median time to LF, DF, and EF from the start of BRAF plus MEK inhibitors was 9.0 months, 4.7 months, and 7.0 months, respectively. The larger size of the BM was associated with LF on univariate analysis (odds ratio 1.13 per 1 mm increase in diameter, 95% confidence interval 1.019 to 1.308, p<0.02). Two (20%) patients eventually received stereotactic radiosurgery, and 2 (20%) received whole-brain radiotherapy for intracranial progression. Conclusion Although patients with BRAF-mutant melanoma with BM had fair local control on BRAF plus MEK inhibitors, the competing risk of death and distant intracranial and extracranial progression was high. Patients with larger brain metastases may benefit from local therapy.

Project description:BackgroundResistance to therapy with BRAF kinase inhibitors is associated with reactivation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway. To address this problem, we conducted a phase 1 and 2 trial of combined treatment with dabrafenib, a selective BRAF inhibitor, and trametinib, a selective MAPK kinase (MEK) inhibitor.MethodsIn this open-label study involving 247 patients with metastatic melanoma and BRAF V600 mutations, we evaluated the pharmacokinetic activity and safety of oral dabrafenib (75 or 150 mg twice daily) and trametinib (1, 1.5, or 2 mg daily) in 85 patients and then randomly assigned 162 patients to receive combination therapy with dabrafenib (150 mg) plus trametinib (1 or 2 mg) or dabrafenib monotherapy. The primary end points were the incidence of cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma, survival free of melanoma progression, and response. Secondary end points were overall survival and pharmacokinetic activity.ResultsDose-limiting toxic effects were infrequently observed in patients receiving combination therapy with 150 mg of dabrafenib and 2 mg of trametinib (combination 150/2). Cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma was seen in 7% of patients receiving combination 150/2 and in 19% receiving monotherapy (P=0.09), whereas pyrexia was more common in the combination 150/2 group than in the monotherapy group (71% vs. 26%). Median progression-free survival in the combination 150/2 group was 9.4 months, as compared with 5.8 months in the monotherapy group (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.25 to 0.62; P<0.001). The rate of complete or partial response with combination 150/2 therapy was 76%, as compared with 54% with monotherapy (P=0.03).ConclusionsDabrafenib and trametinib were safely combined at full monotherapy doses. The rate of pyrexia was increased with combination therapy, whereas the rate of proliferative skin lesions was nonsignificantly reduced. Progression-free survival was significantly improved. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01072175.).

Dataset Information

Fatal gastrointestinal toxicity with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination in a melanoma patient achieving pathological complete response.

Publications

Fatal gastrointestinal toxicity with ipilimumab after BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination in a melanoma patient achieving pathological complete response.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets