piperidines and binimetinib

Major therapeutic advances have been made recently in the treatment of metastatic melanoma, due to the development of targeted therapies, namely BRAF and MEK inhibitors, in patients with BRAF V600 mutation. Combinations of vemurafenib+cobimetinib, dabrafenib+trametinib, et encorafenib+binimetinib, evaluated in coBRIM, COMBI-d/COMBI-v and COLUMBUS trials respectively have been approved in this indication. Toxicities induced by combination therapies are different from those reported with monotherapies, in terms of frequency and intensity. Physicians who treat melanoma patients thus face news issues relating to prevention, detection and treatment of these adverse events. This paper summarizes tolerance data from the three pivotal trials (coBRIM, COMBI-v and COLUMBUS) and issues recommendations for the specific management of main toxicities, based on experts' opinion. We discuss dermatological, ophthalmological, cardiovascular, digestive, musculoskeletal, renal and general toxicities and propose a timetable for examinations to be performed before and during treatment.

Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Carbamates; Drug Combinations; Humans; Imidazoles; Melanoma; Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Kinases; Mutation; Oximes; Piperidines; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Sulfonamides; Vemurafenib

Although a myriad of novel treatments entered the treatment paradigm for advanced melanoma, there is lack of head-to-head evidence. We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to estimate each treatment's relative effectiveness and safety.. A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted in Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane to identify all phase III randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a time frame from January 1, 2010 to March 11, 2019. We retrieved evidence on treatment-related grade III/IV adverse events, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Evidence was synthesised using a Bayesian fixed-effect NMA. Reference treatment was dacarbazine. In accordance with RCTs, dacarbazine was pooled with temozolomide, paclitaxel and paclitaxel plus carboplatin. To increase homogeneity of the study populations, RCTs were only included if patients were not previously treated with novel treatments.. The SLR identified 28 phase III RCTs involving 14,376 patients. Nineteen and seventeen treatments were included in the effectiveness and safety NMA, respectively. For PFS, dabrafenib plus trametinib (hazard ratio [HR] PFS: 0.21) and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib (HR PFS: 0.22) were identified as most favourable treatments. Both had, however, less favourable safety profiles. Five other treatments closely followed (dabrafenib [HR PFS: 0.30], nivolumab plus ipilimumab [HR PFS: 0.34], vemurafenib [HR PFS: 0.38], nivolumab [HR PFS: 0.42] and pembrolizumab [HR PFS: 0.46]). In contrast, for OS, nivolumab plus ipilimumab (HR OS: 0.39), nivolumab (HR OS: 0.46) and pembrolizumab (HR OS: 0.50) were more favourable than dabrafenib plus trametinib (HR OS: 0.55) and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib (HR OS: 0.57).. Our NMA identified the most effective treatment options for advanced melanoma and provided valuable insights into each novel treatment's relative effectiveness and safety. This information may facilitate evidence-based decision-making and may support the optimisation of treatment and outcomes in everyday clinical practice.

Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Cancer Vaccines; Carboplatin; Dacarbazine; gp100 Melanoma Antigen; Humans; Hydrazines; Imidazoles; Interleukin-2; Ipilimumab; Lenalidomide; Melanoma; Network Meta-Analysis; Nitrosourea Compounds; Nivolumab; Organophosphorus Compounds; Oximes; Paclitaxel; Piperidines; Progression-Free Survival; Proportional Hazards Models; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Skin Neoplasms; Sorafenib; Survival Rate; Temozolomide; Treatment Outcome; Vemurafenib

Tremendous progress has been made in the clinical landscape of advanced-stage. Targeted therapy with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors has become the standard of care for patients with advanced-stage

Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Carbamates; Fever; Humans; Imidazoles; Indoles; Melanoma; Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Kinases; Oximes; Piperidines; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Skin Diseases; Sulfonamides; Vemurafenib

New treatments for metastatic melanoma work through distinct mechanisms: enhancing the immune response and blocking cellular proliferation. Agents that enhance the immune response include ipilimumab, pembrolizumb, and nivolumab; agents that block cellular proliferation include vemurafenib, dabrafenib, trametinib, cobimetinib, binimetinib, and selumetinib. The translational impact of laboratory discoveries has revolutionized management of metastatic melanoma and enhanced the prognosis of affected patients.

Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Humans; Imidazoles; Immunologic Factors; Indoles; Ipilimumab; Melanoma; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Nivolumab; Oximes; Piperidines; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Skin Neoplasms; Sulfonamides; Vemurafenib

Historically, there were few effective and durable treatments for metastatic melanoma. Recently, mutation based targeted therapies have revolutionized treatment and outcomes for patients with metastatic melanoma. Specifically, inhibitors aimed at BRAF, NRAS, and C-KIT mutations are now commonly used in treatment for patients harboring the specific mutations. Areas covered: A brief review of current BRAF, NRAS, and C-KIT inhibitors provides background for a thorough review of newly developed agents namely binimetinib, a MEK inhibitor, encorafenib a BRAF inhibitor, and masitinib which inhibits C-KIT. Expert opinion: While the 3 novel agents reviewed here have potential for use in melanoma, optimal utilization will occur once a more personalized approach incorporating genomic, proteomic, and immunologic data guides therapeutic decisions.

Topics: Benzamides; Benzimidazoles; Carbamates; Humans; Melanoma; Mutation; Piperidines; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Proteomics; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-kit; Pyridines; Skin Neoplasms; Sulfonamides; Thiazoles

Cardiovascular adverse events (CVAEs) associated with BRAF inhibitors alone versus combination BRAF/MEK inhibitors are not fully understood.. This study included all adult patients who received BRAF inhibitors (vemurafenib, dabrafenib, encorafenib) or combinations BRAF/MEK inhibitors (vemurafenib/cobimetinib; dabrafenib/trametinib; encorafenib/binimetinib). We utilized the cross-sectional FDA's Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS) and longitudinal Truven Health Analytics/IBM MarketScan database from 2011 to 2018. Various CVAEs, including arterial hypertension, heart failure (HF), and venous thromboembolism (VTE), were studied using adjusted regression techniques.. In FAERS, 7752 AEs were reported (40% BRAF and 60% BRAF/MEK). Median age was 60 (IQR 49-69) years with 45% females and 97% with melanoma. Among these, 567 (7.4%) were cardiovascular adverse events (mortality rate 19%). Compared with monotherapy, combination therapy was associated with increased risk for HF (reporting odds ratio [ROR] = 1.62 (CI = 1.14-2.30); p = 0.007), arterial hypertension (ROR = 1.75 (CI = 1.12-2.89); p = 0.02) and VTE (ROR = 1.80 (CI = 1.12-2.89); p = 0.02). Marketscan had 657 patients with median age of 53 years (IQR 46-60), 39.3% female, and 88.7% with melanoma. There were 26.2% CVAEs (CI: 14.8%-36%) within 6 months of medication start in those receiving combination therapy versus 16.7% CVAEs (CI: 13.1%-20.2%) among those receiving monotherapy. Combination therapy was associated with CVAEs compared to monotherapy (adjusted HR: 1.56 (CI: 1.01-2.42); p = 0.045).. In two independent real-world cohorts, combination BRAF/MEK inhibitors were associated with increased CVAEs compared to monotherapy, especially HF, and hypertension.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Carbamates; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Cardiotoxicity; Cardiovascular Diseases; Colonic Neoplasms; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Heart Failure; Humans; Hypertension; Imidazoles; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Melanoma; Middle Aged; Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Kinases; Oximes; Piperidines; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Registries; Regression Analysis; Skin Neoplasms; Sulfonamides; Vemurafenib; Venous Thromboembolism; Young Adult

Gastrointestinal toxicities of MEK inhibitors in melanoma patients are frequent. In clinical trials, the most common digestive adverse events were nausea, vomiting, and diarrhoea. However, severe toxicities such as colitis and gastrointestinal perforation, some with fatal outcomes, have been reported. These rare but severe adverse events are not well described. We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients with stage IV and unresectable stage III melanoma treated with a MEK inhibitors at Saint-Louis Hospital, Paris, between 1 August 2013 and 15 October 2018. Among 119 patients exposed to MEK inhibitors, 78 were treated with trametinib, 19 with cobimetinib, four with binimetinib, and 18 patients with two different MEK inhibitors at separate times. All grade digestive adverse events were observed in 39 (32.7%) patients. Grade 3 and 4 adverse events occurred in 6 (5%) patients: 2 (1.7%) developed perforations, 3 (2.5%) had colitis and 1 (0.8%) had grade 4 diarrhoea. These adverse events were all reversible following a permanent discontinuation of the MEK inhibitors, or a temporary interruption followed by resumption at a dose lower than conventional posology. There were no fatal outcomes; however one patient had a permanent ileostomy. The mechanism underlying these toxicities is not well known. Clinicians should be aware of such toxicities.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Antineoplastic Agents; Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Databases, Factual; Enzyme Inhibitors; Female; Gastrointestinal Tract; Humans; Male; MAP Kinase Kinase 1; Melanoma; Middle Aged; Piperidines; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Retrospective Studies; Skin Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome

Targeted therapies for cancers are fast-growing therapies. For instance kinase inhibitors such as BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) and MEK inhibitors (MEKi) are increasingly used to treat malignant melanoma. The metabolic profile of these drugs can result in great interindividual variability, justifying therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). We describe a rapid and specific method for quantification of 2 BRAFi (vemurafenib, dabrafenib) and 3 MEKi (cobimetinib, trametinib and binimetinib). Chromatography was performed on a Waters Acquity-UPLC system with CORTECS C18+ column, under a gradient of 10% acetic acid in water/acetonitrile. An Acquity-TQD® with electrospray ionization was used for detection. Samples were prepared by solid phase extraction (Oasis® MCX microElution) before injection in the system. Calibration curves ranges from 0.4 to 100μg/ml for vemurafenib, from 1 to 1000ng/ml for dabrafenib, from 0.5 to 500ng/ml for cobimetinib and binimetinib, and from 0.75 to 250ng/ml for trametinib. At all concentrations the bias was within ±15% of the nominal concentrations and precision was ≤15%. All results were within the acceptance criteria of the EMA guidelines on method validation. This rapid, sensitive and specific UPLC-MS/MS method can perform simultaneous quantification of targeted therapies used in malignant melanoma and is usable for routine TDM.

Topics: Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid; Humans; Imidazoles; Indoles; Limit of Detection; Linear Models; Melanoma; Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Kinases; Oximes; Piperidines; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Sulfonamides; Tandem Mass Spectrometry; Vemurafenib

To investigate the clinical and morphologic characteristics of serous retinal disturbances in patients taking mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase (MEK) inhibitors.. A total of 313 fluid foci in 50 eyes of 25 patients receiving MEK inhibitors for treatment of their metastatic cancer, who had evidence of serous retinal detachments confirmed by optical coherence tomography (OCT).. Single-center, retrospective cohort study.. Clinical examination and OCT were used to evaluate MEK inhibitor-associated subretinal fluid. The morphology, distribution, and location of fluid foci were serially evaluated for each eye. Choroidal thickness was measured at each time point (baseline, fluid accumulation, and fluid resolution). Two independent observers performed all measurements. Statistical analysis was used to correlate interobserver findings and compare choroidal thickness and visual acuity at each time point.. Comparison of OCT characteristics of retinal abnormalities at baseline to fluid accumulation.. The majority of patients had fluid foci that were bilateral (92%) and multifocal (77%) and at least 1 focus involving the fovea (83.3%). All fluid foci occurred between the interdigitation zone and an intact retinal pigment epithelium. The 313 fluid foci were classified into 4 morphologies, as follows: 231 (73.8%) dome, 36 (11.5%) caterpillar, 31 (9.9%) wavy, and 15 (4.8%) splitting. Best-corrected visual acuity at fluid resolution was not statistically different from baseline; and no eye lost more than 2 Snellen lines from baseline at the time of fluid accumulation. There was no statistical difference in the choroidal thickness between the different time points (baseline, fluid accumulation, and fluid resolution). A strong positive interobserver correlation was obtained for choroidal thickness measurements (r = 0.97, P < 0.0001) and grading of foci morphology (r = 0.97, P < 0.0001).. The subretinal fluid foci associated with MEK inhibitors have unique clinical and morphologic characteristics, which can be distinguished from the findings of central serous chorioretinopathy. In this series, MEK inhibitors did not cause irreversible loss of vision or serious eye damage.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antineoplastic Agents; Azetidines; Benzimidazoles; Central Serous Chorioretinopathy; Female; Fluorescein Angiography; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Kinases; Neoplasms; Piperidines; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Retinal Detachment; Retrospective Studies; Subretinal Fluid; Tomography, Optical Coherence; Visual Acuity; Young Adult