Other search tools

About this data

The publication data currently available has been vetted by Vanderbilt faculty, staff, administrators and trainees. The data itself is retrieved directly from NCBI's PubMed and is automatically updated on a weekly basis to ensure accuracy and completeness.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact us.

Results: 1 to 10 of 19

Publication Record

Connections

Safety and efficacy of vemurafenib in BRAF(V600E) and BRAF(V600K) mutation-positive melanoma (BRIM-3): extended follow-up of a phase 3, randomised, open-label study.
McArthur GA, Chapman PB, Robert C, Larkin J, Haanen JB, Dummer R, Ribas A, Hogg D, Hamid O, Ascierto PA, Garbe C, Testori A, Maio M, Lorigan P, Lebbé C, Jouary T, Schadendorf D, O'Day SJ, Kirkwood JM, Eggermont AM, Dréno B, Sosman JA, Flaherty KT, Yin M, Caro I, Cheng S, Trunzer K, Hauschild A
(2014) Lancet Oncol 15: 323-32
MeSH Terms: Adult, Aged, Dacarbazine, Disease-Free Survival, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Indoles, Male, Melanoma, Middle Aged, Mutation, Protein Kinase Inhibitors, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf, Sulfonamides, Vemurafenib
Show Abstract · Added March 20, 2014
BACKGROUND - In the BRIM-3 trial, vemurafenib was associated with risk reduction versus dacarbazine of both death and progression in patients with advanced BRAF(V600) mutation-positive melanoma. We present an extended follow-up analysis of the total population and in the BRAF(V600E) and BRAF(V600K) mutation subgroups.
METHODS - Patients older than 18 years, with treatment-naive metastatic melanoma and whose tumour tissue was positive for BRAF(V600) 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/m(2) 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 BRAF(V600E) 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 BRAF(V600K) 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 grade 5 events.
INTERPRETATION - Inhibition of BRAF with vemurafenib improves survival in patients with the most common BRAF(V600E) mutation and in patients with the less common BRAF(V600K) mutation.
FUNDING - F Hoffmann-La Roche-Genentech.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
0 Communities
1 Members
0 Resources
16 MeSH Terms
Severe cutaneous and neurologic toxicity in melanoma patients during vemurafenib administration following anti-PD-1 therapy.
Johnson DB, Wallender EK, Cohen DN, Likhari SS, Zwerner JP, Powers JG, Shinn L, Kelley MC, Joseph RW, Sosman JA
(2013) Cancer Immunol Res 1: 373-7
MeSH Terms: Adult, Aminoquinolines, Anaphylaxis, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols, Drug Eruptions, Female, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, Humans, Imiquimod, Indoles, Melanoma, Middle Aged, Nivolumab, Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor, Skin Neoplasms, Sulfonamides, Vemurafenib
Show Abstract · Added March 20, 2014
Immune checkpoint inhibitors such as ipilimumab and targeted BRAF inhibitors have dramatically altered the landscape of melanoma therapeutics over the past few years. Agents targeting the programmed cell death-1/ligand (PD-1/PD-L1) axis are now being developed and appear to be highly active clinically with favorable toxicity profiles. We report two patients with BRAF V600E mutant melanoma who were treated with anti-PD-1 agents as first-line therapy without significant toxicity, followed by vemurafenib at disease progression. Both patients developed severe hypersensitivity drug eruptions with multi-organ injury early in their BRAF inhibitor treatment course. One patient subsequently developed acute inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (AIDP) and the other developed anaphylaxis upon low-dose vemurafenib rechallenge. Further investigation of the immune response during combination or sequences of melanoma therapeutics is warranted. Furthermore, clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for these toxicities when vemurafenib is administered following an anti-PD-1 agent.
0 Communities
2 Members
0 Resources
18 MeSH Terms
Acquired resistance and clonal evolution in melanoma during BRAF inhibitor therapy.
Shi H, Hugo W, Kong X, Hong A, Koya RC, Moriceau G, Chodon T, Guo R, Johnson DB, Dahlman KB, Kelley MC, Kefford RF, Chmielowski B, Glaspy JA, Sosman JA, van Baren N, Long GV, Ribas A, Lo RS
(2014) Cancer Discov 4: 80-93
MeSH Terms: Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antineoplastic Agents, Cell Line, Tumor, Clonal Evolution, Drug Resistance, Neoplasm, Female, Humans, Imidazoles, Indoles, Male, Melanoma, Middle Aged, Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinases, Oximes, PTEN Phosphohydrolase, Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases, Protein Kinase Inhibitors, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf, Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-akt, Skin Neoplasms, Sulfonamides, Vemurafenib, ras Proteins
Show Abstract · Added March 20, 2014
BRAF inhibitors elicit rapid antitumor responses in the majority of patients with BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma, but acquired drug resistance is almost universal. We sought to identify the core resistance pathways and the extent of tumor heterogeneity during disease progression. We show that mitogen-activated protein kinase reactivation mechanisms were detected among 70% of disease-progressive tissues, with RAS mutations, mutant BRAF amplification, and alternative splicing being most common. We also detected PI3K-PTEN-AKT-upregulating genetic alterations among 22% of progressive melanomas. Distinct molecular lesions in both core drug escape pathways were commonly detected concurrently in the same tumor or among multiple tumors from the same patient. Beyond harboring extensively heterogeneous resistance mechanisms, melanoma regrowth emerging from BRAF inhibitor selection displayed branched evolution marked by altered mutational spectra/signatures and increased fitness. Thus, melanoma genomic heterogeneity contributes significantly to BRAF inhibitor treatment failure, implying upfront, cotargeting of two core pathways as an essential strategy for durable responses.
0 Communities
3 Members
0 Resources
25 MeSH Terms
Impact of MET expression on outcome in BRAF(V600E/K) advanced melanoma.
Jubb AM, Ribas A, Sosman JA, McArthur GA, Yan Y, Rost S, Zhao S, Koeppen H
(2013) Histopathology 63: 351-61
MeSH Terms: Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Animals, Disease-Free Survival, Female, Humans, Immunohistochemistry, Indoles, Kaplan-Meier Estimate, Male, Melanoma, Middle Aged, Mutant Proteins, Prognosis, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf, Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-met, Rabbits, Retrospective Studies, Signal Transduction, Skin Neoplasms, Sulfonamides, Vemurafenib, Young Adult
Show Abstract · Added March 7, 2014
AIMS - Preclinical data suggest that signalling through the HGF-MET pathway may confer resistance to BRAF inhibition in BRAF(V600E/K) melanoma. Therefore, blockade of HGF-MET signalling might be a valid therapeutic strategy, in combination with BRAF inhibition, in BRAF(V600E/K) melanoma. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical relevance of these observations by evaluating the survival impact of MET expression in patients with BRAF(V600E/K) advanced melanoma treated with vemurafenib.
METHODS AND RESULTS - Formalin-fixed tissue blocks were obtained of tumours from patients enrolled in the BRIM2 (n = 59) and BRIM3 (n = 150) trials of vemurafenib in advanced BRAF(V600E/K) melanoma. Immunohistochemistry for MET (SP44 rabbit monoclonal antibody) was performed with a highly validated assay and clinically validated scoring system. Pretreatment MET expression was frequent at the ≥1 + cutoff (BRIM3, 31%; BRIM2, 49%), but relatively infrequent at the ≥2 + cutoff (BRIM3, 9%; BRIM2, 19%). Retrospective subset analyses showed that, irrespective of the cutoff used or the treatment arm, MET expression did not show prognostic significance, in terms of objective response rate, progression-free survival, or overall survival.
CONCLUSIONS - MET is expressed in a proportion of BRAF(V600E/K) advanced melanomas. Further analyses on appropriately powered subsets are needed to determine the prognostic and predictive significance of MET in vemurafenib-treated melanoma.
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
0 Communities
1 Members
0 Resources
25 MeSH Terms
IQGAP1 scaffold-kinase interaction blockade selectively targets RAS-MAP kinase-driven tumors.
Jameson KL, Mazur PK, Zehnder AM, Zhang J, Zarnegar B, Sage J, Khavari PA
(2013) Nat Med 19: 626-630
MeSH Terms: Amino Acid Sequence, Animals, Cell Line, Tumor, DNA Mutational Analysis, Drug Resistance, Neoplasm, Humans, Indoles, MAP Kinase Signaling System, Mice, Mice, Knockout, Molecular Sequence Data, Mutation, Neoplasm Transplantation, Neoplasms, Protein Interaction Domains and Motifs, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf, Sequence Homology, Amino Acid, Sulfonamides, Vemurafenib, Wound Healing, ras GTPase-Activating Proteins, ras Proteins
Show Abstract · Added October 22, 2013
Upregulation of the ERK1 and ERK2 (ERK1/2) MAP kinase (MAPK) cascade occurs in >30% of cancers, often through mutational activation of receptor tyrosine kinases or other upstream genes, including KRAS and BRAF. Efforts to target endogenous MAPKs are challenged by the fact that these kinases are required for viability in mammals. Additionally, the effectiveness of new inhibitors of mutant BRAF has been diminished by acquired tumor resistance through selection for BRAF-independent mechanisms of ERK1/2 induction. Furthermore, recently identified ERK1/2-inducing mutations in MEK1 and MEK2 (MEK1/2) MAPK genes in melanoma confer resistance to emerging therapeutic MEK inhibitors, underscoring the challenges facing direct kinase inhibition in cancer. MAPK scaffolds, such as IQ motif-containing GTPase activating protein 1 (IQGAP1), assemble pathway kinases to affect signal transmission, and disrupting scaffold function therefore offers an orthogonal approach to MAPK cascade inhibition. Consistent with this, we found a requirement for IQGAP1 in RAS-driven tumorigenesis in mouse and human tissue. In addition, the ERK1/2-binding IQGAP1 WW domain peptide disrupted IQGAP1-ERK1/2 interactions, inhibited RAS- and RAF-driven tumorigenesis, bypassed acquired resistance to the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib (PLX-4032) and acted as a systemically deliverable therapeutic to significantly increase the lifespan of tumor-bearing mice. Scaffold-kinase interaction blockade acts by a mechanism distinct from direct kinase inhibition and may be a strategy to target overactive oncogenic kinase cascades in cancer.
0 Communities
1 Members
0 Resources
22 MeSH Terms
Pharmacodynamic effects and mechanisms of resistance to vemurafenib in patients with metastatic melanoma.
Trunzer K, Pavlick AC, Schuchter L, Gonzalez R, McArthur GA, Hutson TE, Moschos SJ, Flaherty KT, Kim KB, Weber JS, Hersey P, Long GV, Lawrence D, Ott PA, Amaravadi RK, Lewis KD, Puzanov I, Lo RS, Koehler A, Kockx M, Spleiss O, Schell-Steven A, Gilbert HN, Cockey L, Bollag G, Lee RJ, Joe AK, Sosman JA, Ribas A
(2013) J Clin Oncol 31: 1767-74
MeSH Terms: Administration, Oral, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antineoplastic Agents, Apoptosis, Cell Cycle, Cell Proliferation, Disease Progression, Drug Resistance, Neoplasm, Female, GTP Phosphohydrolases, Humans, Immunohistochemistry, Indoles, MAP Kinase Kinase 1, MAP Kinase Signaling System, Male, Melanoma, Membrane Proteins, Middle Aged, Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase Kinases, Point Mutation, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf, Skin Neoplasms, Sulfonamides, Tumor Cells, Cultured, Vemurafenib
Show Abstract · Added March 5, 2014
PURPOSE To assess pharmacodynamic effects and intrinsic and acquired resistance mechanisms of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib in BRAF(V600)-mutant melanoma, leading to an understanding of the mechanism of action of vemurafenib and ultimately to optimization of metastatic melanoma therapy. METHODS In the phase II clinical study NP22657 (BRIM-2), patients received oral doses of vemurafenib (960 mg twice per day). Serial biopsies were collected to study changes in mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling, cell-cycle progression, and factors causing intrinsic or acquired resistance by immunohistochemistry, DNA sequencing, or somatic mutation profiling. Results Vemurafenib inhibited MAPK signaling and cell-cycle progression. An association between the decrease in extracellular signal-related kinase (ERK) phosphorylation and objective response was observed in paired biopsies (n = 22; P = .013). Low expression of phosphatase and tensin homolog showed a modest association with lower response. Baseline mutations in MEK1(P124) coexisting with BRAF(V600) were noted in seven of 92 samples; their presence did not preclude objective tumor responses. Acquired resistance to vemurafenib associated with reactivation of MAPK signaling as observed by elevated ERK1/2 phosphorylation levels in progressive lesions and the appearance of secondary NRAS(Q61) mutations or MEK1(Q56P) or MEK1(E203K) mutations. These two activating MEK1 mutations had not previously been observed in vivo in biopsies of progressive melanoma tumors. CONCLUSION Vemurafenib inhibits tumor proliferation and oncogenic BRAF signaling through the MAPK pathway. Acquired resistance results primarily from MAPK reactivation driven by the appearance of secondary mutations in NRAS and MEK1 in subsets of patients. The data suggest that inhibition downstream of BRAF should help to overcome acquired resistance.
0 Communities
2 Members
0 Resources
29 MeSH Terms
Widespread potential for growth-factor-driven resistance to anticancer kinase inhibitors.
Wilson TR, Fridlyand J, Yan Y, Penuel E, Burton L, Chan E, Peng J, Lin E, Wang Y, Sosman J, Ribas A, Li J, Moffat J, Sutherlin DP, Koeppen H, Merchant M, Neve R, Settleman J
(2012) Nature 487: 505-9
MeSH Terms: Antineoplastic Agents, Breast Neoplasms, Cell Line, Tumor, Cell Survival, Drug Resistance, Neoplasm, Female, Hepatocyte Growth Factor, Humans, Indoles, Lapatinib, Ligands, Melanoma, Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinases, Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinases, Protein Kinase Inhibitors, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf, Quinazolines, Receptor Protein-Tyrosine Kinases, Receptor, ErbB-2, Signal Transduction, Sulfonamides, Vemurafenib
Show Abstract · Added March 20, 2014
Mutationally activated kinases define a clinically validated class of targets for cancer drug therapy. However, the efficacy of kinase inhibitors in patients whose tumours harbour such alleles is invariably limited by innate or acquired drug resistance. The identification of resistance mechanisms has revealed a recurrent theme—the engagement of survival signals redundant to those transduced by the targeted kinase. Cancer cells typically express multiple receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) that mediate signals that converge on common critical downstream cell-survival effectors—most notably, phosphatidylinositol-3-OH kinase (PI(3)K) and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK). Consequently, an increase in RTK-ligand levels, through autocrine tumour-cell production, paracrine contribution from tumour stroma or systemic production, could confer resistance to inhibitors of an oncogenic kinase with a similar signalling output. Here, using a panel of kinase-'addicted' human cancer cell lines, we found that most cells can be rescued from drug sensitivity by simply exposing them to one or more RTK ligands. Among the findings with clinical implications was the observation that hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) confers resistance to the BRAF inhibitor PLX4032 (vemurafenib) in BRAF-mutant melanoma cells. These observations highlight the extensive redundancy of RTK-transduced signalling in cancer cells and the potentially broad role of widely expressed RTK ligands in innate and acquired resistance to drugs targeting oncogenic kinases.
0 Communities
1 Members
0 Resources
22 MeSH Terms
Vemurafenib (RG67204, PLX4032): a potent, selective BRAF kinase inhibitor.
Patrawala S, Puzanov I
(2012) Future Oncol 8: 509-23
MeSH Terms: Antineoplastic Agents, Clinical Trials as Topic, Humans, Indoles, Melanoma, Protein Kinase Inhibitors, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf, Sulfonamides, Vemurafenib
Show Abstract · Added March 5, 2014
Vemurafenib is a potent inhibitor of the mutated BRAF kinase. Phase I and II clinical trials of vemurafenib showed response rates of more than 50% in patients with metastatic melanoma and BRAF mutation. A Phase III study comparing vemurafenib with dacarbazine in 675 previously untreated patients revealed overall survival to be 84% (95% CI: 78-89) in the vemurafenib group and 64% (95% CI: 56-73) in the dacarbazine group. Vemurafenib was associated with a relative reduction of 63% in the risk of death and 74% in the risk of either death or disease progression, as compared with dacarbazine (p < 0.001). Progression-free survival was longer in those treated with vemurafenib (median: 5.3 vs 1.6 months; hazard ratio: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.20-0.33). Response rates were 48% for vemurafenib and 5% for dacarbazine. After review of the interim analysis by an independent data and safety monitoring board, crossover from dacarbazine to vemurafenib was recommended.
0 Communities
1 Members
0 Resources
9 MeSH Terms
Preexisting MEK1 exon 3 mutations in V600E/KBRAF melanomas do not confer resistance to BRAF inhibitors.
Shi H, Moriceau G, Kong X, Koya RC, Nazarian R, Pupo GM, Bacchiocchi A, Dahlman KB, Chmielowski B, Sosman JA, Halaban R, Kefford RF, Long GV, Ribas A, Lo RS
(2012) Cancer Discov 2: 414-24
MeSH Terms: Adult, Aged, Antineoplastic Agents, Cell Line, Tumor, Drug Resistance, Neoplasm, Exons, Female, HEK293 Cells, Humans, Imidazoles, Indoles, MAP Kinase Kinase 1, Male, Melanoma, Middle Aged, Mutation, Oximes, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf, Sulfonamides, Vemurafenib
Show Abstract · Added March 20, 2014
UNLABELLED - BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) induce antitumor responses in nearly 60% of patients with advanced V600E/KBRAF melanomas. Somatic activating MEK1 mutations are thought to be rare in melanomas, but their potential concurrence with V600E/KBRAF may be selected for by BRAFi. We sequenced MEK1/2 exon 3 in melanomas at baseline and upon disease progression. Of 31 baseline V600E/KBRAF melanomas, 5 (16%) carried concurrent somatic BRAF/MEK1 activating mutations. Three of 5 patients with BRAF/MEK1 double-mutant baseline melanomas showed objective tumor responses, consistent with the overall 60% frequency. No MEK1 mutation was found in disease progression melanomas, except when it was already identified at baseline. MEK1-mutant expression in V600E/KBRAF melanoma cell lines resulted in no significant alterations in p-ERK1/2 levels or growth-inhibitory sensitivities to BRAFi, MEK1/2 inhibitor (MEKi), or their combination. Thus, activating MEK1 exon 3 mutations identified herein and concurrent with V600E/KBRAF do not cause BRAFi resistance in melanoma.
SIGNIFICANCE - As BRAF inhibitors gain widespread use for treatment of advanced melanoma, biomarkers for drug sensitivity or resistance are urgently needed. We identify here concurrent activating mutations in BRAF and MEK1 in melanomas and show that the presence of a downstream mutation in MEK1 does not necessarily make BRAF–mutant melanomas resistant to BRAF inhibitors.
© 2012 AACR.
0 Communities
2 Members
0 Resources
20 MeSH Terms
Marked, homogeneous, and early [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography responses to vemurafenib in BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma.
McArthur GA, Puzanov I, Amaravadi R, Ribas A, Chapman P, Kim KB, Sosman JA, Lee RJ, Nolop K, Flaherty KT, Callahan J, Hicks RJ
(2012) J Clin Oncol 30: 1628-34
MeSH Terms: Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Australia, Biomarkers, Tumor, Confidence Intervals, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Drug Administration Schedule, Early Diagnosis, Female, Fluorodeoxyglucose F18, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Indoles, Male, Maximum Tolerated Dose, Melanoma, Middle Aged, Monitoring, Physiologic, Mutation, Neoplasm Invasiveness, Neoplasm Staging, Positron-Emission Tomography, Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf, Skin Neoplasms, Statistics, Nonparametric, Sulfonamides, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Vemurafenib
Show Abstract · Added March 5, 2014
PURPOSE - Imaging with [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) -positron emission tomography (PET) allows early recognition of a response to agents that target key driver mutations in human cancer. We aimed to determine the metabolic response rate to vemurafenib in patients with advanced BRAF-mutant melanoma.
PATIENTS AND METHODS - Baseline and day 15 FDG-PET was evaluated in 31 patients with advanced melanoma treated in a phase I study of dose escalation of vemurafenib (PLX06-02), which included four patients treated at subtherapeutic doses and 24 patients treated at 960 mg twice a day, which is the maximum-tolerated dose of vemurafenib.
RESULTS - All 27 patients treated at potentially therapeutic levels had at least a partial metabolic response, and three patients achieved a complete metabolic response. In the 27 patients, there was an 80% ± 3% reduction in the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of target lesions and an 87% ± 3% decrease in the percentage of injected dose (%ID) in all identified disease sites. There was a positive correlation between %ID in all identified disease and target-lesion SUVmax (r(2) = 0.66; P < .001) that indicated a significant homogeneity of the response between lesions in individual patients. Although no relationship was found between the reduction in target lesion SUVmax and best response according to RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors), there was a trend for patients with greater reductions in uptake of FDG to have longer progression-free survival.
CONCLUSION - FDG-PET is a useful marker of an early biologic response to vemurafenib. Little variability in PET response was found between lesions in individual patients, which suggested minimal intrapatient molecular heterogeneity. FDG-PET is a useful tool for the evaluation of the biologic impact of inhibiting mutant BRAF and may allow for the more effective development of novel agents.
0 Communities
2 Members
0 Resources
30 MeSH Terms