BACKGROUND An improvement in overall survival among patients with metastatic melanoma has been an elusive goal. In this phase 3 study, ipilimumab — which blocks cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen 4 to potentiate an antitumor T-cell response — administered with or without a glycoprotein 100 (gp100) peptide vaccine was compared with gp100 alone in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma. METHODS A total of 676 HLA-A⋆0201–positive patients with unresectable stage III or IV melanoma, whose disease had progressed while they were receiving therapy for metastatic disease, were randomly assigned, in a 3:1:1 ratio, to receive ipilimumab plus gp100 (403 patients), ipilimumab alone (137), or gp100 alone (136). Ipilimumab, at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram of body weight, was administered with or without gp100 every 3 weeks for up to four treatments (induction). Eligible patients could receive reinduction therapy. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS The median overall survival was 10.0 months among patients receiving ipilimumab plus gp100, as compared with 6.4 months among patients receiving gp100 alone (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; P<0.001). The median overall survival with ipilimumab alone was 10.1 months (hazard ratio for death in the comparison with gp100 alone, 0.66; P = 0.003). No difference in overall survival was detected between the ipilimumab groups (hazard ratio with ipilimumab plus gp100, 1.04; P = 0.76). Grade 3 or 4 immune-related adverse events occurred in 10 to 15% of patients treated with ipilimumab and in 3% treated with gp100 alone. There were 14 deaths related to the study drugs (2.1%), and 7 were associated with immune-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS Ipilimumab, with or without a gp100 peptide vaccine, as compared with gp100 alone, improved overall survival in patients with previously treated metastatic melanoma. Adverse events can be severe, long-lasting, or both, but most are reversible with appropriate treatment. (Funded by Medarex and Bristol-Myers Squibb; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00094653.)

Background Phase 1 and 2 clinical trials of the BRAF kinase inhibitor vemurafenib (PLX4032) have shown response rates of more than 50% in patients with metastatic melanoma with the BRAF V600E mutation. Methods We conducted a phase 3 randomized clinical trial comparing vemurafenib with dacarbazine in 675 patients with previously untreated, metastatic melanoma with the BRAF V600E mutation. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either vemurafenib (960 mg orally twice daily) or dacarbazine (1000 mg per square meter of body-surface area intravenously every 3 weeks). Coprimary end points were rates of overall and progression-free survival. Secondary end points included the response rate, response duration, and safety. A final analysis was planned after 196 deaths and an interim analysis after 98 deaths. Results At 6 months, overall survival was 84% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78 to 89) in the vemurafenib group and 64% (95% CI, 56 to 73) in the dacarbazine group. In the interim analysis for overall survival and final analysis for progression-free survival, vemurafenib was associated with a relative reduction of 63% in the risk of death and of 74% in the risk of either death or disease progression, as compared with dacarbazine (P<0.001 for both comparisons). After review of the interim analysis by an independent data and safety monitoring board, crossover from dacarbazine to vemurafenib was recommended. Response rates were 48% for vemurafenib and 5% for dacarbazine. Common adverse events associated with vemurafenib were arthralgia, rash, fatigue, alopecia, keratoacanthoma or squamous-cell carcinoma, photosensitivity, nausea, and diarrhea; 38% of patients required dose modification because of toxic effects. Conclusions Vemurafenib produced improved rates of overall and progression-free survival in patients with previously untreated melanoma with the BRAF V600E mutation. (Funded by Hoffmann–La Roche; BRIM-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01006980.)

BACKGROUND Nivolumab combined with ipilimumab resulted in longer progression-free survival and a higher objective response rate than ipilimumab alone in a phase 3 trial involving patients with advanced melanoma. We now report 3-year overall survival outcomes in this trial. METHODS We randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, patients with previously untreated advanced melanoma to receive nivolumab at a dose of 1 mg per kilogram of body weight plus ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses, followed by nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks; nivolumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 2 weeks plus placebo; or ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram every 3 weeks for four doses plus placebo, until progression, the occurrence of unacceptable toxic effects, or withdrawal of consent. Randomization was stratified according to programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status, BRAF mutation status, and metastasis stage. The two primary end points were progression-free survival and overall survival in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and in the nivolumab group versus the ipilimumab group. RESULTS At a minimum follow-up of 36 months, the median overall survival had not been reached in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and was 37.6 months in the nivolumab group, as compared with 19.9 months in the ipilimumab group (hazard ratio for death with nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.55 [P<0.001]; hazard ratio for death with nivolumab vs. ipilimumab, 0.65 [P<0.001]). The overall survival rate at 3 years was 58% in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group and 52% in the nivolumab group, as compared with 34% in the ipilimumab group. The safety profile was unchanged from the initial report. Treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 occurred in 59% of the patients in the nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab group, in 21% of those in the nivolumab group, and in 28% of those in the ipilimumab group. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with advanced melanoma, significantly longer overall survival occurred with combination therapy with nivolumab plus ipilimumab or with nivolumab alone than with ipilimumab alone. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 067 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01844505.)

Terms of use This work is brought to you by the University of Southern Denmark through the SDU Research Portal. Unless otherwise specified it has been shared according to the terms for self-archiving. If no other license is stated, these terms apply: • You may download this work for personal use only. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying this open access version T h e ne w e ngl a nd jou r na l o f m e dicine n engl j med 381;16 nejm.org

No abstract

Summary Background In the BRIM-3 trial, vemurafenib was associated with risk reduction versus dacarbazine of both death and progression in patients with advanced BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma. We present an extended follow-up analysis of the total population and in the BRAFV600E and BRAFV600K mutation subgroups. Methods Patients older than 18 years, with treatment-naive metastatic melanoma and whose tumour tissue was positive for BRAFV600 mutations were eligible. Patients also had to have a life expectancy of at least 3 months, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate haematological, hepatic, and renal function. Patients were randomly assigned by interactive voice recognition system to receive either vemurafenib (960 mg orally twice daily) or dacarbazine (1000 mg/m2 of body surface area intravenously every 3 weeks). Coprimary endpoints were overall survival and progression-free survival, analysed in the intention-to-treat population (n=675), with data censored at crossover. A sensitivity analysis was done. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01006980. Findings 675 eligible patients were enrolled from 104 centres in 12 countries between Jan 4, 2010, and Dec 16, 2010. 337 patients were randomly assigned to receive vemurafenib and 338 to receive dacarbazine. Median follow-up was 12·5 months (IQR 7·7–16·0) on vemurafenib and 9·5 months (3·1–14·7) on dacarbazine. 83 (25%) of the 338 patients initially randomly assigned to dacarbazine crossed over from dacarbazine to vemurafenib. Median overall survival was significantly longer in the vemurafenib group than in the dacarbazine group (13·6 months [95% CI 12·0–15·2] vs 9·7 months [7·9–12·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·57–0·87]; p=0·0008), as was median progression-free survival (6·9 months [95% CI 6·1–7·0] vs 1·6 months [1·6–2·1]; HR 0·38 [95% CI 0·32–0·46]; p<0·0001). For the 598 (91%) patients with BRAFV600E disease, median overall survival in the vemurafenib group was 13·3 months (95% CI 11·9–14·9) compared with 10·0 months (8·0–14·0) in the dacarbazine group (HR 0·75 [95% CI 0·60–0·93]; p=0·0085); median progression-free survival was 6·9 months (95% CI 6·2–7·0) and 1·6 months (1·6–2·1), respectively (HR 0·39 [95% CI 0·33–0·47]; p<0·0001). For the 57 (9%) patients with BRAFV600K disease, median overall survival in the vemurafenib group was 14·5 months (95% CI 11·2–not estimable) compared with 7·6 months (6·1–16·6) in the dacarbazine group (HR 0·43 [95% CI 0·21–0·90]; p=0·024); median progression-free survival was 5·9 months (95% CI 4·4–9·0) and 1·7 months (1·4–2·9), respectively (HR 0·30 [95% CI 0·16–0·56]; p<0·0001). The most frequent grade 3–4 events were cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma (65 [19%] of 337 patients) and keratoacanthomas (34 [10%]), rash (30 [9%]), and abnormal liver function tests (38 [11%]) in the vemurafenib group and neutropenia (26 [9%] of 287 patients) in the dacarbazine group. Eight (2%) patients in the vemurafenib group and seven (2%) in the dacarbazine group had ...

The sonic hedgehog (SHH) signaling pathway directs the embryonic development of diverse organisms and is disrupted in a variety of malignancies. Pathway activation is triggered by binding of hedgehog proteins to the multipass Patched-1 (PTCH) receptor, which in the absence of hedgehog suppresses the activity of the seven-pass membrane protein Smoothened (SMOH). De-repression of SMOH culminates in the activation of one or more of the GLI transcription factors that regulate the transcription of downstream targets. Individuals with germline mutations of the SHH receptor gene PTCH are at high risk of developmental anomalies and of basal-cell carcinomas, medulloblastomas and other cancers (a pattern consistent with nevoid basal-cell carcinoma syndrome, NBCCS). In keeping with the role of PTCH as a tumor-suppressor gene, somatic mutations of this gene occur in sporadic basal-cell carcinomas and medulloblastomas. We report here that a subset of children with medulloblastoma carry germline and somatic mutations in SUFU (encoding the human suppressor of fused) of the SHH pathway, accompanied by loss of heterozygosity of the wildtype allele. Several of these mutations encode truncated proteins that are unable to export the GLI transcription factor from nucleus to cytoplasm, resulting in the activation of SHH signaling. SUFU is a newly identified tumor-suppressor gene that predisposes individuals to medulloblastoma by modulating the SHH signaling pathway through a newly identified mechanism.

Summary Background Dabrafenib plus trametinib (D+T) improves outcomes in BRAF V600–mutant metastatic melanoma without brain metastases; however, activity of D+T has not been studied in active melanoma brain metastases (MBM). Here, we report results from the phase 2 trial COMBI-MB. Our aim was to build upon the current body of evidence of targeted therapy in melanoma brain metastases through an evaluation of D+T in patients with BRAF V600–mutant melanoma brain metastases. Methods This ongoing open-label, phase 2 study (NCT02039947) evaluated dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily plus trametinib 2 mg once daily in four melanoma patient cohorts: (A) BRAF V600E, asymptomatic MBM, no prior local brain therapy; (B) BRAF V600E, asymptomatic MBM, prior local brain therapy; (C) BRAF V600D/K/R, asymptomatic MBM, with or without prior local brain therapy; and (D) BRAF V600D/E/K/R, symptomatic MBM, with or without prior local brain therapy. The primary objective was to assess intracranial response rate (IRR) in cohort A in the all-treated-subjects population. Secondary endpoints included IRR in cohorts B–D; extracranial and overall response rates; disease control rates; duration of intracranial, extracranial, and overall response; progression-free survival; overall survival; and safety. Findings A total of 125 patients were enrolled (A: n=76; B: n=16; C: n=16; D: n=17). At the data cutoff (November 28, 2016; median follow-up 8·5 months) investigator-assessed IRR was 58% (n=44/76) in cohort A. Intracranial response by investigator assessment was also achieved in 9 (56%) of 16 patients in cohort B, 7 (44%) of 16 patients in cohort C, and 10 (59%) of 17 patients in cohort D. Safety results were consistent with prior D+T studies, with 60 (48%) of 125 patients across cohorts experiencing grade 3/4 adverse events. The most common serious adverse events across cohorts were pyrexia (n=9/125; 7%) and ejection fraction decreased (n=5/125; 4%). Interpretation D+T was active with a manageable safety profile in patients with BRAF V600–mutant MBMs, but the median duration of response was relatively short. These results provide evidence of clinical benefit with D+T and support the need for additional research to further improve outcomes in patients with MBMs. Funding Novartis.