Ibrutinib is an irreversible inhibitor of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (Btk) that has proven to be an effective therapeutic agent for multiple B-cell mediated lymphoproliferative disorders. Ibrutinib, however, carries an increased bleeding risk compared to standard chemotherapy. Bleeding events range from minor mucocutaneous bleeding to life-threatening hemorrhage, due in large part to the effects of ibrutinib on several distinct platelet signaling pathways. There is currently minimal data to guide clinicians regarding the use of ibrutinib in patients at high risk for bleeding or on anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy. In addition, the potential cardiovascular protective effects of ibrutinib monotherapy in patients at risk for vascular disease is unknown. Patients should be cautioned against using nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, fish oils, vitamin E, and aspirin-containing products, and consider replacing ibrutinib with a different agent if dual antiplatelet therapy is indicated. Patients should not take vitamin K antagonists concurrently with ibrutinib; direct oral anticoagulant should be used if extended anticoagulation is strongly indicated. In this review, we describe the pathophysiology of ibrutinib-mediated bleeding and suggest risk reduction strategies for common clinical scenarios associated with ibrutinib.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with KIT-mutant gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GISTs) benefit from imatinib, but treatment resistance results from outgrowth of heterogeneous subclones with KIT secondary mutations. Once resistance emerges, targeting KIT with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) sunitinib and regorafenib provides clinical benefit, albeit of limited duration. METHODS:We systematically explored GIST resistance mechanisms to KIT-inhibitor TKIs that are either approved or under investigation in clinical trials: the studies draw upon GIST models and clinical trial correlative science. We subsequently modelled in vitro a rapid TKI alternation approach against subclonal heterogeneity. RESULTS: Each of the KIT-inhibitor TKIs targets effectively only a subset of KIT secondary mutations in GIST. Regorafenib and sunitinib have complementary activity in that regorafenib primarily inhibits imatinib-resistance mutations in the activation loop, whereas sunitinib inhibits imatinib-resistance mutations in the ATP-binding pocket. We find that rapid alternation of sunitinib and regorafenib suppresses growth of polyclonal imatinib-resistant GIST more effectively than either agent as monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Our data highlight that heterogeneity of KIT secondary mutations is the main mechanism of tumour progression to KIT inhibitors in imatinib-resistant GIST patients. Therapeutic combinations of TKIs with complementary activity against resistant mutations may be useful to suppress growth of polyclonal imatinib-resistance in GIST.

A recurrent intrachromosomal rearrangement on chromosome 12q in solitary fibrous tumor leads to the formation of a NAB2-STAT6 fusion oncogene. As a result, nuclear expression of the cytoplasmic transcription factor STAT6 is found in solitary fibrous tumor and serves as a useful diagnostic marker. STAT6 is located in 12q13, a region containing well-characterized oncogenes that are commonly amplified in dedifferentiated liposarcoma; we have previously reported that STAT6 is expressed in a subset of dedifferentiated liposarcoma. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of STAT6 expression in dedifferentiated liposarcoma and the underlying genetic mechanism. STAT6 protein expression was analyzed by immunohistochemistry in a well-characterized series of 35 previously unpublished cases of dedifferentiated liposarcoma, all with nuclear MDM2 and/or CDK4 expression by immunohistochemistry and/or cytogenetic features of dedifferentiated liposarcoma. FISH for STAT6 was performed in all cases with STAT6 expression, and a subset of control cases without STAT6 expression. In total 4/35 cases (11%) showed STAT6 expression (three with multifocal staining of moderate to strong intensity and one with weak focal staining). FISH demonstrated amplification of STAT6 in all cases positive for STAT6 by immunohistochemistry; in contrast, FISH performed on four STAT6-negative dedifferentiated liposarcomas demonstrated no STAT6 amplification (P ¼ 0.0286). Of the four STAT6 amplified cases, three patients were male and one was female, ranging in age from 51 to 76 years. Tumors were located in the mediastinum (n ¼ 2), paratesticular soft tissue (n ¼ 1), and perirenal soft tissue (n ¼ 1). Three patients received pre-operative chemotherapy þ / À radiation therapy. In conclusion, STAT6 is amplified in a subset of dedifferentiated liposarcoma, resulting in STAT6 protein expression that can be detected by immunohistochemistry and may be a potential pitfall in the differential diagnosis of dedifferentiated liposarcoma and solitary fibrous tumor. These findings suggest a role for STAT6-mediated transcriptional activity in some cases of dedifferentiated liposarcoma and highlight the genomic complexity and heterogeneity of dedifferentiated liposarcoma.