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 grade 5 events. Interpretation Inhibition of BRAF with vemurafenib improves survival in patients with the most common BRAFV600E mutation and in patients with the less common BRAFV600K mutation. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche-Genentech.
Summary Background The combination of cobimetinib with vemurafenib improves progression-free survival compared with placebo and vemurafenib in previously untreated patients with BRAFV600 -mutant ...advanced melanoma, as previously reported in the coBRIM study. In this Article, we report updated efficacy results, including overall survival and safety after longer follow-up, and selected biomarker correlative studies. Methods In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre study, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed BRAFV600 mutation-positive unresectable stage IIIC or stage IV melanoma were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive response system to receive cobimetinib (60 mg once daily for 21 days followed by a 7-day rest period in each 28-day cycle) or placebo, in combination with oral vemurafenib (960 mg twice daily). Progression-free and overall survival were primary and secondary endpoints, respectively; all analyses were done on the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01689519 , and is ongoing but no longer recruiting participants. Findings Between Jan 8, 2013, and Jan 31, 2014, 495 eligible adult patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the cobimetinib plus vemurafenib group (n=247) or placebo plus vemurafenib group (n=248). At a median follow-up of 14·2 months (IQR 8·5–17·3), the updated investigator-assessed median progression-free survival was 12·3 months (95% CI 9·5–13·4) for cobimetinib and vemurafenib versus 7·2 months (5·6–7·5) for placebo and vemurafenib (HR 0·58 95% CI 0·46–0·72, p<0·0001). The final analysis for overall survival occurred when 255 (52%) patients had died (Aug 28, 2015). Median overall survival was 22·3 months (95% CI 20·3–not estimable) for cobimetinib and vemurafenib versus 17·4 months (95% CI 15·0–19·8) for placebo and vemurafenib (HR 0·70, 95% CI 0·55–0·90; p=0·005). The safety profile for cobimetinib and vemurafenib was tolerable and manageable, and no new safety signals were observed with longer follow-up. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events occurring at a higher frequency in patients in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group compared with the vemurafenib group were γ-glutamyl transferase increase (36 15% in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group vs 25 10% in the placebo and vemurafenib group), blood creatine phosphokinase increase (30 12% vs one <1%), and alanine transaminase increase (28 11% vs 15 6%). Serious adverse events occurred in 92 patients (37%) in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 69 patients (28%) in the vemurafenib group. Pyrexia (six patients 2%) and dehydration (five patients 2%) were the most common serious adverse events reported in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group. A total of 259 patients have died: 117 (47%) in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 142 (58%) in the vemurafenib group. The primary cause of death was disease progression in most patients: 109 (93%) of 117 in the cobimetinib and vemurafenib group and 133 (94%) of 142 in the vemurafenib group. Interpretation These data confirm the clinical benefit of cobimetinib combined with vemurafenib and support the use of the combination as a standard first-line approach to improve survival in patients with advanced BRAFV600 -mutant melanoma. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche–Genentech.
Summary Background Addition of a MEK inhibitor to a BRAF inhibitor enhances tumour growth inhibition, delays acquired resistance, and abrogates paradoxical activation of the MAPK pathway in ...preclinical models of BRAF -mutated melanoma. We assessed the safety and efficacy of combined BRAF inhibition with vemurafenib and MEK inhibition with cobimetinib in patients with advanced BRAF -mutated melanoma. Methods We undertook a phase 1b study in patients with advanced BRAFV600 -mutated melanoma. We included individuals who had either recently progressed on vemurafenib or never received a BRAF inhibitor. In the dose-escalation phase of our study, patients received vemurafenib 720 mg or 960 mg twice a day continuously and cobimetinib 60 mg, 80 mg, or 100 mg once a day for either 14 days on and 14 days off (14/14), 21 days on and 7 days off (21/7), or continuously (28/0). The primary endpoint was safety of the drug combination and to identify dose-limiting toxic effects and the maximum tolerated dose. Efficacy was a key secondary endpoint. All patients treated with vemurafenib and cobimetinib were included in safety and efficacy analyses (intention-to-treat). The study completed accrual and all analyses are final. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01271803. Findings 129 patients were treated at ten dosing regimens combining vemurafenib and cobimetinib: 66 had recently progressed on vemurafenib and 63 had never received a BRAF inhibitor. Dose-limiting toxic effects arose in four patients. One patient on a schedule of vemurafenib 960 mg twice a day and cobimetinib 80 mg once a day 14/14 had grade 3 fatigue for more than 7 days; one patient on a schedule of vemurafenib 960 mg twice a day and cobimetinib 60 mg once a day 21/7 had a grade 3 prolongation of QTc; and two patients on a schedule of vemurafenib 960 mg twice a day and cobimetinib 60 mg 28/0 had dose-limiting toxic effects—one developed grade 3 stomatitis and fatigue and one developed arthralgia and myalgia. The maximum tolerated dose was established as vemurafenib 960 mg twice a day in combination with cobimetinib 60 mg 21/7. Across all dosing regimens, the most common adverse events were diarrhoea (83 patients, 64%), non-acneiform rash (77 patients, 60%), liver enzyme abnormalities (64 patients, 50%), fatigue (62 patients, 48%), nausea (58 patients, 45%), and photosensitivity (52 patients, 40%). Most adverse events were mild-to-moderate in severity. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma (12 patients, 9%; all grade 3), raised amounts of alkaline phosphatase (11 patients, 9%), and anaemia (nine patients, 7%). Confirmed objective responses were recorded in ten (15%) of 66 patients who had recently progressed on vemurafenib, with a median progression-free survival of 2·8 months (95% CI 2·6–3·4). Confirmed objective responses were noted in 55 (87%) of 63 patients who had never received a BRAF inhibitor, including six (10%) who had a complete response; median progression-free survival was 13·7 months (95% CI 10·1–17·5). Interpretation The combination of vemurafenib and cobimetinib was safe and tolerable when administered at the respective maximum tolerated doses. The combination has promising antitumour activity and further clinical development is warranted in patients with advanced BRAFV600 -mutated melanoma, particularly in those who have never received a BRAF inhibitor; confirmatory clinical testing is ongoing. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche/Genentech.
Summary Background Recent phase 3 trials have shown an overall survival benefit in metastatic melanoma. We aimed to assess whether progression-free survival (PFS) could be regarded as a reliable ...surrogate for overall survival through a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Methods We systematically reviewed randomised trials comparing treatment regimens in metastatic melanoma that included dacarbazine as the control arm, and which reported both PFS and overall survival with a standard hazard ratio (HR). We correlated HRs for overall survival and PFS, weighted by sample size or by precision of the HR estimate, assuming fixed and random effects. We did sensitivity analyses according to presence of crossover, trial size, and dacarbazine dose. Findings After screening 1649 reports and meeting abstracts published before Sept 8, 2013, we identified 12 eligible randomised trials that enrolled 4416 patients with metastatic melanoma. Irrespective of weighting strategy, we noted a strong correlation between the treatment effects for PFS and overall survival, which seemed independent of treatment type. Pearson correlation coefficients were 0·71 (95% CI 0·29–0·90) with a random-effects assumption, 0·85 (0·59–0·95) with a fixed-effects assumption, and 0·89 (0·68–0·97) with sample-size weighting. For nine trials without crossover, the correlation coefficient was 0·96 (0·81–0·99), which decreased to 0·93 (0·74–0·98) when two additional trials with less than 50% crossover were included. Inclusion of mature follow-up data after at least 50% crossover (in vemurafenib and dabrafenib phase 3 trials) weakened the PFS to overall survival correlation (0·55, 0·03–0·84). Inclusion of trials with no or little crossover with the random-effects assumption yielded a conservative statement of the PFS to overall survival correlation of 0·85 (0·51–0·96). Interpretation PFS can be regarded as a robust surrogate for overall survival in dacarbazine-controlled randomised trials of metastatic melanoma; we postulate that this association will hold as treatment standards evolve and are adopted as the control arm in future trials. Funding None.
PDF