Advertisement

Pathology & Oncology Research

, Volume 25, Issue 1, pp 45–50 | Cite as

Efficacy of Vemurafenib Treatment in 43 Metastatic Melanoma Patients with BRAF Mutation. Single-Institute Retrospective Analysis, Early Real-Life Survival Data

  • Kata CzirbeszEmail author
  • Eszter Gorka
  • Tímea Balatoni
  • Gitta Pánczél
  • Krisztina Melegh
  • Péter Kovács
  • András Gézsi
  • Gabriella Liszkay
Original Article

Abstract

BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib achieved improved overall survival over chemotherapy and have been approved by the FDA and EMA for the treatment of BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma. The aim of our retrospective analysis was to determine the efficacy and safety of vemurafenib therapy for BRAF mutated metastatic melanoma and subsequently to prove the clinical benefit for the studied 43 patients, based on real-life data. From November 2012 to October 2015 we have selected 43 BRAF mutated, metastatic melanoma patients, treated with vemurafenib. The median follow-up time was 15.9 months. We evaluated progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicities. According to the AJCC staging system 70% of the patients had stage M1c metastasis, including 6 with stable brain metastasis. Objective responses were noted in 51.1%, the disease control rate was achieved in 79% of the patients. Complete responses were attained by 5 patients (11.6%). Median PFS was 6.48 (95% CI:4.8–15.0) months, median OS was 11.47 (95% CI:8.08-NA) months. We found significant association between LDH level and OS in univariate (p = 0.000613) and multivariate analysis (p = 0.0168). The most common adverse events (AEs) included follicular hyperkeratosis, rash, arthralgia and photosensitivity. Grade 3 AEs, such as cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma, QTcB interval prolongation, rash, arthralgia were reported in 7 patients (17%). We had no Grade 4 side effects. Similar to the previously published data our analysis confirms the improved survival with vemurafenib treatment (11.47 months) in patients with BRAF V600 mutation. Vemurafenib therapy was well tolerated, the AE profile was almost consistent with the previously reported data of randomised clinical trials.

Keywords

Vemurafenib Melanoma LDH level Targeted therapy Treatment Survival 

References

  1. 1.
    Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A (2015) Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 65:5–29.  https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21254 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tsao H, Atkins MB, Sober AJ (2004) Management of cutaneous melanoma. N Engl J Med 351(10):998–1012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hodi FS, O'Day SJ, McDermott DF, Weber RW et al (2010) Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 363(8):711–723 Erratum in: N Engl J Med. 363(13):1290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chapman PB, Hauschild A, Robert C et al (2011) Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. N Engl J Med 364:2507–2516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McArthur GA, Chapman PB, Robert C et al (2014) 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. Lancet Oncol 15(3):323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al (2009) New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 45:228–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hauschild A et al (2012) Dabrafenib in BRAF-mutated metastatuc melanoma:a multicentre, open-label, phase 3 randomized controlled trial. Lancet 9839:358–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Flaherty KT, Puzanov I, Kim KB, Ribas A, McArthur GA et al (2010) Inhibition of Mutated, Activated BRAF in Metastatic Melanoma. N Engl J Med 363:809–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sosman JA, Kevin MD et al (2012) Survival in BRAF V600-Mutant Advanced Melanoma Treated with Vemurafenib. N Engl J Med 366:707–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Asić K (2016) Dominant mechanisms of primary resistance differ from dominat mechanisms of secondary resistance to target therapies. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 97:178–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Trunzer K, Pavlick AC, Sosman JA, Ribas A et al (2013) Pharmacodynamic effects and mechanisms of resistance to vemurafenib in patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol 31(14):1767–1774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rinderknecht JD, Goldinger SM et al (2013) RASopathic Skin Eruptions during Vemurafenib Therapy. PlosOne 8(10)  https://doi.org/10.1371/annotation/d884b668-04f7-4ae6-96a3-a199df5b43be. 2013 March 14
  13. 13.
    Zimmer L, Livingstone E, Hillen U, Domkes S, Becker A et al (2012) Panniculitis with arthralgia in patients with melanoma treated with selective BRAF inhibitors and its management. Arch Dermatol 148(3):357–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Manzano Jose L, Layos L et al (2016) Resistant mechanisms to BRAF inhibitors in melanoma. Ann Transl Med 4(12):237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Larkin J, Ascierto PA, Dreno B et al (2014) Combined vemurafenib and cobimetinib in BRAF-mutated melanoma. N Engl J Med 371:1867–1876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ascierto PA, McArthur et al (2016) Cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib in advanced BRAF V600 -mutant melanoma (coBRIM): updated efficacy results from a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 17:1248–1260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Long G et al (2015) Dabrafenib and trametinib versus dabrafenib and placebo for Val 600 BRAF-mutant melanoma: a multicentre, double-blind, phase 3 randomised, controlled trial. Lancet 386:444–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Robert C, Karaszewska B, Schachter J et al (2015) Improved overall survival in melanoma combined dabrafenib and trametinib. N Engl J Med 372:30–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Arányi Lajos Foundation 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of DermatooncologyNational Institute of OncologyBudapestHungary
  2. 2.Department of Genetics, Cell- and ImmunbiologySemmelweis UniversityBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations