Dataset Information

Molecular Landscape of BRAF-Mutant NSCLC Reveals an Association Between Clonality and Driver Mutations and Identifies Targetable Non-V600 Driver Mutations.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Approximately 4% of NSCLC harbor BRAF mutations, and approximately 50% of these are non-V600 mutations. Treatment of tumors harboring non-V600 mutations is challenging because of functional heterogeneity and lack of knowledge regarding their clinical significance and response to targeted agents.

Methods

We conducted an integrative analysis of BRAF non-V600 mutations using genomic profiles of BRAF-mutant NSCLC from the Guardant360 database. BRAF mutations were categorized by clonality and class (1 and 2: RAS-independent; 3: RAS-dependent). Cell viability assays were performed in Ba/F3 models. Drug screens were performed in NSCLC cell lines.

Results

A total of 305 unique BRAF mutations were identified. Missense mutations were most common (276, 90%), and 45% were variants of unknown significance. F468S and N581Y were identified as novel activating mutations. Class 1 to 3 mutations had higher clonality than mutations of unknown class (p < 0.01). Three patients were treated with MEK with or without BRAF inhibitors. Patients harboring G469V and D594G mutations did not respond, whereas a patient with the L597R mutation had a durable response. Trametinib with or without dabrafenib, LXH254, and lifirafenib had more potent inhibition of BRAF non-V600-mutant NSCLC cell lines than other MEK, BRAF, and ERK inhibitors, comparable with the inhibition of BRAF V600E cell line.

Conclusions

In BRAF-mutant NSCLC, clonality is higher in known functional mutations and may allow identification of variants of unknown significance that are more likely to be oncogenic drivers. Our data indicate that certain non-V600 mutations are responsive to MEK and BRAF inhibitors. This integration of genomic profiling and drug sensitivity may guide the treatment for BRAF-mutant NSCLC.

SUBMITTER: Negrao MV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7529990 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Resistance 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.In 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.Dose-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).Dabrafenib 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.).

Project description:BACKGROUND:BRAF and MEK inhibitors are approved for BRAF V600-mutated advanced melanoma, with response rates of up to 70%. Responses to targeted therapies have also been observed for diverse non-V600 BRAF alterations. Thus, sensitive, accurate, and broad detection of BRAF alterations is critical to match patients with available targeted therapies. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Pathology reports were reviewed for 385 consecutive melanoma cases with BRAF mutations or rearrangements identified using a hybrid capture-based next-generation sequencing comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) assay during the course of clinical care. RESULTS:Records of prior BRAF molecular testing were available for 79 (21%) cases. Of cases with BRAF V600 mutations, 11/57 (19%) with available data were negative by prior BRAF testing. Prior negative BRAF results were also identified in 16/20 (80%) cases with non-V600 mutations, 2 of which harbored multiple BRAF alterations, and in 2/2 (100%) cases with activating BRAF fusions. Clinical outcomes for a subset of patients are presented. CONCLUSION:CGP identifies diverse activating BRAF alterations in a significant fraction of cases with prior negative testing. Given the proven clinical benefit of BRAF/MEK inhibitors in BRAF-mutated melanoma, CGP should be considered for patients with metastatic melanoma, particularly if other testing is negative. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE:Published guidelines for melanoma treatment recommend BRAF mutational analysis, but little guidance is provided as to selection criteria for testing methodologies, or as to clinical implications for non-V600 alterations. This study found that hybrid capture-based next-generation sequencing can detect BRAF alterations in samples from a significant fraction of patients with advanced melanoma with prior negative BRAF results. This study highlights the need for oncologists and pathologists to be critically aware of coverage and sensitivity limitations of various assays, particularly regarding non-V600E alterations, of which many are potentially targetable.