Evaluating clinical responses to BRAF inhibition in BRAF/TERT promoter mutated melanoma.

Authors

null

Colleen Ciccosanti

Department of Internal Medicine, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ

Colleen Ciccosanti , Alexander Hershey , Chunxia Chen , Dirk F. Moore , Ryan D. Stephenson , Joseph P. Weiner , Vadim P. Koshenkov , Ann W. Silk , Janice M. Mehnert , Adam C. Berger , Roman Groisberg

Organizations

Department of Internal Medicine, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, Biometrics, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, Memor Sloan-Kettering Cancer Ctr, New York, NY, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY

Research Funding

No funding received
None

Background: Combined BRAF/MEK inhibition results in improved progression free and overall survival in BRAF mutated melanoma, but significant response is not universally observed. TERT promoter activating mutations often co-occur with BRAF mutations and have been associated with aggressive features and poorer prognosis. The TERT promotor inhibits apoptosis via a mechanism dependent upon BRAF mutant MAPK activation. Preclinical data in mouse models suggests that BRAF/TERT genetic duet melanomas are associated with improved response to BRAF/MEK inhibition as compared with BRAF mutant/TERT-WT melanomas. Methods: We performed a single center retrospective analysis of adults with melanoma with confirmed BRAF mutations +/- TERT promoter mutations. Responses and progression free survival in response to BRAF/MEK inhibition was assessed. Differences in RR and PFS were compared using Kaplan-Meier and Log-Rank. Results: 52 cases of BRAF/TERT genetic duet and BRAF mutated/TERT-WT melanomas were assessed. A total of 24 patients received BRAF/MEK inhibitors over the course of treatment meeting criteria for study inclusion; 9 (37.5%) BRAF/TERT genetic duet and 15 (62.5%) BRAF mutated/TERT-WT. BRAF V600E was present in 19/24 (79.2%) and V600K in 5/24 (20.8%). In the genetic duets, TERT -146C > T was present in 4/9 (44.4%), -124C > T in 2/9 (22.2%), -139_-138CC > TT in 2/9 (22.2%), and a SNV in 1/9 (11.1%). Mean age at diagnosis was 56 ± 13.5 years and 62.5% were male. ECOG PFS was 0-1 in 15/24 (62.5%), 2-3 in 6/24 (25%), and unreported in 3/24 (12.5%). Mean LDH at start of therapy was 391 (range 81-1664). At initial diagnosis 20.8% were Stage I, 25% Stage II, 37.5% Stage III, and 16.7% Stage IV. Two or more sites of disease were present in 10/24 (41.7%) and 2/24 (8.3%) had CNS metastases. BRAF/MEK directed therapy was first line in 6/24 (25%) of patients, others received prior immunotherapy. No significant differences between groups were observed in baseline demographics, disease state at diagnosis, or treatment history. In BRAF/TERT genetic duet melanomas CR was observed in 1/9 (11.1%), PR in 7/9 (77.8%), and NR in 1/9 (11.1%). In BRAF mutated/TERT-WT CR was observed in 3/15 (20%), PR in 11/15 (73.3%), and NR in 1/15 (6.7%). BRAF/TERT genetic duets were observed to initially have somewhat better PFS on first exposure to BRAF/MEK directed therapy but the PFS curves crossed at about 5 months with no significant difference observed overall (p = 0.40). Conclusions: This study is the first to report on outcomes of BRAF/MEK directed therapy in BRAF/TERT genetic duet vs BRAF mutated/TERT-WT melanomas in humans. While preclinical data from mouse models observed an improved response to BRAF/MEK inhibition in genetic duet tumors, no significant difference was observed. Our study is limited by small sample size. A multicenter analysis may be of interest to better understand the effects of BRAF inhibition in patients with BRAF/TERT genetic duet melanoma.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2021 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Publication Only

Session Title

Publication Only: Melanoma/Skin Cancers

Track

Melanoma/Skin Cancers

Sub Track

Biologic Correlates

Citation

J Clin Oncol 39, 2021 (suppl 15; abstr e21551)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2021.39.15_suppl.e21551

Abstract #

e21551

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

Abstract

2023 ASCO Annual Meeting

Frequency of KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutations in colorectal cancer in an Argentinian population.

First Author: Agustín Barbier

Abstract

2021 ASCO Annual Meeting

BRAF and NRAS mutation status and response to checkpoint inhibition in advanced melanoma.

First Author: Olivier Jules van Not

Abstract

2023 ASCO Annual Meeting

The analysis of BRAF fusions characteristics in Chinese solid tumor patients.

First Author: Fang Ma