Faculty Bibliography

Background: Although patient age at diagnosis is not currently included in guidelines for treatment of primary melanoma, several lines of evidence suggest that patient age is an important, yet understudied, factor when considering treatment options. Here, we attempt to address the limited knowledge of the impact of age on primary melanoma treatment. Methods: In a prospectively enrolled and followed-up cohort of melanoma patients at NYU, we used logistic regression models to evaluate the association between patient age at diagnosis, tumor baseline characteristics, including BRAF and NRAS mutation status, and likelihood of receiving and responding to adjuvant therapy. We examined adjuvant therapy effectiveness using recurrence and melanoma-specific survival as endpoints. Results: 444 primary melanoma patients were included in the study (median follow-up: 6.3 years; age range: 19-95 years). Age was categorized into three groups spanning the range of age at presentation: younger (19-45 years; 24%), middle (46-70 years; 50%), and older (71-95 years; 26%). Older patients were significantly more likely to have advanced stage, nodular subtype (P < 0.01, both variables), and BRAF wildtype tumors (P = 0.04). Controlling for these factors as well as gender, older patients experienced a higher risk of recurrence (HR older vs. younger 3.34, 95% CI 1.53-7.25; P < 0.01). Of the 128/444 (29%) patients who were eligible for adjuvant treatment (clinical stage IIB), only 67/128 (52%) received treatment. Using a propensity score that accounts for stage at presentation, patients in the middle age group were more likely to receive adjuvant therapy than those in the older group (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.12-6.08; P = 0.03). In addition, a trend suggesting benefit from adjuvant therapy (defined as longer melanoma-specific survival) was observed only in the middle age group (P = 0.07). Conclusions: Our data suggest that older melanoma patients, despite having a significantly worse prognosis, are less likely to receive and bene!

Background: Patients with metastatic melanoma are eligible for BRAF inhibitor therapy if the BRAF V600E mutation can be identified in their tumor specimen. Patients lacking an available specimen for genotyping are unable to receive inhibitor therapy. We developed two mutation-specific genotyping platforms and tested their ability to detect BRAF and NRAS mutations in archived plasma and tumor samples to determine the potential utility of blood-based tumor genotyping in melanoma. Methods: We analyzed a group of 96 patients with stage III or IV melanoma, prospectively enrolled and followed in the NYU Melanoma Biorepository program. Each patient had a plasma sample and one or more tumor samples available for analysis. We used a combination of allele-specific PCR (Taqman) and SNaPshot assays to identify BRAF V600 and NRAS Q61 mutations in the tumor and plasma samples. Results: Among the 96 patients, 51 had stage III disease at the time of analysis; 45 had stage IV disease. Seventy-two patients had 2 or more tumor samples available for analysis, for a total of 204 tumors analyzed. In total, 52/96 (54%) patients had one or more BRAF or NRAS mutant tumors, including one patient with separate BRAF and NRAS mutant tumors (BRAF, n=35 (36%); NRAS, n=18 (19%)). We successfully amplified plasma DNA from 39/52 (75%) patients with tumor-associated mutations. Among those patients with amplifiable plasma DNA we detected mutations in 7 (18%) patients including 3 BRAF V600E, one V600K, 2 NRAS Q61K and one Q61L. Plasma-based mutations matched tumor-associated mutations in all 7 patients. All 7 patients had active disease at the time of blood draw. There were 32 patients with tumor-associated mutations in which a mutation could not be detected in the plasma. Only 15 of those 32 (47%) had active disease at the time of blood draw. There were no mutations detected in the plasma of the 44 patients whose tumors lacked BRAF or NRAS mutations. Conclusions: These data suggest that plasma-based detection of BRAF and NRAS mut!

Background: Small reported studies have provided some evidence implicating immune related genes in melanoma susceptibility and prognosis; however candidate selection of these prior efforts has been limited. In this study, we performed an analysis of germline variants in immuno-modulatory genes for their association with melanoma survival in a well characterized cohort of prospectively accrued melanoma patients. Methods: Germline DNA isolated from blood samples of 817 melanoma patients was genotyped for 94 SNPs tagging 55 immuno-modulatory genes using Sequenom iPLEX. Cox models were used to test associations between each SNP and recurrence-free and overall survival (RFS and OS), with adjustments for age, gender, subtype, thickness, ulceration, and anatomic site. ROC curves were constructed from different SNP/clinical covariate combinations and the area under the curve (AUC) was used to assess their utility in the classification of 3-year recurrence. Results: The SNP rs2796817 in TGFB2 had strong associations with both RFS (HR=3.8, CI 95%: 1.3-11, p=0.02) and OS (HR=5.5, CI 95%: 1.6-19, p=0.029). Other interesting associations with OS came from IRF8 (rs4843861, HR=0.62, CI 95%: 0.39-0.99, p=0.017), CCL5 (rs4796120, HR=7.6, CI 95%: 2.3-25, p=0.035), and CD8A (rs3810831, HR=2.4, CI 95%: 0.91-6.2, p=0.048). A multivariate model including stage, subtype, and one of the SNPs (rs3810831 from CD8A), was shown to improve the AUC when compared to a model including only stage and subtype (0.77 vs. 0.79). Conclusions: We identified several immune-related loci associated with melanoma RFS and OS. The strongest association, rs2796817, maps in TGFB2, which among other functions suppresses IL-2 dependent T-cell growth. In addition to other associations found in the study these findings provide evidence for the involvement of immuno-modulatory genes in melanoma prognosis and suggest further investigations of immune related genes in disease progression. This is currently underway in the second stage validation an!

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.

PURPOSE: We previously reported the eradication of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)- amplified human xenografts in mice by inhibition of the HER2 pathway with lapatinib and trastuzumab to block all homo- and heterodimer signaling as well as by blockade of estrogen receptor (ER) when expressed. In this clinical trial, we sought to translate these findings to patients using targeted therapy without chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Women with stages II to III HER2-positive breast cancers were eligible. They received trastuzumab once per week (4 mg/kg loading, then 2 mg/kg) and lapatinib 1000 mg once per day for 12 weeks. Women with ER-positive tumors also received letrozole (plus a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone [LHRH] agonist if premenopausal). Pathologic response was assessed by ER status. Biopsies were obtained at baseline, weeks 2 and 8, and time of surgery. RESULTS: Sixty-six patients were enrolled, and 64 were eligible and evaluable for response. Median tumor size was 6 cm (range, 1.5 to 30 cm). Adverse events were mainly grades 1 to 2 (GI, 63%; skin, 46%). Grade 3 metabolic, GI, and liver (18%; 12 patients) and grade 4 liver toxicities (one patient) were also observed. Overall, in-breast pathologic complete response (pCR; ypT0-is) was 27% (ER positive, 21%; ER negative, 36%). The rate of low-volume residual disease (ypT1a-b) was 22% (ER positive, 33%; ER negative, 4%). CONCLUSION: In patients with locally advanced HER2-positive breast cancer, our approach of targeted therapy only resulted in a high pCR rate without chemotherapy. Our data support the hypothesis that selected patients with HER2-positive tumors may not need chemotherapy, and more-complete blockade of HER receptors and ER is an effective strategy worthy of further study.

Background Arginine deiminase (ADI) is an enzyme that degrades arginine, an amino acid that is important for growth and development of normal and neoplastic cells. Melanoma cells are auxotrophic for arginine, because they lack argininosuccinatesynthetase (ASS), a key enzyme required for the synthesis of arginine. Patients and methods Patients with advanced melanoma were treated with 40, 80 or 160 IU/m ADI-PEG 20 i.m. weekly. Primary endpoints were toxicity and tumor response, secondary endpoints included metabolic response by FDG-PET, pharmacodynamic (PD) effects upon circulating arginine levels, and argininosuccinate synthetase tumor expression by immunohistochemistry. Results 31 previously treated patients were enrolled. The main toxicities were grade 1 and 2 adverse events including injection site pain, rash, and fatigue. No objective responses were seen. Nine patients achieved stable disease (SD), with 2 of these durable for >6 months. Four of the 9 patients with SD had uveal melanoma. PD analysis showed complete plasma arginine depletion in 30/31 patients by day 8. Mean plasma levels of ADI-PEG 20 correlated inversely with ADI-PEG 20 antibody levels. Immunohistochemical ASS expression analysis in tumor tissue was negative in 24 patients, whereas 5 patients had <5 % cells positive. Conclusions ADI-PEG 20 is well tolerated in advanced melanoma patients and leads to consistent, but transient, arginine depletion. Although no RECIST responses were observed, the encouraging rate of SD in uveal melanoma patients indicates that it may be worthwhile to evaluate ADI-PEG 20 in this melanoma subgroup.

PURPOSE: BRAF mutations promote melanoma cell proliferation and survival primarily through activation of MEK. The purpose of this study was to determine the response rate (RR) for the selective, allosteric MEK1/MEK2 inhibitor trametinib (GSK1120212), in patients with metastatic BRAF-mutant melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was an open-label, two-stage, phase II study with two cohorts. Patients with metastatic BRAF-mutant melanoma previously treated with a BRAF inhibitor (cohort A) or treated with chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy (BRAF-inhibitor naive; cohort B) were enrolled. Patients received 2 mg of trametinib orally once daily. RESULTS: In cohort A (n = 40), there were no confirmed objective responses and 11 patients (28%) with stable disease (SD); the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.8 months. In cohort B (n = 57), there was one (2%) complete response, 13 (23%) partial responses (PRs), and 29 patients (51%) with SD (confirmed RR, 25%); the median PFS was 4.0 months. One patient each with BRAF K601E and BRAF V600R had prolonged PR. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events for all patients were skin-related toxicity, nausea, peripheral edema, diarrhea, pruritis, and fatigue. No cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma was observed. CONCLUSION: Trametinib was well tolerated. Significant clinical activity was observed in BRAF-inhibitor-naive patients previously treated with chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy. Minimal clinical activity was observed as sequential therapy in patients previously treated with a BRAF inhibitor. Together, these data suggest that BRAF-inhibitor resistance mechanisms likely confer resistance to MEK-inhibitor monotherapy. These data support further evaluation of trametinib in BRAF-inhibitor-naive BRAF-mutant melanoma, including rarer forms of BRAF-mutant melanoma.

PURPOSE: The combination of oblimersen, a bcl-2 antisense oligonucleotide, and dacarbazine lead to superior progression-free survival in advanced melanoma patients. Albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) has single-agent activity in melanoma. METHODS: In a phase I trial, chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic melanoma and normal LDH levels were enrolled on 3 cohorts. The treatment regimen consisted of 56-day cycles of oblimersen (7 mg/kg/day continuous IV infusion on day 1-7 and 22-28 in cohort 1 and 2; 900 mg fixed dose, twice weekly in weeks 1-2, 4-5 for cohort 3), temozolomide (75 mg/m(2), days 1-42), and nab-paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2) in cohort 1 and 3, 260 mg/m(2) in cohort 2 on day 7 and 28). Apoptosis markers were tested in pre- and post-treatment specimens of a subset of patients. RESULTS: Six grade 3 events (neutropenia, renal insufficiency, hyponatremia, elevated creatinine, allergic reaction, and neuropathy) and 2 grade 4 events (neutropenia and thrombocytopenia) were seen in 32 patients. The objective response rate was 40.6 % (2 complete responses and 11 partial responses) and 11 patients had stable disease, for a disease control rate of 75 %. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of oblimersen, temozolomide, and nab-paclitaxel was well tolerated and demonstrated encouraging activity in patients with advanced melanoma.

Objectives: Age is an understudied factor when considering treatment options for melanoma. Here, we examine the impact of age on primary melanoma treatment in a prospective cohort of patients. Methods: We used logistic regression models to examine the associations between age and initial treatment, using recurrence and melanoma-specific survival as endpoints. Results: 444 primary melanoma patients were categorized into three groups by age at diagnosis: 19-45 years (24.3%), 46-70 (50.2%), and 71-95 (25.5%). In multivariate models, older patients experienced a higher risk of recurrence (hazard ratio 3.34, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.53-7.25; p < 0.01). No significant differences were observed in positive biopsy margin rates or extent of surgical margins across age groups. Patients in the middle age group were more likely to receive adjuvant therapy than those in the older group (odds ratio 2.78, 95% CI 1.19-6.45; p = 0.02) and showed a trend to longer disease-free survival when receiving adjuvant therapy (p = 0.09). Conclusion: Our data support age as an independent negative prognostic factor in melanoma. Our data suggest that age does not affect primary surgical treatment but may affect decisions of whether or not patients receive postoperative treatment(s). Further work is needed to better understand the biological variables affecting treatment decisions and efficacy in older patients.