Frontline Therapy forBRAF-Mutated Metastatic Melanoma: How Do You Choose, and Is There One Correct Answer?

Author(s):  
Anna C. Pavlick ◽  
Leslie Fecher ◽  
Paolo A. Ascierto ◽  
Ryan J. Sullivan

Genetic analysis of melanoma has allowed us to identify a population of patients who have more aggressive disease and harbor the driver mutation BRAF. This mutation is found in approximately 50% of metastatic disease and provides a target for focused therapies to control this disease. These responses are usually brisk; however, they lack the durability of immunotherapy. Frontline therapy for patients with BRAF-mutated melanoma is not as straightforward as prescribing BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Prior trials of combination immunotherapy demonstrate similar responses and durability of responses in patients with BRAF wild-type as well as BRAF-mutated disease. Decisions about immunotherapy, targeted therapy, or the combination of immunotherapy with targeted therapy require an oncologist to evaluate multiple factors to select which treatment option is best for the patient. Trials for metastatic melanoma have included biomarkers as secondary endpoints and aim to identify some way to predict a response, or lack thereof, to therapy. Here, we discuss the utility and reliability of biomarkers in determining therapy for patients with BRAF-mutated metastatic melanoma and discuss combination immunotherapy with targeted therapy versus sequential immunotherapy/targeted therapy as well as which regimen should be implemented as initial therapy.

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 264-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim H.T. Paraiso ◽  
Meghna Das Thakur ◽  
Bin Fang ◽  
John M. Koomen ◽  
Inna V. Fedorenko ◽  
...  

Botany ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 88 (8) ◽  
pp. 710-724 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie Kang ◽  
Neelima R. Sinha

Formation of a compound leaf requires the involvement of multiple factors, including KNOX1 gene expression. To further characterize simple and complex tomato leaf mutants, we analyzed their morphology and development by assessing: leaf phenotypes, primary leaf morphogenesis, expression of the class I KNOX gene LeT6, and meristematic activity of the marginal blastozone. Mutants with alterations in lobing and (or) pinnation (decrease/increase) were analyzed. Primary leaflet initiation is delayed in mutants with decreased lobing. In contrast, leaflet initiation is advanced or similar to the wild type in mutants with deep lobes. Leaves with increased pinnation along the rachis require a protracted developmental program to form their final leaf morphology. Using a morphometric analysis, we show that leaf complexity can be quantified. The expression pattern of LeT6 correlates with histological analysis of meristematic activity of the marginal blastozone, suggesting that LeT6 may play a role, through some unknown mechanism, to regulate meristematic competence, not only in the marginal blastozone to regulate leaflet lobing, but along the entire length of the leaf to regulate pinnation in compound leaves.


2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 272-276
Author(s):  
Jens Tijtgat ◽  
Julia Katharina Schwarze ◽  
Gil Awada ◽  
Bart Neyns ◽  
Sandrine Aspeslagh

2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (8) ◽  
pp. 1027-1035 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosamaria Pinto ◽  
Sabino Strippoli ◽  
Simona De Summa ◽  
Anna Albano ◽  
Amalia Azzariti ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1357-1357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah Asghari ◽  
Dasom Lee ◽  
Yehuda E. Deutsch ◽  
Onyee Chan ◽  
Najla Al Ali ◽  
...  

Background: Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have dismal overall outcomes and survival is exceptionally poor in patients who experience relapse or are refractory (R/R) to frontline therapy. Since December 2018, combination therapy with hypomethylating agents (HMA) and venetoclax (HMA+Ven) has become standard frontline therapy for older patients or younger unfit patients. Moreover, it has been routinely utilized in patients experiencing relapsed or refractory AML yet response and outcome data is limited in patients with R/R disease. Thus, we investigated outcomes after HMA+Ven in patients with relapsed or refractory AML. Methods: We retrospectively annotated 72 patients who received treatment with HMA+Ven at Moffitt Cancer Center and Memorial Healthcare System between 2017 and 2019. Patients were divided into two subgroups: 1) initial remission therapy and 2) salvage therapy. Clinical and molecular data were abstracted in accordance with the Institutional Review Board approved protocol. Overall response rate (ORR) included patients achieving complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi), and morphologic leukemia free state (MLFS). Patients achieving CR, CRi, or MLFS were termed as responders (RES) and patients without CR, CRi, or MLFS were nonresponders (NRES). Fisher's Exact method was used to determine significance for categorical variables. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to determine median overall survival (mOS) and log-rank test was utilized to determine significance. All p-values are two-sided. Results: Out of 72 patients, 41 received HMA+Ven as initial therapy and 31 received it in the R/R setting. Baseline characteristics are outlined in Table 1. Median age was 63 years for patients with R/R AML with 58% female. In the R/R cohort, ORR was 34.5% with 0 (0%) patients achieving CR, 8 (27.6%) patients achieving CRi, and 2 (6.9%) achieving MLFS (Table 2). When compared to patients receiving HMA+Ven as initial therapy, ORR was significantly lower in the R/R cohort (64.1% vs. 34.5%, p=0.03). Among 31 patients in the R/R cohort, 6.5% (n=2) proceeded to allogeneic stem cell transplant (allo-SCT) after achieving CRi. European LeukemiaNet (ELN) risk stratification was known in 22 patients in the R/R cohort and ORR were similar in patients in the favorable/intermediate risk group (n=8) compared to adverse risk group (n=14) (37.5% vs. 28.6%, p=1.0). When compared to HMA+Ven used as initial therapy, ORR among the R/R cohort were not different among adverse risk groups (58.3% vs. 28.6%, p=0.10); however, ORR were significantly lower among patients with favorable/intermediate risk (100% vs. 37.5%, p=0.009). At a median follow-up of 7.6 months (mo), mOS was 4.9mo in the R/R cohort with mOS among RES superior to NRES (not reached vs. 2.4mo, p=0.0009) (Figure 1). Moreover, mOS was inferior in R/R patients compared to initial therapy (4.9mo vs. 13.8mo, p=0.0013) (Figure 2). A total of 15 (48.4%) patients had HMA exposure prior to receiving HMA+Ven without apparent impact on mOS (3.7mo (prior HMA) vs. 4.9mo (no prior HMA), p=0.97). The median duration of CR/CRi was 5.2mo and the median time to CR/CRi was 2.4mo. Based on ELN risk groups, mOS was not statistically different among patients with favorable/intermediate risk disease compared to adverse risk disease (8.6mo (fav/int) vs. 2.8mo (adverse), p=0.07). Responses were also analyzed based upon somatic mutations (Figure 2). In patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 and 2 mutations (IDH1/IDH2) compared to patients without IDH1/2, ORR were 60% vs. 25%, respectively (p=0.28) with no significant difference in mOS (7.2mo (IDHmut) vs. 3.1mo (IDHwt), p=0.38). Comparing patients with TP53 mutation to those without TP53 mutations, no significant difference in ORR (25% vs. 33%, p=1.0) or mOS (4.4mo vs. 6.9mo, p=0.0.84) was noted. Conclusion: Although combination therapy with HMA+Ven has yielded impressive responses as frontline therapy, response rates with this combination in the salvage setting are less encouraging with the possible exception of those patients with IDH1/IDH2 mutations. Nevertheless, responders to salvage HMA+Ven had a significant survival benefit compared to nonresponders, suggesting that this combination is a reasonable salvage option in patients with relapsed or refractory AML. Disclosures Padron: Incyte: Research Funding. Kuykendall:Incyte: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Honoraria. List:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Lancet:Agios, Biopath, Biosight, Boehringer Inglheim, Celator, Celgene, Janssen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Karyopharm, Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Other: fees for non-CME/CE services . Sallman:Celyad: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Komrokji:JAZZ: Speakers Bureau; JAZZ: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; DSI: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy. Sweet:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Stemline: Consultancy. Talati:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is approved in combination with hypomethylating agents (azacitidine or decitabine) or low dose cytarabine for treatment of newly diagnosed AML in adults aged 75 years or older, or those who have comorbidities that preclude the use of induction chemotherapy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher A. Thomas ◽  
Justin Lee ◽  
Roberto J. Bernardo ◽  
Ryan J. Anderson ◽  
Vladimir Glinskii ◽  
...  

Background: Pulmonary hypertension is a complication of chronic lung diseases (PH-CLD) associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Management guidelines for PH-CLD emphasize the treatment of the underlying lung disease, but the role of PH-targeted therapy remains controversial. We hypothesized that treatment approaches for PH-CLD would be variable across physicians depending on the type of CLD and the severity of PH.Methods and Results: Between May and July 2020, we conducted an online survey of PH experts asking for their preferred treatment approach in seven hypothetical cases of PH-CLD of varying severity. We assessed agreement amongst clinicians for initial therapy choice using Fleiss' kappa calculations. Over 90% of respondents agreed that they would treat cases of severe PH in the context of mild lung disease with some form of PH-targeted therapy. For cases of severe PH in the context of severe lung disease, over 70% of respondents agreed to use PH-targeted therapy. For mild PH and mild lung disease cases, <50% of respondents chose to start PH-specific therapy. There was overall poor agreement between respondents in the choice to use mono-, double or triple combination therapy with PH-specific agents in all cases.Conclusion: Although management guidelines discourage the routine use of PH-targeted therapies to treat PH-CLD patients, most physicians choose to treat patients with some form of PH-targeted therapy. The choice of therapy and treatment approach are variable and appear to be influenced by the severity of the PH and the underlying lung disease.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chune Yu ◽  
Xiaowei Liu ◽  
Jiqiao Yang ◽  
Min Zhang ◽  
Hongyu Jin ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 390-402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia M. LoRusso ◽  
Kurt Schalper ◽  
Jeffrey Sosman

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document