gdc-0973 and Neoplasm-Metastasis

IMspire150 aimed to evaluate first-line combination treatment with BRAF plus MEK inhibitors and immune checkpoint therapy in BRAF. IMspire150 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study done at 112 institutes in 20 countries. Patients with unresectable stage IIIc-IV, BRAF. Between Jan 13, 2017, and April 26, 2018, 777 patients were screened and 514 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the atezolizumab group (n=256) or control group (n=258). At a median follow-up of 18·9 months (IQR 10·4-23·8), progression-free survival as assessed by the study investigator was significantly prolonged with atezolizumab versus control (15·1 vs 10·6 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0·78; 95% CI 0·63-0·97; p=0·025). Common treatment-related adverse events (>30%) in the atezolizumab and control groups were blood creatinine phosphokinase increased (51·3% vs 44·8%), diarrhoea (42·2% vs 46·6%), rash (40·9%, both groups), arthralgia (39·1% vs 28·1%), pyrexia (38·7% vs 26·0%), alanine aminotransferase increased (33·9% vs 22·8%), and lipase increased (32·2% vs 27·4%); 13% of patients in the atezolizumab group and 16% in the control group stopped all treatment because of adverse events.. The addition of atezolizumab to targeted therapy with vemurafenib and cobimetinib was safe and tolerable and significantly increased progression-free survival in patients with BRAF. F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; Melanoma; Middle Aged; Mutation; Neoplasm Metastasis; Neoplasm Staging; Piperidines; Progression-Free Survival; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Vemurafenib

Topics: Aged; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; CTLA-4 Antigen; Disease-Free Survival; Female; Humans; Imidazoles; Immunotherapy; Ipilimumab; Male; Melanoma; Middle Aged; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Mutation; Neoplasm Metastasis; Nivolumab; Oximes; Piperidines; Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Treatment Outcome; Vemurafenib

The combination of cobimetinib with vemurafenib improves progression-free survival compared with placebo and vemurafenib in previously untreated patients with BRAF(V600)-mutant advanced melanoma, as previously reported in the coBRIM study. In this Article, we report updated efficacy results, including overall survival and safety after longer follow-up, and selected biomarker correlative studies.. In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre study, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed BRAF(V600) mutation-positive unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive response system to receive cobimetinib (60 mg once daily for 21 days followed by a 7-day rest period in each 28-day cycle) or placebo, in combination with oral vemurafenib (960 mg twice daily). Progression-free and overall survival were primary and secondary endpoints, respectively; all analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01689519, and is ongoing but no longer recruiting participants.. Between Jan 8, 2013, and Jan 31, 2014, 495 eligible adult patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the cobimetinib plus vemurafenib group (n=247) or placebo plus vemurafenib group (n=248). At a median follow-up of 14·2 months (IQR 8·5-17·3), the updated investigator-assessed median progression-free survival was 12·3 months (95% CI 9·5-13·4) for cobimetinib and vemurafenib versus 7·2 months (5·6-7·5) for placebo and vemurafenib (HR 0·58 [95% CI 0·46-0·72], p<0·0001). The final analysis for overall survival occurred when 255 (52%) patients had died (Aug 28, 2015). Median overall survival was 22·3 months (95% CI 20·3-not estimable) for cobimetinib and vemurafenib versus 17·4 months (95% CI 15·0-19·8) for placebo and vemurafenib (HR 0·70, 95% CI 0·55-0·90; p=0·005). The safety profile for cobimetinib and vemurafenib was tolerable and manageable, and no new safety signals were observed with longer follow-up. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events occurring at a higher frequency in patients in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group compared with the vemurafenib group were γ-glutamyl transferase increase (36 [15%] in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group vs 25 [10%] in the placebo and vemurafenib group), blood creatine phosphokinase increase (30 [12%] vs one [<1%]), and alanine transaminase increase (28 [11%] vs 15 [6%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 92 patients (37%) in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 69 patients (28%) in the vemurafenib group. Pyrexia (six patients [2%]) and dehydration (five patients [2%]) were the most common serious adverse events reported in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group. A total of 259 patients have died: 117 (47%) in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 142 (58%) in the vemurafenib group. The primary cause of death was disease progression in most patients: 109 (93%) of 117 in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 133 (94%) of 142 in the vemurafenib group.. These data confirm the clinical benefit of cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib and support the use of the combination as a standard first-line approach to improve survival in patients with advanced BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma.. F Hoffmann-La Roche-Genentech.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; Biomarkers, Tumor; Double-Blind Method; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Indoles; Male; Melanoma; Middle Aged; Mutation; Neoplasm Metastasis; Neoplasm Staging; Piperidines; Prognosis; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Skin Neoplasms; Sulfonamides; Survival Rate; Vemurafenib; Young Adult

In the IMspire150 trial, triplet treatment with atezolizumab and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with vemurafenib plus cobimetinib alone for treatment of BRAF V600 variation metastatic melanoma. However, considering high cost of this combination, it is unclear if the incremental cost is worth the additional survival benefit.. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib vs vemurafenib plus cobimetinib alone in patients with newly diagnosed unresectable BRAF V600 variation metastatic melanoma from the US health care perspective.. This economic evaluation study used a 3-state partitioned survival model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the combination of atezolizumab with vemurafenib plus cobimetinib vs vemurafenib plus cobimetinib alone. The observed Kaplan-Meier curves for overall survival and PFS were digitized from the IMspire150 trial (January 2017-April 2018) and the long-term survivals (over a lifetime horizon) beyond the end of the trial were extrapolated using 7 different survival models. The cost and health preference data were collected from a literature review. This study was performed from March 2021 through June 2021.. The outcomes of interest were expected life-years (LYs) gained and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as cost per LYs and per QALYs saved.. Adding atezolizumab to vemurafenib and cobimetinib provided an additional 3.267 QALYs compared with the doublet regimen of vemurafenib plus cobimetinib, at an ICER of $271 669 per QALY, which is not considered cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $150 000 per QALY. However, the scenario analyses found that atezolizumab combined with vemurafenib plus cobimetinib could be cost-effective at 20-year (ICER, $121 432 per QALY) and 30-year ($98 092 per QALY) time horizons when both strategies were stopped after 2 years of treatments, and over a lifetime horizon ($122 220 per QALY) when only immunotherapy with atezolizumab was stopped after 2 years of treatment.. These findings suggest that the atezolizumab and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib regimen provides significant survival benefits over vemurafenib plus cobimetinib alone, and a price reduction would be encouraged to maximize the value of its survival gain.

Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Humans; Immunotherapy; Melanoma; Neoplasm Metastasis; Piperidines; Progression-Free Survival; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Vemurafenib

New primary melanomas (NPMs) in the era of combination treatments for melanoma constitute a challenge for physicians, especially due to the increased incidence of NPMs in patients treated with BRAF inhibitors. We present the unique case of a patient that developed an invasive NPM while under treatment with a combination of vemurafenib, cobimetinib, and atezolizumab. A 39-year-old white male was treated with vemurafenib, cobimetinib, and atezolizumab for a stage IV (T0, N3, M1) BRAF-V600E mutated malignant melanoma in the context of a clinical trial. Eight months from treatment initiation he was diagnosed with an NPM on his back that was found to be BRAF-wild type and neuroblastoma ras mutated, while he was in complete remission. Wide excision of the lesion followed, and the patient was not withdrawn from study treatment. Twenty-two months from treatment initiation, he is still in complete remission. NPMs are a well-known adverse effect of BRAF inhibitors and pose a challenge for the treating physician since these lesions are BRAF-wild type and usually have aggressive biologic behaviour. Invasive NPMs require an aggressive management strategy with clear guidelines to prevent the emergence of advanced or metastatic disease. The emergence of invasive NPMs in patients treated with triple regimens with BRAF/mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase inhibitors and PD1/PDL1 inhibitors is at least unexpected and constitutes a therapeutic stalemate for the physician. Through this case report, we aim to increase awareness about the diagnosis and management of patients with NPM and to express our concerns regarding further management of NPMs in patients under triple combination treatment.

Topics: Adult; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; Humans; Male; Melanoma; Neoplasm Metastasis; Piperidines; Skin Neoplasms; Vemurafenib

Prognostic models may provide insight into clinical trial results and inform the clinical management of patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma.. To identify subgroups with distinct survival outcomes based on clinical and genomic characteristics and to assess survival in identified prognostic subgroups across cohorts treated with dacarbazine, vemurafenib, or cobimetinib plus vemurafenib.. This retrospective and exploratory recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) modeled associations between prespecified covariates and survival outcomes using pooled data from the BRIM-2, BRIM-3, BRIM-7, and coBRIM studies.. Dacarbazine, vemurafenib, or cobimetinib plus vemurafenib.. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.. The RPA included 1365 patients (783 men; 57.4%). Of these, 1032 (75.6%) were older than 65 years; 310 received cobimetinib plus vemurafenib; 717, vemurafenib alone; and 338, dacarbazine. Median follow-up was 14.1 months (interquartile range, 6.3-28.3 months). In the RPA that included all patients, baseline lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), presence or absence of liver metastases, and baseline sum of longest diameters of target lesions (SLDs) were significant prognostic factors for PFS: Median PFS was longest in patients with lower LDH (≤2 × upper limit of normal [ULN]), ECOG PS 0, and shorter SLD (≤44 mm) (11.1 months; 95% CI, 7.0-18.4 months), and shortest in those with elevated LDH (>2 × ULN) (3.5 months; 95% CI, 3.0-3.8 months). The subgroup with normal baseline LDH and no liver metastases had the longest median OS (22.7 months; 95% CI, 20.3-27.2 months). Similar PFS trends were observed when these prognostic subgroups were applied to the cobimetinib plus vemurafenib, vemurafenib alone, and dacarbazine cohorts. Baseline LDH, ECOG PS, and SLD were significant prognostic factors for OS: Median OS was longest in patients with normal LDH and shorter SLD (≤45 mm) (27.2 months; 95% CI, 22.1-32.1 months) and shortest in those with elevated LDH (>2 × ULN) (6.0 months; 95% CI, 5.3-6.8 months). Among patients in the most favorable subgroup (normal LDH and SLD ≤45 mm), 3-year OS rates were 53.3% (95% CI, 39.5%-67.1%) in the cobimetinib plus vemurafenib cohort, 35.6% (95% CI, 27.4%-43.8%) in the vemurafenib cohort, and 35.6% (95% CI, 24.8%-46.4%) in the dacarbazine cohort. Among patients with available gene expression data, RPA identified gene signature as a significant prognostic factor for PFS in those with normal LDH; 3-year PFS rates were 21.9%, (95% CI, 15.4%-28.4%) and 8.8% (95% CI, 3.6%-14.1%) in immune and cell cycle signature, respectively. The RPA for OS did not identify gene signature as a significant factor.. Baseline LDH, ECOG PS, disease burden, and gene signature appear to be key determinants of survival outcomes in patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma treated with BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors. These results are consistent with survival benefits of cobimetinib plus vemurafenib over vemurafenib alone observed in the coBRIM study.

Topics: Aged; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; Dacarbazine; Female; Humans; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; Melanoma; Middle Aged; Mutation; Neoplasm Metastasis; Piperidines; Prognosis; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retrospective Studies; Skin Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome; Vemurafenib

BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) and MEK inhibitors (MEKi) are among the cornerstones of metastatic melanoma therapy demonstrating excellent response rates with duration of 7-12 m. Long-term benefit from these agents was reported in patients with normal lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and less than three disease sites. However, a treatment-dependent marker for long-term efficacy is lacking. Data suggest that immune-related adverse events (irAEs) are associated with clinical benefit in patients treated with immunotherapy and that response to BRAF/MEK therapy may have an underlying immune mechanism. We hypothesised that AEs with an underlying immune mechanism may be associated with a durable response to targeted therapy. We retrospectively identified a cohort of 78 BRAF V600-mutant metastatic melanoma patients treated with BRAFi or BRAFi + MEKi between November 2010 and November 2013. Four treatment-related AEs including vitiligo, uveitis, erythema nodosum and keratitis sicca were defined as irAEs of interest. Retrospective analysis of AEs in relationship to progression-free survival (PFS), disease burden and LDH levels was performed. Median PFS (mPFS) for all patients was 7.5 months with responses ongoing in eight patients as of April 2017. Ten patients were identified with the AEs defined previously. Cox regression analysis revealed a very strong association between those AEs and PFS; mPFS was 42.8 m in patients with at least one AE versus 6.1 m in those without an AE (hazard ratio [HR] 0.22, p = 0.002). This association was independent of LDH levels and disease burden (HR 0.24, p = 0.035). This analysis demonstrates a strong association between immune AEs and durable response to targeted therapy and may provide a treatment-related biomarker to estimate the outcome of therapy.

Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Arthralgia; Azetidines; Female; Humans; Imidazoles; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Male; MAP Kinase Kinase 1; Melanoma; Middle Aged; Mutation; Neoplasm Metastasis; Oximes; Piperidines; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Retrospective Studies; Skin Diseases; Skin Neoplasms; Vemurafenib; Young Adult

Metastatic melanoma is an aggressive form of skin cancer with a high mortality rate and the fastest growing global incidence rate of all malignancies. The introduction of BRAF/MEK inhibitor combinations has yielded significant increases in PFS and OS for melanoma. However, at present, no direct comparisons between different BRAF/MEK combinations have been conducted. In light of this, an indirect treatment comparison was performed between two BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination therapies for metastatic melanoma, dabrafenib plus trametinib and vemurafenib plus cobimetinib, in order to understand the relative efficacy and toxicity profiles of these therapies.. A systematic literature search identified two randomized trials as suitable for indirect comparison: the coBRIM trial of vemurafenib plus cobimetinib versus vemurafenib and the COMBI-v trial of dabrafenib plus trametinib versus vemurafenib. The comparison followed the method of Bucher et al. and analyzed both efficacy (overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS], and overall response rate [ORR]) and safety outcomes (adverse events [AEs]).. The indirect comparison revealed similar efficacy outcomes between both therapies, with no statistically significant difference between therapies for OS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 - 1.30), PFS (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.79 - 1.40), or ORR (risk ratio [RR] 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 - 1.10). Dabrafenib plus trametinib differed significantly from vemurafenib plus cobimetinib with regard to the incidence of treatment-related AE (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.87 - 0.97), any AE grade ≥3 (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.60 - 0.85) or dose interruption/modification (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 - 0.99). Several categories of AEs occurred significantly more frequently with vemurafenib plus cobimetinib, while some occurred significantly more frequently with dabrafenib plus trametinib. For severe AEs (grade 3 or above), four occurred significantly more frequently with vemurafenib plus cobimetinib and no severe AE occurred significantly more frequently with dabrafenib plus trametinib.. This indirect treatment comparison suggested that dabrafenib plus trametinib had comparable efficacy to vemurafenib plus cobimetinib but was associated with reduced adverse events.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Azetidines; Female; Humans; Imidazoles; Indoles; Male; Melanoma; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Metastasis; Oximes; Piperidines; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sulfonamides; Treatment Outcome; Vemurafenib; Young Adult

Topics: Azetidines; Drug Interactions; Humans; MAP Kinase Kinase 1; Melanoma; Neoplasm Metastasis; Piperidines; Skin Neoplasms; Survival Rate

Topics: Antibodies, Monoclonal; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Azetidines; Chemotherapy, Adjuvant; Drug Discovery; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Imidazoles; Indoles; Ipilimumab; MAP Kinase Kinase 1; MAP Kinase Kinase 2; Melanoma; Molecular Targeted Therapy; Neoplasm Metastasis; Nivolumab; Oximes; Piperidines; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Pyridones; Pyrimidinones; Skin Neoplasms; Sulfonamides; Vemurafenib